Martin

In this article, Martin discuss plagiarism among individuals and groups alike and the lack of repercussions for them. Martin classifies plagiarism into two groups: competitive plagiarism and institutionalized plagiarism. Competitive plagiarism includes verbatim plagiarism and paraphrased plagiarism. This type is a grave sin in the academic world, although it is taken more seriously in higher education than in grade school. Institutionalized plagiarism is more accepted between the two. The only difference between them is that institutionalized plagiarism thrives on the exploitation of more people. This seems like a great injustice, but Martin explains that it is needed in hierarchal organizations. I suppose it is comparable to a beehive, where all of the worker bees work together for the well-being of their queen. The job is self-sacrificing, but necessary. 

After reading this article, I was surprised to say the least. never condoned plagiarism. I expected that college would be the same story. This article made me reconsider what I was taught which I assume was the intention. I also think Martin was somehow trying to defend institutionalized plagiarism and the structure it upholds. In fact, Martin believes that the destruction of institutionalized plagiarism would only lead to an increase in competitive plagiarism. While plagiarism use exploitative, it seems that in hierarchal organizations it creates a sense of unity, so people do not feel the need to outdo each other when it comes to the influx of their ideas.

Comparing Writing Processes

The biggest difference between my writing process and Maurissa's writing process is that Maurissa relies more on brainstorming and organizing her ideas beforehand. I hate brainstorming because I prefer writing my ideas as they come to me. She also can write non stop for longer periods, which helps her finish quicker than me. When I write, I often leave my work and do other things. I keep the tv on and often change my music to match my mood. I typically take six hours to finish a first draft, while she can write hers in half the time. Maurissa says she does not struggle with writers' block. I do not encounter writers' block as often as I used to, but when I do, it cripples me. I am much more flexible when it comes to my writing environment. Maurissa says that her environment is essential in her writing, especially lighting. Our writing processes greatly differ, but we do share a few similarities. When revising, we both like to go back and replace some words with more expressive ones. We both do well in narratives and Edgar Allan Poe is one of our literacy sponsors.

My Writing Process

My writing process has two sides to it; on one hand, I can spend hours agonizing over a paper scribbling line after line and hating it all, or, I can vomit out a bunch of words on the page all at once, reorganize them into a few decent pages, and not hate it as much. To start off this fiasco, I take a nap. For some reason, good ideas often come to me when I'm half asleep. I never graph or organize my ideas, I just write. When I wake up at around 9 pm, I have an idea of what I want to write, or at least how to start off my first paragraph. I'll probably eat something, watch a bit of t.v., and procrastinate before I start my first paragraph. I give a considerable amount of my attention to the first paragraph, because it guides me throughout the rest of the paper. If I'm writing a first draft, however, I won't put that much effort into it because I like to go and fix it up once when I'm done with the whole project. If I'm satisfied I start thinking of a conclusion. Getting the introduction and conclusion out the way allows me more time to focus on the body, where the more important details are. Throughout the process of creating my body paragraphs, I frequently get side tracked. I will leave the paper, eat, come back, paint my nails, come back, bounce a ball against the wall, and come back again. In about two to three hours, I might have something legible enough to count as a first draft, so I'll sleep again, then wake up at about 4 in the morning to go pee and write something better when I'm finished. Usually, I hate everything I write, but if my teacher thinks it's good enough, I don't complain. The second draft is usually a lot easier to me because I've already stumbled around the pages enough to understand what I want to say. I take the first draft and revamp it; replace words, give better examples, etc. By now, I've probably given up on the paper in its entirety and won't even think about a third draft. It probably isn't the best process, but its shown me my best results as opposed to following some outline.

Rose

1. Create a list of all the rules that, according to Rose, interfere with the "blockers'" writing. What rules, if any, do you find yourself forced to follow seem to get in the way of your writing?

According to Rose, captivating your audience within the first paragraph, composing complex outlines, and meeting the expectations of your professor are rules that interfere with the blockers' writing. I often feel that meeting the expectations of my teacher belittles my writing because I can not be as expressive.

2. Describe the difference between the rules that blcokers in Rose's study were following and those that non-blockers were following . What accounts for the difference?

The rules that blockers follow are precise, by the book rules that were probably taught to them in highschool. These rules restrict their writing process and fuel writer's block. Non-blockers, on the other hand, follow a more vague and lenient set of rules. If something conflicts with their sensibility or experience, they ignore it. The less precise rules are, the easier writing is for the student.

5. Can you think of mutually exclusive rules that you've tried to follow in your writing? If you can't easily or quickly think of any, comb through the rules that you follow for writing, and see if they're consistent with each other.

One rule that I consistently follow is to list all of the points I make throughout the essay in the first paragraph. I do not necessarily do this because I was taught to. I follow this rule more for my own sake, because it helps me keep on track when my words venture off topic or I begin to ramble. Other than that, I tend to write more for myself, while still managing to keep my audience.

Murray & Strasser

2. In what ways, according to Murray, is writing autobiography? Can you categorize the ways Murray believes writing is autobiography?

Murray believes that every writer is incorporating an autobiography through their writing style and the voice they use in their writing. No matter what outlet they use, be it poetry, essays, narratives, or academics pieces, writers are bound to incorporate their own personal stories and tone in their works.

