I have always believed my writing ability was fairly strong, yet susceptible to inferiority. The same way an elite athlete may have not always perform to their potential every game, my ability to write follows a similar avenue. To say my writing is elite is erroneous, I did not possess the ability to persuade the hearts and minds of the handful of english teachers who have read my work, let alone the general public. Having established this, my writing process has, until somewhat recently, been a linear one. Only rarely would I return to my work to bolster arguments and fortify continuity. I operated under this methodology not because I lacked the drive or work ethic, but rather because it was not necessary in order for me to succeed. This was true throughout roughly half of my high school career. My work was comprised of a single, systematic approach where I attempted to craft the most convincing argument my mind could conjure. Once the last word had been written and the ink had dried I was done. My writing was punctual and only under the most dire circumstances was it completed less than a day or two prior to its deadline. However, I began to see the benefits of revision once I reached my AP chemistry class during my junior year. As the most difficult course I had taken at that time, intensive in both material and especially writing, I began to understand the necessity for revisiting and calibrating my work despite the supplemental time devotion. For most writing assignments, especially ones of great significance, drafting and revision became an integral component of my writing process. This class will be a testament as to whether those skills survived my year away from conventional schooling. However, I can say with confidence that, with the rigors I anticipate to endure from this course and others, if those skills have been lost I will work to ensure that I have them perfected once May arrives.
Galen Arnold
Professor Miller
English 110-G
30 January 2019
The use of quotes from outside sources is a seemingly simple and linear process. However, after reading They Say I Say, I realize that the approach may not be as elementary as I previously thought. Early in the chapter, the book discusses how integrating quotes into writing not only supports an argument and bolsters the content, but it also offers credibility to your piece. I have often overlooked this idea, as I always simply thought of quotes as simply another requirement to meet in my writing. This new methodology will enable me to approach the implementation of quotes differently and use them more effectively.
Perhaps the most interesting idea from this chapter is the level of parity that is involved when explaining quotes. I found it interesting to ponder how there is no definitive protocol to the practice of quote discussion as not all quotes require the same degree of analysis. Despite the lack of consistency, I found it beneficial that it is typically desired to over explain a quote. This is because the significance of the quote needs to be established, and the dynamic it creates with the topic of the piece must be distinguished.
One of the most beneficial pieces of information I found from this chapter lies at the end with a passage on the improper methods to introduce quotes. The book indicates that there is a specific procedure that minimizes ambiguity and enhances the introduction in order to fully attain the potential of the quote. This is done by explicitly stating that the quote is rather an idea, assertion or statement from the respective person. This ultimately enables the reader to understand that the quote is being manipulated for the purpose of strengthening an argument rather than unintentionally misleading readers.
Galen Arnold
- I found it interesting that Rhinehart had, at the time the article was written, been living off of Soylent for roughly 90% of his meals. In the first paragraph, Widdicombe describes Rhinehart’s appearance as “encouraging” despite the fact that he had been living almost entirely off of Soylent. I was surprised that Rhinehart’s concoction was not only functional, but also a sustainable substitute to a conventional diet.
- Widdecombe admits to buying an overpriced pressed juice from a specialty bar. She shows the product to Rhinehart who reveals a pompous attitude towards it, saying that, “it’s kind of archaic” and that it is “mostly sugar.” It seems as though through the development and his dependence on the Soylent, Rhinehart has adapted a distasteful, almost arrogant perspective on traditional food. I found this to be quite unbecoming, that real food has become an inconvenience to Rhinehart, and that it seems as though he believes his product is the pinnacle of human agriculture and food consumption.
- Widdecombe details the extent of the potential food shortage and suggests that it may be closer than most people are aware. This could potentially give rise to a more contrived devotion to Soylent and other products like it. In order for the human race to survive in the future, we may have to succumb to Rhinehart’s concept and adapt to the possibility that it could not only be the primary source of nourishment, but perhaps the only one.
Galen Arnold
Professor Miller
English-110
6 February 2019
They Say, I Say is an interesting guide to perfecting the skills necessary to be successful at academic writing. One of the most prevalent talents the book implores its readers to fortify is the practice of integrating potential views into my own text. I have always been taught that, while writing an argumentative piece, the critical component of constructing an effective argument is to simply explain my own perspective thoroughly. They Say, I Say, however, discusses the importance of including potential rebuttals and providing justification against it. They Say, I Say instructs its readers to summarize opposing opinions in order to use them as a catalyst to not only thoroughly explain an argument, but also approach it from a different perspective. In my writing experience, this skill has rarely been necessary, as my compositions have scarcely been subject to public scrutiny. Nevertheless, this skill will indeed be necessary in nearly every career with respect to my own interests and if I am to succeed, I must ameliorate my current status.
