TRUTH DOG CHAPTER 5

May 03, 2017 / JAKE STANFORD

Author's note: this is the online version of the first chapter of the advanced English textbook I'm writing. I keep this version here so my students can read what I write without an unnecessary waste of paper. The book is not yet published as of 9/1/18.

Another note: information researched from other texts will be properly cited in the published text.

HOW TO READ

You’re thinking, “I know how to read already. I’m not stupid!”

Shhh. I know.

But has anyone taught you how highly educated people read text? I can’t just assume you already know how to read like a college student, because most students who come to me do not. And many young people find college unnecessarily difficult because they lack important reading skills.

Inexperienced and less educated readers make three critical errors:

They just start reading at the beginning without first trying to figure out what they’re reading.
They tolerate confusion because they don’t want to have to do any work in order to understand.
They read everything at the same basic pace.

I’ll address #2 and #3 later. Let’s just worry about critical error #1 for now.

Any college-educated person, when picking up a new text or document, asks, “What am I looking at?”

It might be:

a book
an article
a letter
a diary entry
a report
a graph
a political cartoon
a piece of artwork

So a text is not necessarily a book. And a book is not necessarily a novel.

There so much to consider, before you start reading or examining any document.

First of all, understand: everything is an argument, in some sense. In my classroom there is a sign covering up the clock that says, "TIME TO STUDY." Even this short message is, in a sense, an argument about the way many of us sit in classrooms and stare at the clock on those days when we don't feel like working.

The power of language on old parchment paper. Just kidding. It's a bad photograph. (c) 2018 J. STANFORD

This diagram shows the mechanics of any message. There is the words (or images) in the message itself, represented by boxes, and there is the context of the message, represented by circles.

“Context is everything.”

BEFORE READING: CONTEXT

In this course I am requiring you to mark up a text or document using a particular strategy. Different teachers call it different things. You may have heard of SOAPSTone, or TSOAPPS, or any one of a number of acronyms floating around out there in the World of Teachers Talking About School. I used to call it my “document protocol”—it made sense, I suppose, but when I set about writing this chapter of Truth Dog, I could see no good reason to be unnecessarily cute or proprietary.

We all want basically the same thing. I’m going to call it what it is: the document’s context. Ascertaining context is the cognitive process an educated reader goes through when first picking up an unfamiliar document.

Think of yourself as a detective at a crime scene. Before examining it in detail, a good detective will look at the big picture to see if anything about the crime scene stands out. The detective is ascertaining the context of the crime, in much the same way I want you to ascertain the context of the text in your hands.

I need to see your thinking written directly on the document, at least at first. As you become more skilled, you’ll write less and less, especially in a testing situation, because you’ll be able to do more of it in your head.

Educated adults ascertain context in their heads, without writing anything. You’ll get there too but in the beginning I’d like for you to make notes on the text for each item:

FORM (What type of document are you looking at?)
VOICE
OCCASION
AUDIENCE

DURING AND AFTER READING: CONTEXT AND CONTENT

MESSAGE
STRUCTURE
TONE
PARADIGM
PURPOSE

That’s as simple as I can make it. You don’t need an acronym, because at first I’m going to remind you, over and over, to consider all 9 items. In a few months it’ll be second nature to you.

And, you don’t have to slavishly consider them in the order I give. Some students are more linear or sequential in their thinking and need to consider them in the same order every time. Other students are more abstract or organic, and can consider them as they come up, more naturally, like mushrooms on a forest floor.

When called upon, you should expect to be able to speak aloud to the class about your choices. Be able to say why. Be able to offer evidence. You’ll get better, faster, if you give it your best shot, and bravely risk being “wrong”—rather than timidly waiting until you’re sure. Dive into the lake! (Before I push you.)

ARE YOU SHY?

If you’re shy about speaking aloud in front of your peers, I understand. When I was your age a hundred years ago, talking in front of my peers frightened me so much I nearly wet my pants.
Now look at me. Like most of your teachers I can barely shut up. (Fortunately, I’ve retained outstanding bladder control, even at my advanced age.)

If you’re shy, relax. See me outside of class and we’ll figure it out.

STEP 1. FORM

What form does the document take? What are you looking at?