5. Consider the implications of Murray's argument: if he's right, how do his ideas change the way you think about writing? Would they encourage you to write any differently than you currently do?

I agree completely with Murray's argument. Every piece of literature is different in it's own way because every person puts a piece of themself into that work. As I think about this, I realize that every form of writing, no matter how small, is personal to the individual. Murray's argument makes me appreciate my own work more. This does not necessarily mean that I intend to change my writing style or the process of writing. However, Murray's argument makes me want to put more effort into my wrting and be more expressive.

6. Consider the last few texts that you have written, whether for school, work or personal reasons. Consider the ways that these texts are -- or are not -- autobiography in the sense that Murray describes.

My works are autobiographical to me because I like to put my personality into them. I use my own dialect and vocabulary and I type in the same tone that I talk. I also frequently use personal stories from my life to convey my own point.

1. Strasser writes that "The devices of grammar and rhetoric remain superficial skills until a writer employs them to express important and powerful feelings, thoughts, and ideas." Why? And do you agree?

Strasser explains that those who only rely on grammatical construct and never relate to the topic at hand, can never love what they write, and will never be able to put their grammatical skills to meaningful purposes. I can agree with this statement from a student's perspective. In high school, I hated the assignments that I found no personal connection or interest to. I would often just make up something on the spot that seemed to satisfy my teachers, but I never gained anything from the assignment. I put no effort into it and I did not care about what was being written.

2. What seems to be at issue for Straser is creating "personally meaningful writing" in response to school assignments. Is there actually anything in Stanley Fish's advocacy of a writing course that teaches reasoning which which would seem to rule out such personally meaningful writing? In other words, is Strasser right to assume that Fish's insistence on writing in order to exercise one's grammar will actually lead to meaningless writing?

Fish's teaching style condemns meaningful writing in its entirety. He holds grammatical skill itself above any actual interest in writing. by following this form of writing students hold no connection to what they write. They spew out complicated sentence structures mechanically, offering no insight or personal opinion and, basically, killing the empowerment they could gain from writing.

3. In your experience, does school create a separation of mind, body, and spirit that Strasser quotes bell hooks as identifying?

Public schools in particular do not seem to show much interest in the individual. The schools and their faculty look for performance that they can measure and boast on and not meaningful, thoughtful writing. I have seen this personally in the construction of laws such as No Child Left Behind.

Childhood Reading

At varying points in my childhood, I read several books that I considered to be my favorites. A few of these were If You Give a Mouse a Cookie by Laura Numeroff, The Giver by Lois Lowry, and The Twilight Saga by Stephenie Meyer. I first read If You Give a Mouse a Cookie during the first grade. It actually came with a kid's meal my aunt had bought from Wendy's. I loved the book so much because it was hilarious to me that the mouse's head was so much bigger than his body. It was one of the first books that I read on my own and I even read it with my little cousin. I read The Giver for the first time during my fifth grade year. Though I did not understand some parts of it, I still enjoyed the book. I believe it opened the door for my love of utopian society style books. The Twilight Saga is actually one of my favorite series today. I actually knew nothing about the books until I saw the movie in 8th grade. Once I read the book, I fell in love with it. I loved everything about it from the characters to Meyer's writing style. I appreciated it so much that I would often try to incorporate her style of writing and vocabulary into my own work. All of these books are major literary sponsors that helped me develop a love of reading.

Villanueva

1. This account shifts back and forth between the first person and the third person. What effects does that shifting create? Does it break any rules that you've been taught?

The writer's shift of point of view seems to make his writing more impersonal, as if the main character of the story isn't him. His writing style takes some getting used to because it defies what I've been taught. Jumping from person to person is an admirable thing to accomplish.

2. How does Villanueva define rhetoric? What else does he say that studying rhetoric helps you study?

According to Villanueva, rhetoric is the conscious use of language through means such psychology, philosophy, literature, politics, and a handful of other things. Through the study of rhetoric, we are able to study language and, subsequently, we can study humans themselves.

3. Have you ever tried observing and imitating the writing moves that other writers make, as Villanueva describes doing with his English teachers? If so, what was your experience doing so? If not, what what would you need to look for in order to do the kind of imitation Villanueva describes?

I related strongly to Villanueva's writing process in this text. From a young age I would study the styles of the books I read and incorporate them into my own writing. There were times when I was satisfied with the results, and times where I felt the writing didn't sound quite like me. Now I've learned to combine the styles of more talented authors with some of my personality, forming my own unique writing style.

4. In paragraph 6, Villanueva describes his college writing process as , "The night before a paper was due, he'd gather pen and pad, and stare. Clean the dishes. Stare. Watch an 'I love Lucy' rerun. Stare. Then sometime in the night the words would come." What elements of this process resemble your own? How is yours different?

My own writing process is very similar to Villanueva. I seldom outline the content of my papers, and I don't often revise any of my drafts. I don't think I was disciplined about the proper writing process enough in middle school because my teachers never seemed to care about it. Even in high school, I would wait until the last minute to start my papers. Oddly enough, this process seemed to work well for me.