I also found that the practice of limiting ambiguous language to be helpful. They Say, I Say explains the inferiority of utilizing redundant claims and phrases, and that by doing so, my argument is inherently weakened and causes readers to lose interest. Ultimately, the flawless execution of an argument lies within the delivery and the methods comprising it. I must be assertive, confident, and eloquent if my argument is to be effective. Rhetoric is perhaps the most important component to any piece of writing as it provides credibility. Credibility is essential because if a reader is to believe my argument, I must first provide a reason for them to believe me as a writer. If I do not establish trust between myself and my reader, they will not approach my piece with a malleable mind.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
20 February 2019
One of the most interesting things, I found, from this section of “They Say, I Say” is the deceptive precision involved with writing. This is admittedly a general observation, but is something I have often overlooked nonetheless. Using the specific language and the mechanics necessary to embody my own opinion while simultaneously rebutting conflicting arguments, or employing an opposing view in order construct my own is ultimately a practice of critical thinking. Additionally, I found that including a point from another opinion that is not explicitly stated, but rather implied in my own writing to be especially remarkable. Using another opinion, whether parallel to my own or not, as a foundation with which to derive more information is certainly a technique I intend to implement into my own writing. Not only will it enable me to more thoroughly explain the purpose behind my argument, but it will also allow me to refute more of the conceivable counterarguments.
I also found it particularly interesting to ponder the idea of periodically reintroducing the ideas of which I am developing my argument around. Not only does this remind the reader of the purpose behind my argument, but it also reminds me, the writer, what my argument is as my thesis evolves over the course of my writing process maintaining a distinguishable motive for my justification. Over the course of my writing process, ideas will arise and disappear, and with this practice, my argument will abide by the parameters of the ideas I am writing about. Ultimately, there is a distinct protocol involved with constructing an effective argument, yet despite the meticulous nature behind it, “They Say, I Say” assures me that this methodology will enable me to evolve the most functional and powerful argument my mind can conjure.
Galen Arnold
While revising project one, I found that I was spending most of my time ensuring my thoughts and ideas flowed in a coherent manner. Whether or not my essay is good, I ultimately want the reader’s thoughts and opinions to be able to evolve with my own.
If I were to change something, I would likely change the way I approached my thesis. While I (hope) I was able to formulate a convincing argument, the third component of my thesis was not as sound as I would have liked it to be. While I think the idea I ultimately used was fine, I do not believe I extrapolated the ideas I potentially could have.
The entire experience completing this project was a fairly new experience for me. I found that I was much more attentive to the ideas I conjured and the language I used in order to properly convey the information I intended. I ultimately found that I was more formulaic with my approach than I have been in the past.
I believe that my approach to this assignment was superior relative to my past experiences, although I am not sure how I rank within the expectations for this class. If put frankly, I think I was remarkably average when compared to my fellow classmates.
Galen Arnold
Page 9, 3rd Paragraph
In this passage, Michael Pollen describes the niched nature of the skills displayed on today’s popular cooking shows. Throughout this section, Pollen asserts that these skills are only pertinent to these shows and cannot translate to life outside of them. This opinion, I believe, holds a commendable amount of truth to it. This is because the talents found on these shows are purposed in order to illustrate the precision and craftsmanship behind not only the production of food, but most importantly, its presentation. The latter is something rarely seen outside of the realm of food television and is especially absent in regard to home cooking. Skills such as conjuring an extravagant dish from strange ingredients or doing so in a predetermined amount of time are simply redundant concerning home cooked meals. Ultimately, requirements such as these have no real-world implementations and serve to practical purpose to learn.
Page 4, 2nd Full Paragraph
In this paragraph, Pollen speculates as to the reasons behind the rapid decline in home cooking over recent years. Primarily, he believes the main reason behind this trend is people have begun to move away from the confinements and commitments of home-cooking and elected for the simplicity found in eating out and consuming food prepared by someone else. However, while this may be true, I do not believe that this is the main reason behind this cascade of events. I believe that it is a product of the changing societal culture. Life is moving faster than it ever has and more is expected from people than ever before. Preparing for a career as well as the act of maintaining one demands a significant time sacrifice, one that conflicts with the cultural normality found in the days of yesteryear and one that members of today’s work force are not prepared to accommodate with sacrificing these commodities.
