Just a reminder: text wrestling essays were due at the end of this week (Thursday for afternoon classes; Friday for morning classes). Even if you are not quite finished, turn these in to avoid any more substantial late penalties. (I will grade and you can revise if you’re not happy with grade.)

“Essay” 4 (annotation project) is due by Wed. before Thanksgiving at midnight via email (or hand in paper copy at last class or in my mailbox). I’ve been very disappointed at how slow most of you have been to get going with this research project; I had hoped to see Works Cited page plus a para. or two from everyone by the end of this past week. If you manage to get this much done sometime this weekend or Monday, please feel free to send to e via email or post on yr blog (and send me email letting me know you’ve added a post).

We still have one more essay to do after Thanksgiving. I will post assignment this weekend, and we’ll talk about it next week.

Here are summaries by yr colleagues:

Sam

Amanda (please post yr summary on blog!)

Kevin

I’d say that this was one of the hardest articles because, although it’s relatively short, it is packed with information (and maybe information that’s unfamiliar to many of you). The first thing to do is identify his main purpose/claim: what does he say about agriculture? He seems critical of it, from its beginnings 10,000 years ago right up until farming practices today. What are his reasons?

Look at the main parts of the article. First he talks about the food chain, and how plants with chlorophyll are the only living things that can convert he sun’s energy into usable form. He then talks about the development of agriculture from its beginnings, though the spread of grains from cradles of civilization westward, to the Green Revolution in the 1960s and modern-day agriculture. Think about the title–how is oil involved in all this? Finally he talks about politics and ethics of eating. (You fill in the details–not all of them, just the structure of his reasoning.)

As for a response, think about how convincing he is. What are the implications of what he is saying? What is your own view of how we should eat? In your history classes here at BCC or in high school, what did you learn about agriculture and the beginning of civilization? Most views are that the development of agriculture is what allowed people to settle down so that civilization could develop; Manning does not seem to agree. Can you reconcile these views, or do you agree with one or the other?

Here are summaries done by yr colleagues:

• Kristen
• Samantha
• Cecily
• Manny
• Melissa

As I wrote on many of yr papers, I think this is not primarily a personal essay about Ehrenreich’s own experience but rather a sharp critique about the “pink ribbon” culture of breast cancer (why is it precisely that she has such disdain for this sentimentality?) . She writes about the the impersonality of many medical professionals, the corporate connection, the complicated role feminists have played in breast cancer battles, the not-so-reliable diagnostic methods the toxic treatments that don’t provide a cure, the cult of the survivor and how it demeans those who have died from cancer. There is an awful lot of material here of general importance beyond what happened to Ehrenreich herself. Again, as I suggested many times in class, try to jot down the most important info you find here and figure out a way to group them together into paragraphs that make sense, remembering to use topic sentences that establish main ideas and help reader see the structure of yr summary. It’s a real challenge with this one, I think. (You may go a bit over the 400-500 word guideline if you feel it’s necessary in order to cover all the main points.)

Responses may be personal certainly, or you may want to challenge Ehrenreich’s claims by emphasizing the importance of positive thinking in dealing with illness (or other difficulties in life). I was interested in how she used humor and other tonal elements to make her sharp critiques more acceptable (maybe) to a resistant audience. Feel free to add comments here, or to carry on a discussion about what you understood the article to be about.

Here are links to summaries by other students:

• Samantha
• Jared
• Tonya
• Melinda
• Sara

Most of you did a pretty good job of picking out at least some of the main ideas here (though not everyone identified what Rosen’s main claim seems to be–what is the main claim or question she raises about cell phone use? Look at the usual place for thesis statements: at the end of the beginning section of article). What many of you need to do, though, is to group these details into paragraphs that make sense (for example, the reasons people cite for using cell phones; the psychological effects of cell phones; the negative effects of cell phones). Your grouping may not be identical to this, but you should have three or four or five “chunks” of info to make up 3, 4, or 5 paragraphs. Remember to use topic sentences to help yr reader see the organization of yr summary. Try to keep yr writing concise (avoiding repetition and unnecessary detail), so that you can pack in as much content as possible.

Responses should be fairly easy here. You may write about yr own experiences using cell phones, or write a “mini-ethnography” about what you observe about the cell phone use of others (that would be my choice–I’ve been paying lots of attention to cell phone use, even in the classes I teach, which is a level of discourtesy I find stunning). You may want to evaluate her argument, or propose some solution or rebuttal to the problems she identifies. (To what extent is this a generational thing, with only the older generation raising these out-of-touch objections?)