FICTION OR NONFICTION

Is this “real”?

Fiction is the invention of the writer. It did not actually happen. However, it might represent something that actually happened, such as George Orwell’s Animal Farm, which is allegorical, meaning that it tries to retell the story of the Russian Revolution, using character animals who revolt against the farmer and take over the farm.

Nonfiction is the recounting of an actual event, or an explanation of something that exists in the real world, or an argument about some issue in the real world.

More about fiction: In a later chapter I expand on the idea of genres when I talk about what kinds of books you should be reading on your own.

TYPE OF TEXT

What type of text is this? What is its basic form?

Narrative text — a chronological retelling of events, often with dialogue. Many traditional narratives have what’s called a plot: the main character is confronted with a problem, followed by complications, followed by a climax, and ending with a resolution. But not all narratives are fictional; a diary entry is generally written in narrative format about something that actually happened. Newspaper reporting and television documentaries often employ a narrative structure. The books of the Old Testament employ narration.
Expository text — a text that explains something. It often makes use of photographs, charts, graphs, tables, and other graphics in order to convey information. But it isn’t necessarily nonfiction; the fantasy role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons involves expository reference texts that explain, in great detail, imaginary places and monsters.
Argumentative text — a text that attempts to convince—in other words, to change the reader’s behaviors or beliefs (or both). An explicit argument makes a claim supported by lines of argument and evidence. You may also see an implicit argument being made in a text, one that’s unstated.
Descriptive text — a text that only describes, without telling a story, without explaining anything, and without posing an overt argument. Poetry is often purely descriptive.

Please don’t get overly confused trying to jam every text squarely into one of the four categories. All texts include description, of course, but we want you to recognize when a text is purely descriptive. Argumentative texts and expository texts often include narrative elements, but we want you to recognize when a text is purely narrative in structure.

And, in the next chapter I’m going to argue that every message, every document, is rhetorical (argumentative) in some sense. I already alluded to this, but remember, when I’m talking about text or a document, I’m thinking about more than just prose. A poem is a document. So is a graph. So is a pie chart. Even a painting or a photograph can count as a “text” in this sense. Even a video or a television show can count.

No matter what it is, we can still recognize its basic structure as narrative, expository, argumentative, or purely descriptive.

So what if I’m looking at a single black and white photograph of a tree stump? How should I categorize such a photograph?

Narrative — Can I make any inference about a story this photograph attempts to depict?
Expository — Does this photograph attempt to explain something?
Argumentative — Is an argument hidden in the image? If so, what?
Purely descriptive — Do I think the photograph is only describing a tree, or a place?

I’m not sure there’s one right answer here. What do you see? Can you justify it?

Ascertaining context is about connecting yourself to the document. It’s not a math problem with one right answer.

OTHER WAYS TO TALK ABOUT A DOCUMENT’S FORM

“Ascertaining context is about connecting yourself to the document. It’s not a math problem with one right answer.”

RHETORICAL MODES = the variety, conventions, and purposes of the major kinds of language-based communication.

Let’s save this for later. Think of it as a treat or a surprise, like a wrapped present under a Christmas tree.

MEDIA

Media is the means of communication: newspaper, magazine, scientific journal, television, library book, social media post, video, web page, pamphlet, freeway billboard, airplane banner ad…

You get the idea.

GENRE

Genre is discipline-specific, a category of artistic composition, characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter. So, painting has genres. Music has genres.
Wikipedia™ lists the following genres for fiction and nonfiction.

Fiction
Classic / literature of the traditional canon
Comics / graphic novels
Crime / detective
Fable
Fairy tale
Fan fiction
Fantasy
Folklore
Historical fiction
Horror
Humor
Legend story
Magical realism
Meta fiction
Mystery
Mythopoeia
Picture book / children’s book
Realistic fiction
Science fiction
Short story
Suspense / thriller
Tall tale
Western
Nonfiction
Biography / autobiography
Essay
Owner’s manual / instruction manual / user’s guide
Journalism / straight reporting
Lab report
Memoir
Narrative fiction / personal narrative
Reference book
Self-help book
Speech
Textbook

I did not include this list because I expect you to use it.

