Group Post Assignment
(Due at the end of the block Tuesday, November 17)
Post your group's assigned paragraphs here. At the top of your post, type all group members' names, the title and author of your assigned essay, and the heading name of the questions you were assigned.Example:
Group Members' Names
Grant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts by Bruce Catton
Questions About Purpose
Brett Rogers & Skylar Beavers
ReplyDeleteGrant and Lee: A Study In Contrasts by Bruce Catton
Questions About Purpose
Catton's primary purpose in writing this piece was to compare Grant and Lee's causes for fighting, what drove them to continue fighting when the war had raged for so long and gotten so bloody. He shows what these men were made of and how that allowed them to continue fighting for their cause through all different sorts of hell and loss.
His analysis seems rather unbiased, he has obvious respect and praise for both men due to their powerful leadership abilities and strengths. He highlights the noble cause that Lee represents and the sinewy raw strength of Grant that allows him to push through any situation no matter how difficult.
In regard to the paragraph explaining the primary purpose in "Grant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts," you could also include how the two men stood for opposing forces during the Civil War, but were both respected by many people no matter what side they supported. You could also use specific examples from the text to support the purpose you have stated above. For instance, as an example of how their personalities differed, you could say that Lee's way of life was centered around the old aristocratic concept but Grant believed that hard work was the only way to earn your spot in society.
DeleteRachel Rohlwing and Maria Rochow
ReplyDeleteGrant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts
Questions about strategy
1) He uses a combined strategy to show similarities and differences in the generals in order to help the reader follow along and not get mixed up between the generals but to show the two similarities side by side.
2) Grant was a modern man, he was hard working and true to his country; he stood for more of the population like cities and frontier citizens. "What he lived by would survive or fall with the nation itself" (Catton pg. 171)
Adding that the author uses good diction and selection of detail would strengthen your response. A strong use of detail is clear through the authors use of decription to compare the generals. Such detail exploits that the generals were similar in that they both had strong leadership skills and were skilled in preparing a strategy to win in battle. Adding this would help strengthen your response.
Delete1) It could also be said that Catton treats the generals equally in terms of writing about them, he doesn't give either more detail than the other and his criticism and praise is equal.
Delete2)I think you got this one pretty well, but you might be able to add that Grant values modernism, advancement, or something along those lines.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDavid Stults and Reid Williams
ReplyDelete1) For women communication is a way to talk and socialize and interact. However for men, communication is to inform one another of important things. So when a women gets upset that her husband isn't talking to her its because of the communication differences. She thinks that he is ignoring her because he doesn't express every thought and fleeting idea that he has, whereas men do no feel the need to express these things because they're aren't important.
2) For men talking in front of people is report talk and the numbers are of no consequence. They simply say what needs to be said and usually talk in front of more people rather than less. Women are the opposite, they prefer to talk to only those they know personally about their personal lives and even then only in small numbers to avoid judgement from others.
I feel that this piece really stereotyped men and women. The point of the piece was to discuss the difference in communication between men and women but there is not necessarily a solid division between the two. Not all women feel uncomfortable in front of people and certainly would not withhold a joke just because a man is present. The reciprocal of this is also true; Not all men are quiet and reserved at home and then loud talkers with their friends. People make generalizations often however, I do not really feel that this generalization is accurate. I do not believe that a majority of either gender behave the way described in this piece. When first reading this piece, I had believed it to be written in the '50's or '60's due to how enforced the gender stereotypes were and how many old forms of media were used to 'prove' the point.
DeleteI feel that the second question is overly generalized. The writer does portray the idea that women like to speak in smaller groups where as men dont care about numbers. But in reality you will find that not all men are this way and the same goes for women. Some men would rather talk in a small group setting and some women may like to talk in large settings. I would suggest that speaking preferences are not based on sexuality as all but by the persons personality.
DeleteI feel that this piece is super general and stereotyped. In the first paragraph you explain that women talk to communicate and men talk to explain or teach. I disagree because the way people talk is not at all generalized by gender. And when this states that men don't express those emotions when women explain things, I disagree with that as well. It could very easily go the other way. The things people talk about and how they react to certain things has nothing to do with what gender they are. Same thing goes for the speaking in front of people.
