Sunday, February 28, 2016

Thlog #8

On Monday, the videos we watched tied really well into the course’s teachings. I thought it resembled how writers have different perspectives on the same topic and use particular moves to fit their purpose. Unlike writers, I felt like the artists painted the way they did for the sake of themselves. Since they are artists, they stuck closer to self-expression instead of appropriating their work to a specific audience. Not to say that writers aren’t artists, it just seems like writers have more constraints in the art of rhetoric to clearly send their message to their targeted audience. On the other hand, the painters didn’t seem to have a targeted audience and had more freedom with showing their own style. I still thought the video was relevant to the class though since it’s a good example of how a topic can be seen in multiple angles. Rooted from that one ordinary tree, four distinct trees sprouted.

When Zack showed us examples of past WP3’s, I think what confused people the most is that their scholarly articles didn’t revolve on the topic of writing. I think the issue of how to use the content of the articles troubled some people, including me, because the topic of writing is not structured like a story such as the feud between Russia and America. Personally, a story is what I first think of when transforming a genre so I just have to break out of that mindset. Having my first topic choices taken actually helped since the pressure of picking a new one sparked new ideas that diverged from the “story” model. It is reassuring when Zack said to not think about it too much. Apparently there’s more freedom to WP3 than WP2 so I’ll go ahead and trust that. It is true that writing about writing will help us understand the topic better.

1 comment:

  1. Medina,

    I’m a big fan of your ideas here. I never would’ve thought of restaurant menus as a way to bring threshold concepts (TCs) to life, but the way you’ve laid it out and the REASONS you have for doing so make sense to me. The difficulty, I think, is making those reasons apparent within the menu itself. In other words, I don’t want you to (and I don’t think you would) show me an IHOP menu and say “here ya go—threshold concepts!” So how can you bring that “new way of seeing” that TCs afford into a menu? How could a menu represent the “portal”-like qualities that Meyer and Land claim TCs possess? And, on top of that, how can you rhetorically situate the menu in a real world kind of way? This is challenging, for sure, but you can do it.

    The Pokemon-y idea sounds killer. The protagonist who comes to a new way of seeing in his/her adventures is a pretty close fit for this concept. Now, how will you try to align the plot of the story with content/research embedded within the scholarly piece? So again: think hard about making deliberate transformations without going too far off into a “menu for menu’s sake” or “Pokemon story for its own sake” kind of route. Have a specific reason(s) for everything you’re doing here. (One other side note: I'd like into finding some websites that might help you to illustrate/animate the story. Might save you some work.)

    Nice job!

    Z

    ReplyDelete