Rather, I’d like for you to see how artificial and personal categorization can be. Wikipedia—or at least, whoever was bored enough to write this particular Wikipedia entry—considers autobiography and memoir to have some critical difference. Apparently “diary” is subsumed under one or the other. Whatever. Seriously.

I can assure you this is my first encounter with the term “mythopoeia.”

And: fable vs. folklore vs. legend story? Search me. I could have read the short descriptions and even gone Wikisurfing™ in order to learn more. Eh. Maybe tomorrow.

The point is that you don’t need to internalize or adhere or assign too much importance to someone else’s categories or nomenclature.

I only need you to be able to talk intelligently about a text. Use language you think makes sense, but try to keep it as specific and as academic as possible.

Speaking of someone else’s nomenclature, the title of this section I’ve just written is “STEP 1: FORM.” I am less concerned with whether “form” is the best term for this part of ascertaining a text’s context, and more concerned that you can answer the question, “What am I looking at?”

In fact, please don’t even waste any time writing the word “form” on any document I give you. If you’re looking at a diary entry, just write “diary” and “NF” for “nonfiction.”
Perfect.

STEP 2. VOICE

Who’s talking (writing)?

Why call it “voice” instead of “author” or “writer”?

Well, the document might be a speech. It might be a painting. So “writer” seems limited and misleading. Although there is, strictly speaking, no “voice” involving in painting, I like to think of human civilization as a collection of conversations. A painting, or a photograph, or even a home’s interior design, represents a contribution to the human conversation. I mean “voice” in that sense.

Also, the voice may not be the author’s.

Say what?

Pay attention: the text’s narrator may not be the same person as the writer. For example, in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, the first-person narrator is not Fitzgerald himself, but Nick, one of the characters in the story.

Fitzgerald has created a persona he inhabits in order to narrate: the character, Nick. So in this text, we have two speakers we can analyze: What can we tell about character-narrator Nick Carraway? What can we tell about writer F. Scott Fitzgerald? They are not the same person.

BIAS / WORLDVIEW

Drilling deeper: What can you tell about the person behind the voice? Occupation? Gender? Nationality? Ethnicity? Race? (No, ethnicity and race are not the same thing.) Sexual orientation? Religion? Political affiliation? If you can’t tell, what would you say, based on the text? Speculate.

As a juror serving the State of California, I can tell you from personal experience that after the defense and the prosecution finish their closing arguments, the judge will read instructions to the jury. At the conclusion of my latest criminal trial (yes, I always get picked… sigh…), Judge Otis instructed us not to be “biased.” That is the way the California code is written.

But the state is misusing the word. Most people misuse it.

When Judge Otis tells us we have to be “unbiased,” what he means is that we must strive to be objective rather than subjective. We must try to be “fair” and not “judgmental.”

But you already knew that, because you read and remember Chapter 4, which was devoted entirely to the topic of bias versus subjectivity.

Splendid! Let’s move along, then.

STEP 3. OCCASION

Where and when was it written?

What can you tell about the text’s time and place?

Unfortunately, if you haven’t been paying attention in history class and you don’t know much about geography, you’re placing yourself at a considerable disadvantage compared to other students. For example, let’s say you’re told that the speech you’re reading was given in Boston in 1775, and you haven’t the faintest idea what was going on in Boston that year. You may as well grope in the dark without a flashlight.

Now of course your knowledge will never be that universally specific. For example, if you’re told the speech was written in Detroit in 1881, you may not recall anything specific about 1881, but you ought to know something about what was going on in the Midwest in the late 19th century.

The good news is that if it’s not a test situation, and you have the freedom to research the text’s occasion, then please feel free to look it up! That’s what educated readers do.
What if you can’t tell anything about the occasion, before reading?

That’s fine. It happens. Imma say it til Imma outta breath: this is not math, and often the One Right Answer, if it exists, may elude us! Your goal should be to see IF there is anything you can ascertain about the occasion before reading. If you can’t, skip ahead.

STEP 4. AUDIENCE

Who’s the intended audience?