Page 12 2nd Full Paragraph
In this paragraph, Pollen questions the appeal behind cooking shows and insinuates that such shows should not draw the massive audiences that they do. Pollen believes that cooking is becoming increasingly archaic, and consequently, more people are watching shows on cooking. I believe, however, that this trend is not as outlandish as it seemingly is. The critical purpose behind television is entertainment, and that is found heavily in such shows. However, Pollen implies that interest is synonymous with practice as why would someone watch a show about something that do not do themselves? Interest and practice are not mutually exclusive, as how many people who watch football on Sundays actually play or even used to play competitively at all? Cooking shows, like sports, are watched purely for entertainment and while the skills displayed can rarely be translated to a practical setting, it is the removed perspective that the viewer has that is so appealing.
Galen Arnold
In Chapter fourteen of They Say, I Say, I found the idea of using my own argument to provoke or create others was an interesting concept and one I have scarcely pondered. I find the notion that arguments are merely ongoing conversations created and subsequently bolstered by an unquantifiable amount of people evolving the core ideas to be fascinating. Moreover, this idea moves many of the essays I have written into a different perspective: that they are simply a piece of a much larger puzzle of establishing an idea, the arguments that can be formulated around it and the evolution that idea endures.
I also found it interesting that not all arguments must be a response to a particular discussion, but rather can be purposed around the lack of discussion. Perhaps using components of an ongoing discussion that have been overlooked yet have tremendous implications in their own respect, or synthesizing an entirely new topic, there are a multitude of potential avenues to pursue. Likely the simplest pathway is to exploit ideas or concepts that are either missing or underdeveloped. They Say, I Say elaborates mostly on scientific research publications as potential for errors in such fields are both common and sometimes easily identifiable. Ultimately, this practice enables the thorough progression of discussions and effectively integrates more opinions into it.
As writings become increasingly professional, it can be difficult to decipher some of the language used by authors of adept vocabulary. In They Say, I Say, it is encouraged to translate particularly dense passages into something more accessible. I found this tremendously helpful as I sometimes struggle deciphering the primary objective surrounding a piece of writing. However, the suggestion of using a “bridge” to determine the true meaning of a text will, despite the supplemental time devotion, enable me to fully understand and comprehend the argument being made.
Galen Arnold
My experience performing peer review has been a jarring one. Considering my background in this practice being seemingly nonexistent, mostly commenting on local, sentence structure flaws, the evolution to observing flaws on a larger scale, providing counterarguments and suggesting bigger changes to one’s text has required a much different approach. During Project One, I feel that most of the comments I made were beneficial, yet not entirely essential. I believe most of the suggestions I made were neither global nor local, but rather a combination of the two. The most significant proposals I made in Project One were to rearrange paragraph structure with the preexisting text in order to establish a more coherent flow to the argument being made. I believe I made such suggestions only scarcely, however, I also was able to develop a more analytical approach to the process of peer review in Project Two. While I maintained some of my previous rigidity of rearranging paragraphs, I also resolved to look for flaws in the arguments I was reading. Whether it was an effort to bolster these arguments by providing conceivable rebuttals or suggesting another approach to a weaker portion of a thesis, I believe I made a more significant effort in the global component of an essay. This perspective is one I plan to build on in Project Three. This is because, despite the value in local comments, I believe the responsibility of recognizing local flaws lies with the writer while global flaws are most effectively recognized from an external perspective. Moreover, I have found the global review far more beneficial in my writing process, as the comments I have received have enabled me to overcome many of the challenges I face while writing and have enabled me to conjure a more convincing argument by providing insight I would not have seen myself.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
20 March 2019
In NPR’s interview with mortician Caitlin Doughty, I was particularly intrigued with the movement entailing do-it-yourself burial or cremation. Primarily, I understand why this movement exists as it provides a seemingly more pure method of a funeral. By performing such a procedure independently, one has the ability to tailor the nuances of post-death rituals to the most ideal extent. However, like most professions, morticians serve a practical purpose and have the expertise to be able to properly send the physical remains of what once contained life into what lies beyond. Morticians build their careers around corpses, unlike most of the general public, qualifying them to have the proper confidence entrusted in them to properly adhere to the wishes of both the deceased as well as next of kin. Death is an emotional and humbling event. There are few life events that embody the true insignificance of a single person while also respecting the fragility of the gift of life
I was surprised to learn of Doughty’s disposition toward home funerals. Doughty is a tremendous advocate for this ritual which seemed somewhat unbecoming from a mortician. Personally, I could never do this for someone simply because of lack of knowledge of such a procedure. Recently, I have begun to assume a more conscious perspective on death and how fragile life actually is. Death can happen at any time under any circumstances and while there are few guarantees throughout one’s existence both living and not, I believe an expert’s involvement is the proper method through which to honor the death of a loved one. Just how I would not attempt to treat a sick person myself, there is a reason this profession is as prominent as it is: because people are aware that by completing a procedure of such delicacy requires skills and knowledge developed over a career of building experience.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
22 March 2019
“Pizza and wings are the most culturally significant food in the unique city of Buffalo” (Wolf)
This quote from Sydney Wolf was the first outside source I implemented into my text. The primary purpose for this quote was to exemplify how different cultures can influence each other, and, in the case of Sydney’s Buffalo wings, create a unique dish that ultimately serves as part of the city’s identity. I felt that this quote was a strong example of the point I was attempting to prove, and still believe this.
