Sammy Luscher

Process Journals

Week #1
I enjoyed the first reading more than the second. This is because I could better understand it than
the first. Branson remarks in the first reading that first-year writing is often misunderstood. I can elaborate
and continue on by saying that any kind of grammar or English class is misunderstood. Looking back at
my high school experience, I did not learn the most about my writing style and self in my common “red-
pen correction”-type English courses. However, I learned more about how to better my writing and enjoy
the process along the way in my tougher courses where I had to display rhetoric in an argument or
develop a context to whatever I was writing about. I liked how he explained academic writing as context-
dependent, because-- and to bring in the second reading’s points-- “writing in general” does not exist and
cannot exist with the basis of normal writing expectations. If we have to answer those “5 W’s” we have
(or I have) always been told to answer in my writing, Who What When Where Why, then it is simply
impossible to create the stigma of “writing in general”.
The second reading, now that I elaborate more on my opinion of the first, is much easier to
understand. Writing cannot not have a context surrounding it. The previously described “5 W’s” must be
answered, otherwise the writing will be nonsense and will not even be considered academic. In Wardle’s
writing she explains that writing is impacted by context, audience, purpose, medium, history, and
community values. The last one opened my eyes a bit. Writing is interpreted, really, by the culture of the
audience. How the audience views their community and finds their values widely affects how they can
interpret certain writing. Therefore, no single class or workshop or experience, as the article states, can
teach a group how to write because each individual is experiencing different cultures and community
values, so their interpretations and the way they think all vary. Not one course can teach the complex
human minds. We’d all be robots if it did.

Week #2
I have always defined rhetoric, or have been taught to define rhetoric, by the means at which a
writer encourages a point or claim to their intended audience. This definition was taught to me in my AP
Language and Composition class my junior year of high school. We spent the entire year focusing on
various readings, differing from Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to a letter from Abigail Adams
to her son. There were dull readings and there were exciting readings. No matter what, however, we
always ended up analyzing them and writing essays on how the author used rhetoric. We were instructed
to give specific reasons and elements that author used in order to persuade. The way my teacher that year
taught, helped me understand rhetoric in a very deep way. I actually enjoyed it.
This is not to say that this new definition makes me not enjoy rhetoric. Rhetoric is a skill that, in
my opinion, you can never get enough of. This is because of its very nature. Villanueva’s definition of
rhetoric truly shows its complexity and furthermore confirms the latter point that I have made. However, I
do not really resonate so much with Villanueva’s definition. My own personal opinion on the concept is a
mixture of the two. Rhetoric is the study of human language and how an author uses this human language
to develop his or her own opinion and claim. Rhetoric uses certain devices to encourage the audience to
understand their point of view without directly stating this. Rhetoric is sneaky in this way. It’s almost like
the author is tricking, per se, their audience to think a certain way. This is where complexity comes into
the equation, however, because you cannot just assume the simple-mindedness of your writing to
completely change the course of thought your audience has. I have no known answer to counter this
argument because I am still learning about rhetoric, but I hope that this course will help me develop this
understanding.

Week #3
Although my AP Language and Composition class covered the process of writing an
argumentative paper, and did so well, I am surprised I never came about to the formulaic process that
Savini articulates in the chapter. I thought it was important to recognize that leaders are born out of their
power to integratively think, as in, hold two completely opposite ideas in mind while still being able to
argue and articulate your thoughts. The whole idea that this process takes time and takes a conscious
effort to be candid about your questions and sort out each questions’ relevance was interesting, too.
The four steps, once discussed separately, interested me, but the one that interested me the most
was the “posing fruitful questions” step. This is because I don’t think I’ve ever consciously done this one.
I always just find the first question that seems like it could get me to write the most and I move on from
that. Whenever I write an argumentative paper, I also figure out the question right away and that becomes
my first step. I don’t ever analyze other questions, no matter how small or how seemingly unimportant. I
think there’s something special, though, now that I read through this reading, about noticing the little
questions. Because what makes the little questions so little when there’s nothing to be compared in size or
importance to them?
Another step I found interesting was the “noticing” one. I’ve never seen that one referred to as
“noticing” or even “warming up the mind”. I just thought it was reading through and taking notes. But
this idea of “noticing” is much more informal, and intentionally that way. It introduces the personal
connection between you as a reader and an engager to the idea and the argument at hand, and makes it
less of an assignment and more of a task.

Week #5
The whole concept in Dawkins’ writings about punctuation and grammar is something that I am
not too familiar with. From the material we have studied thus far, I have gathered an understanding on
individual style and began to realize that many English curriculums on grammatical errors have not done
their best job to teach individual stylistic approach. However, I found it interesting that Dawkins spoke on
how to use punctuation to rhetorically appeal to your audience. You can use punctuation to fit with your
style and to grab the reader’s attention in ways that average writing cannot.
In Dawkins’ words, some of the best writers break almost every elementary, “textbook” grammar
rule. He says that English courses have been teaching punctuation specifically the wrong way; instead of
making lists and rules on what not to do, we should look to congratulate and encourage the good, the
successes of powerful punctuation. I have found that there is a major difference between various uses of
punctuation. While commas may orderly space out clauses within a sentence, they may serve a more
bland purpose than if you were to use dashes. Take this sentence into consideration: “She walked down
the stairs slowly and explained she didn’t feel too well.” Now, read it with some commas: “She walked
down the stairs, slowly, and explained she didn’t feel too well.” The small addition of the two commas to
the sentence creates a lapse between points, slowing it down to possibly create a more serious tone. It
makes “her”, the subject of the sentence, and her condition, more critical than before when the commas
were not used. Then there’s the sentence with dashes: “She walked down the stairs-- slowly-- and
explained she didn’t feel well.” Now, with the dashes, the emphasis on how she slowly walked down the
stairs is much stronger and the most seriously out of the other two options. It’s all about what kind of
style the author has-- and how they want their tone to be perceived.