Be as specific as you can, and recognize that some texts have less specific audiences than others. A newspaper column, for example, is aimed at those who read the newspaper. How would you describe that audience accurately? The readership of The New York Times tends to be largely American, more broad nationally than most other metropolitan area papers, more affluent (at least slightly), and more liberal politically. But, it’s a fairly general audience—meaning, not too specific.

Remember, you’re acting as detective, and not all aspects of the text are going to reveal themselves to you, at least not before you read, and in some cases not even after you read. All I’m asking you to do is try.

If you can’t tell for sure who is the intended audience, then speculate.

If the document is aimed at a specific audience, it’s critically important to ascertain who. If the document is aimed at multiple audiences, it’s critically important to ascertain which ones.

Soon, you’ll see why.

NOW IT’S TIME TO READ THE TEXT

Let’s review what we tried to ascertain about the text before starting to read it:

Form
Voice
Occasion
Audience

Yes, there are 5 more items we're sleuthing. We may or may not find answers for all of them, but the point is to try.

STEP 5. MESSAGE

What is the message? The main idea? The thesis?

Is the title misleading, or on point? Does it emphasize a particular aspect of the message?

You’ve spent most of your school career so far figuring out what the text is about, and answering questions like this:

What is the main idea?
What is the main character’s motive?
How does the story end?

And, hopefully, you’ve been expected to support your answer with evidence from the text. If not, you’ve suffered bad teaching. Sadly, no one can do anything about the past except offer a supportive hug.

You may not be able to articulate the message before reading it, but you should have some idea what it’s about, from the title if nothing else.

STASIS THEORY

Stasis, from the Greek infinitive histasthai, “to stand,” is roughly synonymous with stagnation, which in many contexts is a negative word (Merriam Webster). Think of a room with poor ventilation and stale, stagnant air. Stasis is less negative. In its most literal sense, stasis refers more to balance, equilibrium, and stability. In short: lack of change. In science fiction movies you may have seen characters able to travel long distances through deep space by entering a state of cryogenic stasis, a speculative freezing technology in which the body remains in a state of frozen sleep, prevented from aging over long periods of time.

You’re like, I didn’t need to know all that. Get to the point.

Sorry.

In rhetoric, when arguers disagree, they must achieve stasis, or else the entire argument is fundamentally pointless.

Basically rhetorical stasis just means that the people in the conversation agree on the specific point of controversy.

If for example I find myself participating in a fight about immigration, the odds are good—particularly in the current political climate—that my opponent and I have not achieved rhetorical stasis. My opponent probably wants to argue about whether or not people who break the law should be punished, I am probably trying to argue about whether or not I want to pay more for produce at the supermarket.

We seem to be arguing about the same thing, but we’re not. I am arguing about money and my opponent is arguing about the rule of law.

I’ll have more to say about fighting versus arguing later, but for now, I’m mentioning stasis theory as a way of helping to determine the issue at hand when we look at a document.

Questions / arguments of FACT: Did something happen? Is it real? What is its origin or cause?
Questions / arguments of DEFINITION: What is its nature? What are its parts? How is it classified?
Questions / arguments of EVALUATION: What is its quality? Is it good or bad? Is it harmful or helpful? What caused it? How does it measure up to standards or criteria?
Questions / arguments of POLICY or PROPOSAL — What actions should be taken? How can we make things better?

If stasis theory is helpful to you, embrace it. If not, remember, you don’t need to internalize or adhere or assign too much importance to someone else’s categories or nomenclature. In her own textbook about rhetoric, Andrea Lunsford admits that “in practice the boundaries between stasis questions are often porous: particular arguments have a way of defining their own issues.” (Lunsford, 19)

TIME PERSPECTIVE

Another way of ascertaining the nature of the argument is to consider the time frame.

FORENSIC arguments — a judgment about the past — government, courts, academia
EPIDEICTIC (three syllables: epi - DIEk - tick) or ceremonial arguments — a performance in the present — widely shared beliefs & assumptions, virtues, praise & blame, celebration or condemnation
DELIBERATIVE arguments — a decision about the future — planning, policy, legislation

These categories come from Aristotle’s Rhetoric, and I find them even more useful than stasis theory. Once again, however, keep in mind that these categories overlap.

“You don’t need to internalize or adhere or assign too much importance to someone else’s categories or nomenclature. ”

STEP 6. STRUCTURE

What is the basic structure of the text?