“I’m sure you are familiar with what the rest of the country refers to as Buffalo wings, but at home we just call them chicken wings” (Wolf)
Another quote from Sydney, my objective with this quote was to show not tell the tangible reality of the previous quote. My words can only say so much, but this quote, I think, was almost meant to be used in my argument. It perfectly embodied my primary point of illustrating that cultures can be impacted and grown with food.
“Cooking made us who we are; by teaching men to use fire, it had done the most to advance the cause of civilization” (Pollen)
The purpose of this quote in my essay was to illustrate the undervalued, yet profound effect that cooking has had on the progression of both human culture as well as intelligence. I perhaps was overly scientific with my ensuing explanation, however the point I tried to make, I think, is still valid ultimately. Humans found that food was better when cooked, and by using the processes necessary to build an understanding of the proper methods used to prepare food, humans developed a crude understanding of the scientific processes involved with cooking food.
“a symbolic way of distinguishing ourselves from other animals” (Pollen)
This quote was used primarily to further illustrate the historical importance cooking had on the development of human intelligence. Humans had to have realized an intellectual dissonance between us and other animals and I thought that the practice of cooking, being that it was likely one of the first major progressions in intelligence.
“…I value the opportunity the meal provides for my family to come together and socialize, giving us time to appreciate each other’s presence” (Hardy)
This quote was used to explain the importance food has on human socialization. I felt that it fully realized what the motive of that particular paragraph was. Being that section’s purpose was to emphasize the seemingly insignificant yet actually profound effect of eating in the company of others.
“…it comes in a big, brown paper bag, stapled shut twice, and with a little receipt stuck to the side…it means a laid back, full family meal, full of fun, laughter, and love” (Murray)
This quote was used to illustrate that the catalyst for cultural progression is more dependent on consuming food than cooking it. I thought this quote embodied my ideal motive well in that the favorite meal in this essay came from a restaurant. Despite delegating the responsibility to someone else, there is still real emotional value in the meal. Value that has clearly had a profound effect on the author.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
25 March 2019
In Ross Andersen’s What the Crows Know, he talks about the concept of consciousness and the blatant lack of understanding humans have of it. I found this to be tremendously interesting and is something I often contemplate myself. Andersen calls consciousness “the final frontier” of science which, considering the current state of affairs in the scientific realm, appears to be an apt assessment. What I found especially interesting to think about was the sociological dynamic between one’s own consciousness and that of someone else. Everyone lives unique, diverse lives filled with different significant events, interests, opinions among an enormous variety of tangible variables that can affect someone’s life. All of these different factors can still be somewhat comparable to others to a certain degree, yet more often than not, people seem to have little to no sympathy or even acknowledgement for other people’s lives. Perhaps it is because humans are cynical by nature and this dynamic is unavoidable, but could a more altruistic societal relationship be a feasible change? It is hard to say definitively, and I am certainly not equipped to be making baseless assumptions. Nevertheless, I would like to believe humans are capable of adapting a cultural standard similar to that of Jainism.