DeleteRachel Rohlwing and Maria Rochow
ReplyDeleteGrant and Lee A Study in Contrasts
Questions About Strategies
1) He uses a combined strategy to show similarities and differences in the generals in order to help the reader follow along and not get mixed up between the generals but to show the two similarities side by side. For example, in one paragraph he will be discussing the childhood and beliefs of Lee and the next paragraph will be about Grant's childhood and beliefs but then he will switch to a back and forth format of one sentence about Grant and the next about Lee. "These frontier men were the precise opposite of the tidewater aristocrats" (Catton pg. 170) This strict comparison requires such a strategy in order to make the most effective compare and contrast essay.
2) Grant was a modern man, he was hard working and true to his country; he stood for more of the population like cities and frontier citizens. "What he lived by would survive or fall with the nation itself" (Catton pg. 171) Catton describes Grant as a role model for his men and country saying that his men would die for what Grant believed in. Catton explains how passionate Grant is and highlights this key trait as it is very significant in American history when it comes to battles and such. In addition Grant also knew how to be kind and peaceful when he was not at war which was hard for most generals to be. People all around the country obviously admired Grant and his skill, personality, and beliefs "Their society might have privileges, but they would but privileges each man had own for himself" (Catton pg. 170)
Sammi Ergang
ReplyDeleteAmy Norton
Shakespeare in the Bush
Questions About Audience
Bohannan knew that her audience, the elders of the African tribe, would not have understood various words in the story Hamlet, so she decided to change the translation into something that she knew they understood. For example, the words “king” and “castle” were exchanged with the words “chief” and “farm.” Bohannan also chose to use the word “omen” instead of the word “ghost” as she knew that they would not understand the concept of ghosts. “‘What is a ‘ghost’? An omen?’” (Bohannan 195). As some words had different meanings, she would have to change the translations of the words to convey what Hamlet really meant to her.
Bohannan believed the story was quite simple and universal, but was quickly exasperated as she began to realize that the elders didn’t understand. She then becomes frustrated trying to explain the story using words and meanings they would understand. In the end, the elders believe that they know the true interpretation of Hamlet. “We, who are elders, will instruct you in their true meaning…”(Bohannan 201). Bohannan comes to realize that there is no one interpretation of any story.
In your second paragraph, you could explain in greater detail as to why the elders didn't understand. The elders didn't understand because they were not as well educated as Bohannan happened to be. We could tell they weren't as educated by the diction, and dialect they used. You could also emphasize what made Bohannan frustrated. She became frustrated because of, what is mentioned above, and she felt the elders weren't accepting of her story. She felt very nervous and anxious to speak.
DeleteBekah Halley
DeleteYour response needs to be thickened up with more supporting facts and information. You could add in how Bohannan viewed Hamlet as any other educated European or American would. In her culture Shakespeare is a mastermind play write and being able to find the "grace of correct interpretation" was an elegant achievement. Because she had such a strong hold on her views and her society this made it very difficult for her to try to see Hamlet as anything but great. Bohannan became very frustrated when the Africans would question her "profound author" and in return had to change the story so it could fit her audience. From there you could go on to explain specifically how she changed the story and identify exactly who her audience is.
Jessie Beilby and Stephanie Rauhoff
ReplyDeleteGrant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts by Bruce Catton
Question about Audience
Catton does assume that the readers do have a general knowledge of the Civil War. For example he assumes that the reader knows what the Union and Confederacy were, as well as the outcome. Generally the reader does not need to know the specific details of the battles including the Second Manassas, Chancellorsville and Vicksburg to understand the essay. Without that knowledge you can still understand the piece with the knowledge that the war ended with the Appomattox, the surrender of Lee’s army.
While the title of the essay is “Grant and Lee”, Catton presents Lee’s background first because of his deeper emotional connection to the audience. He “embodied the noblest elements” of the Confederate Army and towards the end of the war, it “seemed as if the Confederacy fought for Lee.” However, the audience can normally relate to the causes of Grant’s Union army. Grant, like most Americans today, “stood for democracy” and wanted to piece the Union back together to view the “growth and development of his country.”
In your first paragraph, you could have easily put in a quote to back of your statement of Catton assuming that the readers already have a general knowledge of the Civil War. Somewhere in your resonpse, you could probably also add in specifically who you think that the audience would be. For example, you could say how Grandt and Lee: A Study of Contrasts could attract an audience of people who enjoy history and learning about history.