Easy squeezy. What comes first? What comes second? What comes third? Et cetera.

This is easy to ascertain while reading, once you understand what I mean by it.

In a resumé, what comes first is the name, address, e-mail address, and phone number of the applicant. An inch below that you might see a summary of the applicant’s strengths. Then, a bulleted list of core competencies. Then, a work experience history with the most recent or current employers listed first, and the rest in reverse chronological order. Then the resumé will show the applicant’s education. And so on.

The Constitution is divided into seven articles. Each article is divided into sections. Each section is divided into clauses. Article I is about the legislative branch (Congress). Article II is about the executive branch. And so on.

Here’s the easiest way to ascertain structure:

Directly on the document, mark each section’s main ideas. You’re probably wondering, “How do you tell, if it’s not divided up for you the way the Constitution is?”

Well, that depends on the format and length of the text. Abraham Lincoln’s brief Gettysburg Address divides neatly into past, present, and future. Seeing that is immensely helpful in analyzing it, as you’ll see later.

So be creative. Each paragraph might have a main idea. Or, there may be some other way to divide it up. There is not one right way to do this, but if the text is too long, marking each paragraph is exhaustive. In a novel you’re assigned, give each page its own custom title. And, give each chapter its own separate custom title—especially if the novelist only numbered the chapters. Not only does that novel-reading strategy keep you intensely focused, it makes it easy to find things later.

WHAT IF IT’S SHORT?

Analysis of something like a Tweet becomes an analysis of syntax (how words are joined together into phrases and clauses). I’ll come to that later.

WHAT IF IT’S NOT WORDS?

Paintings and photographs have structure too. In the context phase of our analysis, notice what’s there. Can you divide up the contents of the image in some way? Foreground, background? Quadrants?

STRUCTURE IS CONTENT, NOT CONTEXT

If you’re a smart cookie, you’ll have noticed that structure is technically not context—it’s content. It’s about the message itself, not the situation surrounding the message.

Why, then, have I done this to you?

I’m not trying to confuse.

I think examining the central message and ascertaining structure often helps you ascertain the genuine aspects of context: voice, occasion, audience.

When it comes to context, not every item in my list of nine is of equal importance. Occasion and audience matter more in some documents than in others. Structure is no different: often—not always—analyzing a sophisticated document’s structure illuminates something wonderful you might otherwise have missed.

You won’t know if you don’t try.

STEP 7. TONE

What is the writer’s attitude toward the subject?

First of all, tone is not mood. When the teacher asks for mood, the teacher is asking you to describe the general feeling the text creates in the reader. Mood is a more literary term we apply to pieces of fiction and poetry. The writer’s goal is to place the reader in the setting with the characters, to inhabit the same atmosphere they inhabit, so that the reader can more closely identify with one or more of them.

Tone is different, and I’m sorry to say, many teachers and textbooks make tone far more difficult than it needs to be.

Tone is the writer’s attitude toward the subject. You’re being asked to describe that attitude using an adjective.

Let’s imagine the voice is talking about a beetle. It could be a writer writing an essay, or it could be a poet, or it could be a photographer or a painter. The subject is a beetle.

The writer’s attitude towards the beetle is the tone. It can be any tone.

Is the attitude angry? Playful? Scientific? Resentful? Frightened? Indifferent? Loving?

If you’re having trouble, start simply: is the attitude positive, negative, or neutral?

And realize that the tone almost always shifts. In The Great Gatsby, Nick (the narrator) describes Gatsby in an admiring, almost enamored tone. But that’s not the tone of the entire novel. He describes Tom in a wary, sometimes irritated tone. And so on.

Back in Chapter 2 I hit you with vocabulary. I did it for many reasons. One of those reasons was to help you do a better job selecting a precise adjective when discussing tone.

Right now, I am including tone as part of the context, to draw your attention to it when examining a document. We’ll have more to say about tone, how it works, and why it matters later in a later chapter.

Right now, we just need an adjective.

STEP 8. PARADIGM

What part of the audience’s worldview does the voice seek to challenge?

You’re probably thinking—WHAT?