Andersen also describes how some philosophers believe that consciousness is a form of energy not dissimilar from time or space. I find this idea to be terrifically interesting with titanic potential if humans are able to develop a more accurate understanding of consciousness. What limits are there? Can it be manipulated? It is a curious subject, and one I hope can be further explored in the future.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
27 March 2019
Page 2, Paragraph 3
This passage, for me, ultimately refines to a single sentence, being “He even began to question the morality of pets.” This line in particular was somewhat enraging. Pets are some of the most pure relationships that can be developed. Admittedly, it is a contrived union born through food and shelter, yet a relationship between a person and their pet can resemble that of one with their own child. Jim Thompson believing having a pet is wrong is fundamentally a preposterous claim. There are plenty of human activities more ethically questionable than caring for a pet. War, deception, Ryan Kesler’s contract with Anaheim. There are few things more genuine than a bond with a pet. This quote is ultimately harmful towards Herzog’s argument. It is a unique question to ask, yet most people do not have an unbiased opinion towards having pets. Everyone loves their dog, cat or whatever creature lurks within the walls of one’s house.
Page 4, Paragraph 2
In this passage, Herzog discusses the sheer magnitude behind the pet “industry.” The numbers involved with producing enough food for pet cats alone is astounding even with conservative estimations. This passage is particularly effective in Herzog’s argument purely for the reason of using such enormous numbers. Anytime evidence can be supported numerically, the validity seems to increase drastically. I also think the usage of cats in this particular statistic, though likely unintentional, also supported Herzog’s argument for the reason that, between cats and dogs, cats are generally more disliked than dogs are. This consequently causes the size of production needed to support the domesticated cat population in America seems a bit more distasteful.
Page 5, Paragraphs 3-5
In this passage, Herzog discusses the the attachment her colleague, Rob Neibor, developed with a group of experimental cats. Herzog also details the effect of the cats’ euthanization had on Neibor, making him a cold, distant person ashamed of his actions and guilty of the morbidness of his experiment. This helps Herzog’s argument as it shows the ease through which humans are able to develop relationships with animals. This illustrates why it is hard for humans when a pet or an animal of significance passes, yet we have little hesitation when it comes to eating slaughtered animal meat.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
1 April 2019
Upon the revisiting of David Foster Wallace’s Consider the Lobster after reading several works detailing the hierarchy of animal importance humans have developed over time, I would say that my opinion on the matter has not changed significantly, but it has become a more relevant issue to me. The most critical component to this evolution lies with Hal Herzog’s Animals Like Us. This is because Herzog’s argument throughout his piece ultimately attempts to make the reader question why some animals are treated differently by most humans. This is a question I cannot provide a justifiable answer to, I am not able to explain why dogs mean more to me than cows, and I certainly cannot, in good conscience, say why the thought of slaughtering dogs in other countries is so horrific to me yet the knowledge that this happens with other animals in America does not have the same impact on me. It is a layered subject, and is undoubtedly a humbling one upon reflection. Why are some animals more valuable to me than others? I am not able to say why, but that appears to be the same methodology plaguing most people on this planet. Perhaps the reason behind this is a subconscious recognition that some animals display more human qualities than others. Or maybe it is simply due to an event that occurred millenia ago under arbitrary circumstances that ultimately created a dynamic between humans and animals illustrating that not all animals are the same, and some are able to understand and respond to humans. No matter the reasons behind this primal revolution, it has developed into a tremendous problem as before long, these animals humans consider inferior may not be able to be a sustainable option for the growing human population.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
1 April 2019
In this section of They Say, I Say, the idea of implementing counter arguments into a text is once again revisited. This is tremendously beneficial advice, as this can not only add size to an argument, but also provide a more quality, diverse, and ultimately complete argument. By accounting for most, ideally all, rebuttals to an argument, the persuasion is exalted providing a greater chance at conviction. As the text says, without this employment of potential counter arguments, one’s piece may radiate a rather unbecoming narrative, preaching a close-minded objective produced through ignorance and tunnel vision. Also in this section of They Say, I Say, it is implored that the author represent counter arguments fairly. I believe this is truly invaluable for a variety of reasons. Primarily, it enables readers under such perspectives to not feel attacked by the author. However, the second, and most important reason for the importance of this tactic, is that the author gives themself a chance to truly convince someone. By accounting for other viewpoints with real conviction and understanding, the likelihood that those with opposing views changing their perspective increases significantly. By coupling these two practices together, an effective dynamic between furthering one’s own argument while actively providing evidence against potential rebuttals can be created. Finally, They Say, I Say, advocates for not only accounting for potential rebuttals, but also illustrating them persuasively. This is another important tactic, as it enable the author to display a level-headed opinion of the topic of the text while also demonstrating that his opinion on the matter has a degree of malleability, and is not a rigid, unbreakable force that no words can reform. Ultimately, this section of They Say, I Say provides invaluable advice on how to account for other argument while also representing them in a way that furthers the primary objective.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
3 April 2019
In this paragraph in Jonathan Safran Foer’s Against Meat, Foer details the fond memories he has eating typically meat oriented meals with his family as well as the personal significance those memories have to him. By giving up meat, Foer also sacrifices the pleasure behind eating a meat-based meal and consequently, he feels as though he is losing some of the value that his childhood had with respect to the meals that made such occasions special. Furthermore, Foer is accepting that the culture behind the foods he once ate is no longer a part of his life, and the memories he has are now gone. Conversely, by relinquishing meat, Foer is gaining a sound conscious. Despite the value the memories he has of eating these meals with his family, Foer is willing to accept the forgetfulness necessary in order to him to diminish the guilt he has towards eating meat.