Here are links to the summaries written by yr colleagues:

• Gene
• Lauren
• Lindsay
• Kaylin

This was one of the more difficult articles because, although the content is fairly accessible, there are a lot of words here, making it somewhat unwieldy to summarize. Many people seemed to overemphasize the Julia Child info, which made it difficult to include the full range of other ideas Pollan includes. Also, many people seemed to have difficulty in controlling and organizing their summaries, so that they read more like lists of individual details. In revision focus on identifying the chunks of information in the text, which should be reflected in yr paragraphing. For example, if  I were writing the summary, I might include the following paras: a contrast of Julia child and modern-day Food Network shows; the causes of decline in cooking in the home; the reasons people find food shows appealing; the anthropology of cooking (man as “cooking animal); and the effects of decrease in cooking. This is not the only way to organize info, but you need some such structure to control ideas so that yr reader can easily follow.

Response should be fairly straightforward with this one, I’d think. The most obvious way to respond would be to talk about yr own cooking issues, or maybe to write about food shows…You might also evaluate Pollan’s argument, or challenge or extend it.

Here are links to yr colleagues who have written summaries of this article:

• Matthew
• Ryan
• Tim
• Chris
• Stephen
• Tatiana
• Decio
• Nikki

This was one of the simpler articles, so many of you did a pretty good job picking up the main point. Because the article is not so long or complex, make sure to include as much hard info as you can fit within 400-500 word space, which should include, I think, mention of Moore’s Law, the vision problem, and some specifics about which jobs are likely to be “outsourced” to robots.

For your response, don’t just say you agree or disagree, but look for places to question, for objections to raise, for implications to explore. If you buy his argument, what do you think might be done? What sort of jobs couldn’t be done by robots? What might life be like in a robot-run society? Or you may want to evaluate whether (and if so, how; if not, why not) Brain manages to convince a reader. consider his use of evidence and logic, his appeals to reader’s meotions, his establishment of himself as a credible writer. (You might want to do some research to find out who he is, btw.)

I stumbled across a blog titled Iconic Photos, which you might like to browse through…and here are some other possibilities:

Here are your choices for Essay 3. Look them over on the screen to find one that interests you; I’d strongly suggest that you then print out yr chosen essay so that you can easily mark it up as you read. Remember that you have two purposes: to summarize and to respond. Both mark main ideas and “subchunks” of the essay and record yr responses (agreement, disagreement, questions, applications, personal experiences that relate, etc.).

• Marshall Brain’s “Robotic Nation” (just the page the link brings you to–you don’t need to click on “next’)
• Christine Rosen’s “Our Cell Phones, Ourselves“
• Jonathan Kozol’s “Still Separate, Still Unequal“
• Richard Mann’s “The Oil We Eat“
• Michael Pollan’s “Out of the Kitchen, Onto the Couch“
• Barbara Ehrenreich’s “Welcome to Cancerland“
• Matthew B. Crawford’s “Shop Class as Soulcraft“

SUMMARY IS DUE AT END OF WEEK (10/29 for afternoon classes; 10/30 for morning classes)

Here are the pairings for those who (according to my records) have posted drafts on their. (Let me know if you aren’t listed and you have posted OR if the person you’re supposed to review hasn’t posted their entry.)

For yr review, please first indicate the main point the writer seems to be making about this subculture. (If the writer does not make it clear, you may say what the details seem to you to add up to; if author makes several main points about the subculture, which seems to be best supported by details and/or most interesting.) Then consider the level of detail. Does the writer give plenty of observational details that let you see the fieldsite and see members of the subculture “in action”? If not, please add questions to help the writer see where details might be added. Finally, consider organization–what organizational pattern does the writer seem to use? is it effective? are there alternative you could suggest?

Peer partners: 8 am

Angela and Melinda

Lindsay and Samantha

DeeDee and Sara

Stephen and Chris

Meredith and Tatiana (isn’t that what I said in class? let me know if not…)

Peer partners: 9 am

Melissa and Cecily

Greg and Manny

Decio and Jacob

Peer partners: noon

Caitlin and Matt

Samantha and Kevin

Torrie and Sam

Jess and Katrina

Peer partners: 2 pm

Jared and Kevin

Gene and Tim

Kristen and Lauren

Matthew and Michael

Amanda and Ryan