It’s a precise, academic term for a fairly simple concept. Let me explain.

Another teacher might include paradigm as part of the occasion, and you can bundle the two together if you prefer. Occasion I defined as the time and place in which the voice is delivering the message. In that time and place, the members of the audience share opinions about the way the world should be, and the way people ought to behave.

In 2018, most Californians—not all, but a majority—agree that same gender couples ought to be able to marry, that marijuana ought to be legal for adults to possess, that the state ought to provide a public education for all children ages 5-18, and so on. These are paradigms. If someone argues that education ought to be privatized, that voice is challenging the paradigm that the state ought to provide a public education.

Most messages seek to challenge some paradigm or other—especially the ones presented to you by a teacher in a school setting. Can you work it out? Do the best you can, and don’t worry if a response seems elusive.

In the case of the photograph of the tree stump, perhaps the photographer means to challenge the paradigm that it’s acceptable to consume large amounts of paper. A grim scene showing tree stumps strongly challenges that paradigm.

Perhaps a poem about a calm pond and butterflies and pleasant smells is meant to challenge a paradigm many of us share about the dominance of technology in our lives.

When you look at it, what do you think?

STEP 9. PURPOSE

It isn’t until we work out the basics of the text’s content and context that we can work out the most important aspect of a text: its purpose.

“Why this message, to this audience, on this occasion?”

Don’t expect the writer to tell you explicitly. They often don’t. You might find it in in the text’s background information (you know, the stuff no one ever reads, in a schoolish textbook, at the beginning, before the text… time to start paying attention to that stuff).

The purpose is not the same as the message.

There may be multiple purposes (just as there may be many audiences).

A sophisticated purpose can be applied to other texts—not just this one.

Educated people can argue about a possible purpose. It isn’t math, where there’s one right answer. This means you should be able to support the purpose you’ve chosen with evidence from the text or from the background information. As with context, you may have to speculate, and then defend your speculation.

Once again: you are not looking for the hidden “answer.” It’s not math. You are trying to say something intelligent about a document. To do that, you must have some idea about the purpose of the document. Why did the writer write this text? Why did the painter paint this scene?

PARADIGM, AGAIN

Let’s come back to paradigm. The purpose might be as simple as, “The writer seeks to challenge a paradigm. The existing paradigm for this audience is… The new paradigm the author wants the audience to accept is…”

For many documents, the core purpose is to make money. F. Scott Fitzgerald was trying to earn a living when he wrote The Great Gatsby. Since you have been told the book ranks near the top in terms of American literature, it means the book is not merely a work of commercial fiction. You can assume that other purposes exist for the author.

In the case of Gatsby, a strong case can be made that the novel seeks to challenge the truth of the paradigm of the American dream, in which anyone can, through hard work and effort, change his (or her) socioeconomic status. A case can be made that Fitzgerald seeks to challenge the idea that wealth brings happiness. Or that boorish behavior exists in all socioeconomic classes.

I could go on.

When ascertaining purpose, we can think about a paradigm being challenged. We can also think about Aristotle’s dimensions of time, the same ones I already discussed in STEP 5. MESSAGE above.

Forensic arguments — judgments about the past
Epideictic arguments — performances in the present
Deliberative arguments — decisions about the future

If you think about it, each of the three frames half of a purpose statement.

“He judges the outcome of _________ in order to…”
“She praises the effects of ________ in order to…”
“In order to solve the problem of _______, she proposes…”

There are so many ways to think about purpose. I don’t want to place any undue pressure on you, but you must find or speculate on a sophisticated purpose for a document in a rhetorical analysis. How can you comment on someone’s rhetorical strategies if you aren’t even sure why they’re crafting the message in the first place?

DON’T WRITE YOURSELF INTO A CUL-DE-SAC

You’ve seen a cul-de-sac. It’s a French word meaning a street or passage that’s closed at one end. In French it literally means the bottom of the bag (Merriam Webster). Here are some ways students try to get away with a purpose statement and end up with B.S. (“Bad Stuff”):

“He wants to emphasize…”

You’re not getting anywhere with that. It answers what, not why. You could write, “He wants to emphasize ________ to this audience in order to…” and you might end up with a decent statement of purpose.