In this paragraph, Foer indirectly asks if a healthy conscious is worth relinquishing pleasure with regard to consuming meat. For me, meat is essential to my diet, however, there are many people who may argue the consumption of meat is a morbid and disgusting practice. I believe this dispute is a product of a cognitive dissonance between self awareness and one’s values. Humans have acquired a particularly sophisticated intelligence through which we are able to communicate emotions and ideas. In the animal kingdom however, there is no such privilege. There are no certainties, no guarantees, nothing that ensures any animal will live to see tomorrow. Their primary objective is to preserve their survival as well as they are able to. Humans however, have the unique ability to distinguish right from wrong, and to many, killing and eating animals falls into the latter category. If based by the standards of the animal world, what humans do is perfectly acceptable. However, humans have established standards of our own, and this dilemma may be a violation.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
5 April 2019
- Throughout my writing process for each project, I have tried to evolve my approach in order to establish an effective but also efficient advance. The conditions for my writing, however, are something I keep consistent, things such as listening to music while I write, preferably with minimal lyrics primarily to employ as a source of white noise, or finding a solitary place in the commons to work and not be bothered. Nevertheless, I have tried to build and improve on the approach I once considered flawless. As I have progressed through the projects of this course, I have attempted to adopt a more technical process especially when looking for information to support my argument from the resource texts. I like to scan each essay or article for information I could potentially use in my essays and once I have an idea of what my argument will look like, I continue to revise the tentative information I have until I have the few quotes I will ultimately need. I genuinely do not know how much time I have spent on each essay or even how much time I spend working at a time. Generally, I base my status on feel and work until I reach a place where I am comfortable with what I have completed and what I have yet to do. Additionally, I feel that my process for project three has been significantly more detailed than the previous projects. Using the feedback I have given on project one and two peer reviews, I try to employ an objective perspective on each paragraph I write in order to ensure that my argument and flow are as strong as possible. I plan to continue this process for not only the remaining duration of project three, but also for any future writing I do.
Galen Arnold
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110-G
15 April 2019
Over the course of this semester so far, I have begun to make steps toward understanding the magnitude of just how methodical the process of revision is. Realizing that processes I have employed in the past are simply not sufficient for the level of writing I am participating in has been a humbling evolution. Having said that, I have taken a more significant and direct approach to the revision of this final project. Under the guide of this previous week’s peer review, I have begun to make necessary adjustments to the flawed and under worked components of my material. I have begun to take a sequential approach to my text, starting with my introduction, ensuring that the necessary components of the background are properly illustrated enabling my readers to understand their relevance later in my thesis. Early in my introduction, I attempt to illustrate how complicated issues are often seen as black and white while comparing that sentiment to the treatment of animals. However, I did not give an example of an issue of such complication, which is clearly something I should execute. From there I have tried to rework the language in my thesis but have yet to make progress on that end. In my body paragraphs, I have been working to ensure that all of the evidence I employ is properly represented. In one instance, I use the cat experiment from Hal Herzog’s piece but do not effectively relate it to my primary objective which my peer reviewers noticed. To remedy this, I added a story about my dog Flash to help exemplify how pure relationships between humans and animals can be in order to provide a greater magnitude to Herzog’s story. I felt this was effective as it invokes relatability between my piece and my readers. Ultimately, I have taken a more systematic approach to the revision of my essay in hopes to provide only effective ideas and justifications.
