Assignment 11

Is the composer respectful of the audience, treating them as intelligent, thoughtful people?
I don't believe that Stein does this in her article. Almost the whole time, reading this article was definitely a struggle to understand: big words, complicated sentences, and unexplained thoughts. Now she does treat us as intellectual people, but I do believe that she set her bar too high to include a younger audience.

What does the composer assume the audience knows or believes?
Like stated above, Stein assumes that the audience has a rather vast vocabulary when she was writing her article. Another thing that isn't very clear: what the ad is about. When Stein describes the article, she doesn't help the reader to know that the ad is about a home computer. To have this assumption can hurt her articles overall purpose.

Does the composer seem open to multiple perspectives?
The article doesnt really have its own perspective due to the nature of it being so informational. With it being this way, it leaves a lot of room for interpretation for the reader while still getting the amount of information needed.

If the composer keeps these three things in mind, then their all over controlling purpose will have that much more of an impact. Keeping in mind who your audience is is one of the most important things to keep in mind because in the end, they are the ones who are reading your article.

Group Work: Reflection

Working with a group of people that you barely know is always going to be a little difficult, thats a fact, but it also can be very easy too. At some points it was a little difficult to keep a discussion moving simply for the fact that some people just didn't know what to say or were just the quiet type. When we got a discussion rolling though, thats when things became interesting. Our groups ideas and interpretations, although very very different, all tied back together in the end and also made us all sort of end on the same page (idea wise) on how we felt about the topic. We talked about how the Ad didn't make sense in the beginning the most. This idea or thought surprised me because I remember someone asking, "Would anyone have guessed that this was a computer commercial in the first 50 seconds?" After thinking about it, I laughed when I realized that the Ad had nothing to do with computers until the last 5 or so seconds.

Assignment 10

How is someone supposed to know that the ad is about a commercial in the beginning?
Does watching the ad after reading Stein's article help clear up some confusion?

Stein uses the commercial's free interpretation that it gives to analyze and interpret the Macintosh 1984 Super Bowl Ad. The Ad was only aired one time during the Super Bowl and although it was short, it left a lasting impression. The commercial, to some, was very confusing. Stein uses her article to take this ad that was so simple, and go into as much detail as possible for viewers who were confused. Although Stein's interpretation is very long and thorough, it makes the ad easier to understand and also helps viewers and readers to come up with all kinds of interpretations of their own.

One thing that I feel that pulled Stein to writing her article: the Ad's simplicity. The ad is only one minute in length but left probably one hundred questions. For a writer, this type of topic is like candy: free to go in any which direction they chose. Stein sounds like the kind of person that would go for something like this so that she can do something that has such free interpretation.

Assignment 9

Going back through my article, I found many different mistakes. I knew what I wanted to focus on and I did that pretty well, but one thing I failed to do was to add reasons or proof as to why I felt the way that I did. I talk a bunch about what the author maybe did wrong in their choices but dont really back it up with proof. For example, in my essay talking about Susan Orlean's "Life Like", my main focus throughout my writing was that she misused her quotes. This is a good point and argument but without giving more reasons as to why I felt that way, then I don't think my purpose is going to be as strong as it should.

Assignment 8

I found it interesting that some of the students thought about Orleans writings the way that they did. Having read over her article a few times before reading how my class felt, I don't think that I would have thought about half of the same things.
The fact that I make such an emphasis about Orlean's use of quotes is one of my most interesting things about my writing. After reading about what other students have been writing on, not very may people have decided to focus on that, which makes me feel a little unique.
Going into more depth with some of my arguments is going to need to happen. Although I feel like I have a good start to a strong argument or interpretation, it is still in need to get stronger.
My first essay was a hot mess to be quite honest. After reading it, I wasnt really sure if I had thought about who my audience might be. Now with this being said my later revised drafts of my essay, I felt like my audience were just like me. Being someone who has never heard of taxidermy and didn't have an opinion on the subject.
The tone of my writings have been a little straight forward at times but also allowing there to be room for other opinions and thoughts. I think it is important to get your point across right away rather than just beat around the bush.

Assignment 7

Orlean has a way with quotes throughout her article. She uses a with array of quotes throughout her article to help shape exactly what taxidermy is and what it is for some people. Now although I don't agree that all of the quotes used should have been in her article, as said in Assignment 6:Choices, I do think that by adding in a good amount of quotes has helped build her ethos.
Orlean does a very clever thing in her article: she doesn't make us feel like we have to choose one opinion over the other. She goes through her entire article making us feel like we can form our own opinion because she is very open to both sides of taxidermy in her writing. As a reader it makes things more enjoyable because no matter what opinion we form, we can still relate to the writer and make connections. For Orlean to do this was a very good move.

Assignment 6 :Choices

Orlean uses a ton of quotes throughout her article from people at the taxidermy convention. She had some really good places that she added them in, but at some times the quotes she chose hurt her stance in a way. In the beginning she comes off as someone who has no side to whether or not she supports or doesn't support taxidermy. This was really nice as the reader because it allowed us to make our own decision. Later on through her article she has some quotes that completely turned me off of the subject. "I am in need of several pair of frozen goat feet (Orlean)!" That sounds absolutely repulsive to me and doesn't make me want to read about the topic any further. If her main purpose was to be open minded, then her quotes clearly weren't working for her.

Assignment 6

Susan Orlean, in the beginning of her article, is very uninformed in her topic. She sounds as though she is learning just as much about the topic as we are as we read through her writings. Her tone, not to be mistaken for confused, was very light and joyful about the subject. She made things interesting throughout her article by adding various interesting quotes from people at the convention.
Orlean comes off as very open minded and I feel like that is the same thing that she wants her readers to feel as they go through her article. As said previously, she appears to just be learning about the topic herself and enjoying it. This being said, she most likely wants her readers to have the same fascination as she does.

Assignment 5

I think that Susan Orlean wrote this article for many reasons. Being someone who had never really had any formal education on taxidermy, I think she just enjoyed the learning experience and just let her curiosity take the lead. Another thing that she does is take both sides of taxidermy. My take on the subject is that it is nasty and uncomfortable. Now I know that I'm not the only one who thinks that way, but Orlean takes that into consideration and also talks about the subject to appeal to the negative and positive audience members.
As stated previously, I think Susan Orlean wanted her readers to learn something. In other words, I think she wanted her audience to be accepting to a new feeling towards the topic. Many people get negative thoughts right away just by hearing the word 'taxidermy'. One thing that makes me believe that this is her goal: she never favors one opinion over the other.