Week #7
Upon reading “When Is a Paragraph?” by Arthur Stern, I felt excited by the challenging of norms
throughout the teaching of English. Rather than pat the heads of most grammar teachers for scolding
students for trying to develop their own style through paragraph, it does quite the opposite. I like the
challenge, as I was often the student that got the red ink for going beyond what my English textbook told
me to. It is true that many people have differing opinions and ideas of what paragraph structure is,
however I see it universal that people have “rules” drilled into their heads of certain paragraphs. After all,
throughout middle and high school in peer reviews they made us underline each part of the paragraph.
There was no wiggle room. It was strictly formulaic. I hated this because that’s not English; if you want
formulas, hit up your Calculus class. English is expression and persuasion. There’s no formula to
convince someone of something, or even to hold a conversation. There are cultural norms, however some
of the best communicators communicate in the most unique ways possible.
I think I also liked the advice it gives to those stuck in the formulaic paragraph mindset. Stern
suggests to adopt an approach that allows the writer to create an internal structure to your paragraphs but
additionally use external skills with paragraphs around it to function together rather than separately. I
think that’s a problem I have with the way I was taught paragraphs. They tell you to write your own ideas
with each paragraph, but where’s the creativity in that? The one sentence to “blend” both ideas that is
shoved at the bottom of each paragraph? Paragraphs should serve to function together above all. That’s
how you best create style.

Week #8
Now that I have completed this week’s part of the Genre Analysis Project, I’m beginning to get a
better sense of the assignment and why each step is important in the process. At first I was confused and
the idea of the project stressed me out, so I just shoved it aside and told myself I’d worry about it later. As
the deadline approached for this first part, I began to force myself to reread the instructions and really try
to process what exactly it was that I was doing. I had all the things I needed, but instead of just staring at
the assignment instructions I needed to just get started. Coming at it with the approach of it only being a
step in my whole project’s completion, the pressure and anxiety was relieved. I found completing this part
really easy. And in retrospect, now I am more sure that the rest of this assignment will require some work
but will be more entertaining, as I begin to develop my own opinion about the genre and its discourse
community.
A problem I’m noticing is that I’m not sure how to find the essential “claim” the authors are
making in these articles. After all, photojournalism is going over the facts and the situation and context of
your experience as a photographer… right? I am having a hard time coming to terms with what these
photojournalists might be trying to say to their audience. And on that subject, what even is the audience
for a photojournalist? It surely depends on what magazine they are writing for, or if they are writing on
their own. For National Geographic specifically, I want to say the audience is essentially anyone. Though,
I know this isn’t true. National Geographic photojournalists have to be writing to some specific audience.
I think my next step in this project is finding this out.
Week #9
I’m not exactly happy with the way that I am dealing with this Genre Analysis Essay. I think the
main problem is I chose three articles as a part of my genre and came up with a question, but I don’t know
how to come to a conclusion about my answer. I used my question from last week’s process journal about
the audience of a photojournalist, but I decided to go more into the question “How do photojournalists
reach their audience?” I find this question interesting and intriguing, however finding the answer isn’t
necessarily easy because I’m finding that photojournalists do a great job at reaching a large audience. I
don’t know what necessarily compels someone to pick up a National Geographic magazine and begin
reading. For me, it’s just genuine curiosity, but I don’t know what the statistics are for the greatest amount
of people who subscribe to Nat Geo. And as many magazine consumers do, many subscribers flip through
magazines and pick and choose the articles they want to read; this makes it difficult to come to any
assumptions about magazine consumers for each company as a whole.
However, I’ve enjoyed learning about the process of writing for these journalists. It seems like
they truly love what they do, and I believe you sort of have to in this field. When you write and create so
much for such specific things, such specific projects, you have to find your love for it somewhere within.
You have to find something that will inspire you to create with the best of your ability, and do it as well
as possible, to engage the most people you can. I’m a very passionate person, and work best when I feel
fueled by my love for life. I think that this will be a good thing for me to do.

Week #11
Today I did my presentation for my genre analysis project. I approached it differently than I have
before. I forced myself to feel confident about my research and my knowledge on the subject. Instead of
allowing myself to grow anxious, I pushed out anything but my excitement to get this big part of the
genre analysis project out of the way. Writing has always come easily for me, but talking in front of
groups causes me more stress. So I forced to follow a train of thought that made me simply want to get it
over with. I thought as least about it as possible. I’ve never approached it this way, and I feel like it did
best for me. It was also the fact that I had so much going on this week that made me shove my concern for
this down. I had two tests and a quiz, not to mention a huge away game that required almost ten hours in a
bus on Tuesday. Last time I had that much time spent in a bus I had an awful week and my mental health
wasn’t great. I wanted to avoid that outcome at all costs, so I channeled my stress down and viewed this
presentation as just another thing to check off my list. This did the best for me and my anxiety levels.
In the future I think I will take the same approach. I did my research, I focused well on time
management, and those efforts helped me the most. I didn’t put off anything in the project and took my
time to carefully and adequately finish each portion of the project. Initially I didn’t understand the
guidelines, but now that we’ve gone through most of the project I stand much more confident in my
abilities to work from a situation in which I felt lost. I understand now the importance of this project in
my argumentation and also in my research. I do wish, however, that I picked a different subject than
photojournalism because the genre of photojournalism is really the photography, and I picked the writing.
I felt like I contradicted myself because photojournalism is based on photography, not writing.