DeleteTo make your assertion stronger in your first paragraph you could add quotes. The quotes would add more support to it. The quote should be placed where you are talking about how the audience of the essay should have some basic and background knowledge of the Civil War for the essay. You could also put more examples that are found in the essay of some of the refrences that the author alludes to of the basic knowledge of the war that the audience has. For example that Grant was the leader of the Union forces in the North, while Grant led the Confederate army in the South.
DeleteMaddie Mougalian, Madison Elwell, and Erin Boehme
ReplyDeleteShakespear in the Bush by Laura Bohannan
Questions about Purpose
1) What belief convinces Bohannan that Hamlet is universally intelligible?
The belief that convinces Bohannan that Hamlet is universally intelligible is when the author talks about how the old man says "for we know you are struggling with our language" (Bohannan 191). The author says how here was his chance to says how here was his chance to prove Hamlet universally intelligible. Hamlet explained what the elders did not understand, like they do for Hamlet.
2) How does her attempt to tell Hamlet's story prove that her friend was right: "one can easily misinterpret the universal by misunderstanding the particular"?
"'Dead men can't walk," protested my audience as one man. I was quite willing to compromise. 'A ghost is the dead man's shadow'" (Bohannan 194). Different beliefs can cause different opinions, so as one person may view it as one story, someone else may view it as something else. It's because of what they were taught when they were younger.
Alexa Belanger and Emma Way
ReplyDeleteRapport-Talk and Report-Talk
Questions About Audience
1) Tannen’s audience consists primarily of females, although men could also relate to the article. Men can relate to the feeling that they are letting their significant other down by not speaking or seeming uninterested. Women can relate to this article because Tannen’s purpose behind writing the piece is to assure women that their marriages are still valid and perfectly intact. “Men’s silence at home is a disappointment to women,” however, Tannen dispels this silence as man’s appeal to only say what they find is important. This is called report-talk. As the The American icon features “the silent man and the talkative woman” and demonstrates what a married couples look like, women often compare themselves to their idea of a “picture perfect” couple.
2) Tannen assumes that the audience will benefit by cultivating their relationships after reading the article. She uses the article to illuminate common troubles in American marriages, as well as issues in communication among men and women in general. She believes the audience will use these statistics and gathered information to help better understand their significant other. Tannen helps women solve the misinterpretation that their spouse is losing interest in them or that they aren’t listening. She leads men to understand why their wife or girlfriend may get frustrated with them on a daily basis because they “aren’t talking enough”.
It should be noted, regarding the second question for Audience, that people do not fit in to a binary gendered stereotype hole, and that this piece can be reviewed exclusively for it's meager content regarding communication styles.
DeleteEdit: "MOST people do not..."
DeleteRachel Rohlwing and Maria Rochow
ReplyDeleteGrant and Lee A Study in Contrasts
Questions About Strategies
1) Catton uses a combined strategy to show similarities and differences in the generals in order to help the reader follow along and not get mixed up between the generals but to show the two similarities side by side. For example, in one paragraph he will be discussing the childhood and beliefs of Lee and the next paragraph will be about Grant's childhood and beliefs but then he will switch to a back and forth format of one sentence about Grant and the next about Lee. "These frontier men were the precise opposite of the tidewater aristocrats" (Catton pg. 170) This strict comparison requires such a strategy in order to make the most effective compare and contrast essay. The audience of the piece does not need to know the specifics of each battle that was pointed out in the essay. The author assumes that the audience knows basic Civil War knowledge, which makes it easier to understand and comprehend the essay.
2) Catton strategically names the essay “Grant and Lee”, but writes about Lee before Grant. Catton named the essay “Grant and Lee” to show Grant won the war. However, Lee was representing and trying to preserve the Southern way of life, “was the notion that the old aristocratic concept might somehow survive” (Catton 169). Catton was describing the “before”, the tradition that had set precedents decades earlier. The author described the culture and tradition that Lee stood for, “He embodied a way of life that had come down through the age of knighthood”(Catton 169). The “before” came first in the essay, then “after” follows. Grant, described second, was leading the “new” age, what America was to become, the “after”. Grant was the modern man, leading the Industrial Age, “ready to come on the stage, was the great age of steel and machinery”(Catton 171). Repeatedly in the essay, it makes a notion that Grant strove for the “continued growth and development of the country”(Catton 171) and to preserve the Union anyway possible. The modernism of the time was replacing the ways of the past. Catton does assume that the audience knows some information about both generals. He does not assume that the readers know more about Lee, fascinated with him more than Grant, or want to read about the loser first.