“He wants to emphasize the importance of…”

Stop. That’s not different.

“She wants to tell about…”

That’s not purpose. That’s message. WHY does she want to “tell about” that?

EXAMPLES

Document #1: the last essay you wrote for an English teacher —topic / message was in answer to some prompt

Not the purpose: To answer such a super interesting prompt
A valid purpose: To demonstrate your competence and earn a good grade

Document #2: Sojourner Truth's speech, “Ain't I a Woman?" —message is that women are not inferior to men in any way

Not the purpose: To tell about gender discrimination
A valid purpose: To challenge abolitionist onlookers and sympathizers to include women's suffrage in the struggle

Document #3: Ray Bradbury's short story “The Veldt" —topic is a futuristic house that does everything for its family of four

Not the purpose: To show that children can be evil
A valid purpose: To shock readers into viewing the conveniences promised by advanced new technology with caution instead of accepting it enthusiastically and uncritically

Document #4: JFK's first inuagural address—message is America will be stronger than ever in the face of many modern (20th century) challenges

Not the purpose: To give an inaugural address
Not the purpose: To tell about America's role in the Cold War
A valid purpose: To inspire confidence in Americans frightened about the Cold War arms race
Another valid purpose: To assuage Protestant American voters suspicious of a Catholic president's relationship with the Vatican

See how you can have multiple purposes?

Document #5: Dr. King's speech “I have a Dream"

Not the purpose: To tell about racism
Not the purpose: To advocate equality and cooperation
A valid purpose: To convince American voters—mostly white—in the North and the West to pressure Congress to take action against Southern states and their segregationist laws
A valid purpose: To inspire his activist followers to have the strength and the courage to continue resisting nonviolently in the South

Notice that the purpose is often related to a BIG IDEA that could apply to other texts by other authors.

FINALLY: WHAT NOT TO DO WHEN READING

Stop highlighting so-called “important stuff.” SMH what a WOT. (Shaking my head; what a waste of time.) Nothing is generically or universally “important.” Some college students will highlight 75% of an entire book. Why? So they can go back and read 75% of it over again? Why not read it closely and mark it purposefully the first time? For rhetorical analysis I have something specific I want you to highlight (more about that soon). And I have specific things I want you to write on the text with a pen or a pencil. If you’ve already forgotten what to write on the text, go back to the beginning of this chapter and start over, please.
Don’t fall asleep while reading. Well, duh, right? But seriously, you know yourself by now. If you are not reading for pleasure, then you shouldn’t be curled up on a beanbag. Sit upright at a desk and be ready to write on the text. If music helps, use it. If silence helps, find a quiet place. Personally I read schoolish work things best in an environment with lots of background noise, like a restaurant. Stone silent libraries I find maddening: every time I hear a backpack zipper ZIP! —I’m distracted. And if I find I can’t keep my eyes open, I take a 15-minute nap. You’d be surprised how refreshed you feel after a power nap that short. And if I’m falling asleep because the text is so torturously boring, then I will literally mouth the words silently as I read, to keep myself focused. I’ll give every page its own custom title. If I must read that text, I’ll find a way. Sorry if you have to read something that doesn’t entertain you—welcome to adulthood. In other words, I’m not actually sorry. Verbal irony is fun!
Stop reading different texts the same way. When you read for pleasure, you’re reading to find out what happens next. You’re almost wholly focused on plot. Reading for work or for school is entirely different. If it’s fiction, you’re not reading to find out what happens next. That’s why I don’t mind if you have an assigned novel and you use Spark Notes or the Internet to learn about the plot ahead of time. After doing a little research, instead of reading to find out what happens next, you’re analyzing the author’s choices. In F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, you’re constantly analyzing Nick’s truthfulness, and asking yourself questions like, “What is he leaving out? Why did he describe Jordan Baker that way?” If it’s nonfiction, you’re not reading everything at the same rate. In books like Eric Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation, slow down and close read the beginnings and endings of each chapter. What is his argument? Then skim and get the gist of what he’s saying in the middle of the chapter. Slow down if you get lost. Go back if you need to. But be aware that you have the ability to read at different speeds depending on the situation.

0 Likes

categories / Truth's a Dog