Post 4

In James Porters' “Intertextuality and the Discourse Community” he challenges the common belief that all of our writing is completely individual.  He says the idea of intertextuality is the idea that all texts contain traces from other texts or ideas.  On top of borrowing ideas that we have already read, we let our social communities shape the way we think and perceive things, therefore affecting our writing. 

             Porter identifies discourse communities, which is a group of individuals bound by a common interest.  With this idea in mind, he further explains that intertextuality constrains writing.  It shifts the importance of a piece of writing away from the author’s intention, and more to the social context.  He presents two serious problems with typical writings: “limited range” and “unclear text.” 

            By imagining text to be “individual” we are only hurting ourselves.  We have to realize the social context in which people will understand our writing.  Porter says “all texts are interdependent: We understand a text only insofar as we understand its precursors.”  He suggests ways to overcome this idea by choosing a topic that should be acceptable to your discourse community.  He suggests choosing the “right” topic, by applying the appropriate critical methodology and adopting the views of the communities’ values.  By doing so, this is the best way to get your point across in the way in which you want it to be read. 

            Simply assuming that what you mean will be conveyed to your readers is a problem when you consider text to be “individual.”  All text contains other ideas, and people will pull from their experiences and values to perceive what you are trying to say.  By accepting the idea that most, if not all, writings are just a “web of ideas,” we can better prepare our stories to be more successful. 

Post 3

Greene and Klein have two different views on the types of research conducive to learning.  Greene suggests a “conversation model of argument.”  He says that every argument you make is connected to other arguments and therefore we need to use the information we have to enable us to enter into conversations.  On page 12 of Writing and Writing, he specifically points out his view by saying, “We are not just educated by concepts and facts that we learn in school.  We are educated by the people around us and the environments we live in every day.”

            On the other hand, Klein proposes a different point of view for learning.  He suggests a hunting and gathering method.  Klein believes the process is segmented into four stages; collect data, sift the data rhetorically, seek patterns in the data and translate their findings into research.  He encourages writing two and for your peers and promotes genuine reading in classrooms that provides research that maybe a library cannot provide.  He thinks this will not only help with learning, but also “extend the range of academic writing.”  Klein specifically says, “research is writing.”

            I think the audiences are somewhat the same, and somewhat different.  Greene is talking to college age students, or generally anyone is an academic setting.  Klein is addressing professors and people at a high academic level than students.  He gives suggestions to them about what to change in the classroom, as opposed to the students themselves.  The content changes because of the way it is found.  I think Greene’s approach is more idealistic because we learn from others around us, and conversing with one another ensures we reach a broad range of ideas for each subject.  With Kleins’ approach there are less of a range or variety of information, I think, because there is much more information out there besides what is written in books.

Post 2

Before reading the article on Wikipedia I never thought the website would be helpful.  Throughout high school and college all I hear my professors saying is "don't use Wikipedia as a resource."  It always seemed like everyone was against the website, so i just assumed i needed to be against it as well. 

After reading the article on how Wikipedia can be helpful I think it can be used as a successful source.  Even if I don't directly quote the site, it can start as a basis to finding other sources that may be more helpful to my research and me.  I think it can be most helpful when I am researching something I know nothing bout.  It seems to have a clear outline of the most important parts of a subject.  

I can understand where professors are coming from when they say "don't use this website as a source."  I realize now that in a way they may be right, but Wikipedia can be much more helpful in the research aspect of a project. 

In Purdy's section on reviewing, conversing, revising and sharing I learned that information on Wikipedia is useful because it has been compared.  No article is absolute; all good information is compared to other resources in order to obtain the best information.  I think this also helps the authors stay on point with what they are talking about.  It gives them a chance to compare what topics are most important and what interests the type of people that are going to be looking at their article. 

Post 1

My name is Deanna Kelly.  I am a junior, majoring in Journalism/Public Relations with a minor in Psychology and a specialization in Sociology.  I'm from Pittsburgh, PA.  I am really interested in sports, so when I graduate I would like to be a PR specialist in the sports industry.  I have an older brother and a younger sister.  My brother Ian is a senior at Auburn University majoring in Zoology and my younger sister Maura is a sophomore in high school.  I transferred here my freshman year from University of South Carolina, so I didn't take Eng 151, but took a similar class in South Carolina.

In my english class we wrote a lot of papers, which I enjoyed.  My professor allowed us to write about things that interested us which was refreshing.  My favorite assignment was when we wrote about a fairytale and the various hidden meanings behind them, then reworking it into a modern day story, while still conveying the same hidden meanings.  Being a journalism student I write a lot of papers, and in the past I have had professors who have given me bad grades because my writing style differed from theirs.  This is probably the only bad thing I have to say about previous classes.

I have never maintained a blog or worked with Wikipedia so both of these assignments are very new to me.  I think I will enjoy it because I feel as a Public Relations major I should know as much about the interest as possible because it is the biggest medium used today.  The only part of the class I am apprehensive about is using Wikipedia, but hopefully it isn't that confusing.  I am always striving to be a better writer and to learn more about different types of writings.  I am hoping this class strengthens my skills as a writer and also expands how I think about different subjects/writings.