Andrea Zielke, Rebekah Halley, Jordan VanDyke
ReplyDeleteShakespeare in the Bush
Questions about strategies
1. Bohannan’s discussion of Hamlet’s madness reveals many differences in the way English and African cultures behave and view society. In the ending of Hamlet, he becomes mad and kills Polonius; the father of the woman he loves (Ophelia). Laertes, the son of Polonius and sister of Ophelia, seeks revenge towards Hamlet. To Bohannan, Laertes reaction seems normal, but the Africans rebuttal by saying “One cannot take vengeance on a madman…” When asked to recite a story, Bohannan took the opportunity to tell the story of Hamlet. She perceived that every culture views things in the same way and wanted the others to achieve the same “grace of correct interpretation” from the story as she had. However, as she continued telling Hamlet she quickly became frustrated when the African’s could not comprehend the same morals and ideas that seemed so common in the European realm. She grew up in a world where you didn’t question Shakespeare, and yet she finds herself in a room full of people doing just that. She is disturbed and thrown off balance by their reactions, but reluctantly continues. She learns that every society has their own interpretations of something no matter what culture they comes from; contrasting her original statement that “the general plot and motivation of the greater tragedies would always be clear -everywhere-”. Without realizing it Bohannan begins to tell the story differently and uses elements of the African vernacular. Instead of saying “King” she says “Chief” and though, with much resistance eventually gives up on trying to explain the concept of ghosts and resorts to the African’s ideas of “omens” and “witches”. The African’s also had a different view on certain elements. When hearing of Hamlet’s madness, Ophelia drowned herself in the river. Bohannan only views this as a minuscule element in the tragedy and the idea that this is possible seems normal to her. However, the African’s respond by claiming that the girl must have been drowned by a witch, for “water itself can’t hurt anything. It is merely something one drinks and bathes in.” The madness of Hamlet concludes the story and also sparks a realization for Bohannan that people from different cultures and with different beliefs are going to interpret and react to things differently.
2. Ironically it is the conclusion of Hamlet in which the elders state that “people are the same everywhere”. It is the relationships between the “Chief”, Hamlet, and Laertes, that of which Bohannan only briefly described, assuming the elders would not fully understand, that the elders reveal their reasoning for everyone being the same. Though as shown throughout the many arguments and questions provided by the elders, there is a definite difference between the cultures of Europeans and Africans. However, without being told the complete ending of the story and the motives for the events that occurred they were able to not only guess correctly of who killed each other but also create an explanation for the specific reasoning of each person’s death, going beyond Bohannan’s initial interpretation. Therefor they reasonably claim that everyone is the same because everyone’s minds work in the same way, though ideas may be different throughout different cultures, people in general always tend to have similar characteristics and motivations. Because of this the elders were able to infer what each character’s mind was thinking and their motive for killing.
Riley Beronja and Holly Channells
ReplyDelete"Rapport-Talk and Report-Talk" by Deborah Tannen
Questions about Strategies
1.) Tannen uses the many media forms to further gender stereotypes relating to problems in binary heterosexuals’ domestic communications. Tannen’s use of cartoons and advice columns illustrate “common” complications in prior relationships. The example of the cake topper shows how the things she believes to be important to each gender can cause a rift in the communication in a relationship. However, the examples she uses are out of date; the Blondie and Dagwood comics were created in the early forties when the focus on male and female roles was much different.
2.) The author assumes that women have an aversion to putting themselves on public display as she feels that they fear having to claim what they have to say; of being judged, being self-aggrandizing by exhibiting their credibility or risk being ignored. She uses her own experiences as a transition in to her argument that women are better at talking in private rather than in public.
Alexa Belanger
DeleteYou could also add, in your second paragraph, that women do more private speaking because they use it as a way of emotionally connecting with other people. Women talk to people for a connection, while men talk to people for information. Women feel more comfortable talking in a smaller group of people because they feel this is where they can receive that emotional connection with others.
It is true that Tannen uses the media to promote her assumptions about each gender and their communicative tendencies. She also offers advice to couples regarding how they can make their relationships fit the mold of the "ideal couple." Tannen utilizes pop culture to gear her piece towards the American public, much of whom can relate to a less than perfect marriage.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete