PB3A - Genre Transformation

For this genre transformation, I picked a scholarly article by Iina Hellsten, Dolly: Scientific Breakthrough or Frankenstein’s Monster? Journalistic and Scientific Metaphors of Cloning.  This article uses the sheep cloning incident to highlight its different interpretations from the media.  Specifically, the author talks about certain metaphors associated with the cloning (for instance, “CLONES ARE MASS PRODUCTS”) and talks about how they can lead to opposing interpretations of the cloning incident.  The author then talks about each interpretation in detail (represented in different journals) and shows how the differences in these interpretations came to be. 

Since this is an article that highlights both sides of an argument, one possible genre transformation for an older audience would be to make a series of testimonies to be spoken in a court of law.  Looking at the interpretations of each metaphor, there is clear evidence from each journal for their respective interpretation, and clear logic that follows to explain their positions.  This can be modified to have a more persuasive tone, which would be more appropriate when presenting this information to a judge in court.  Since this logical thought process is present for both sides of the argument, they can be made similar to a plaintiff and defendant’s cases to the judge.  Also, since the topic of cloning is controversial (it brings up ideas about ethics in scientific research), it would be the perfect topic for a court case.  The background of this incident is given at the beginning of the article, which can possibly be incorporated somewhat into each side’s testimony.  Perhaps some of this information can be rewritten with a little bias as well, if it means that it would help the testimony seem more persuasive.  Also, some of the logic in the arguments presented in the scholarly article can be modified a bit in order to add extra drama, or to perhaps vilify the opposing case.  There are a lot of possibilities with this genre transformation, as the article itself seems to allow flexibility with ideas.

I feel like this transformation may be a little tougher in terms of genres for younger audiences, given the content of the academic publication.  However, one possible idea for this kind of transformation would be to turn the points and evidence of the article into some kind of short story for children (maybe similar to Aesop’s Fables).  I could give the story a moral or lesson at the end, such as “be careful what you wish for,” in a reference to difference in interpretations of cloning.  The story could be about someone who wants to bring cloning to the general public and use it to enhance society.  He would go about advocating for this using the vague slogan mentioned in the article, “CLONING IS MASS PRODUCTION.” The public would be intrigued by this idea, and give him the necessary support to implement cloning in society.  Once it started, however, he would realize the negative consequences of cloning (the opposing interpretation of the article would essentially oppose his ideals in the story).  After the situation is resolved, he would vow not to use cloning in such a manner again; this would cue the moral and end the story.  This idea is still a bit vague and not entirely filled out, but this could be a possibility, given the ideas from the article.  

Painting Trees

I feel like Bob Ross made decisions that were centered around the technical aspects of the painting as opposed to about the artistic vision he had.  In "Happy Trees" he only mentioned making "basic tree shapes" when referring to the painting itself, but he mentioned what to do with the brush more often.  Unlike Ross, the four Disney artists draw each of their oak trees differently based on how they view the tree in their mind.  Each artist's vision plays into how they set up their easel, what paints they use, and how they structure the tree on the canvas.

I think Bob Ross' style is characterized in a more technical manner; he seems more directly concerned with how objects are painted in terms of brush technique (and how to get to the final painting) as opposed to what the final result should look like.  In contrast, the Disney artists' style is more artistically driven, in the sense that their own perception of the tree directly affects what decisions they make in their drawing, and ultimately what their final result will look like.  As an audience member, I feel like an art student when watching one of Bob Ross' videos; as he focuses on the technical aspect of painting, he does so in an instructive manner.  On the other hand, the Disney artists make me feel more like someone attending an art showcase.  Watching each of the four artists paint the oak tree differently was inspiring, and it seemed to focus more on the diversity of each interpretation, as well the differences between each initial idea.

In describing his moves, Bob Ross once again refers a lot to technique and how the picture is painted.  At the start of "Happy Trees" he keeps mentioning to "bend the brush" when drawing the leaves on a tree, and one can physically see how he does this on his easel.  Similarly, he talks about scraping the knife hard across the canvas when drawing the tops of mountains.  On the other hand, as the Disney artists paint their trees, each artists talks about how they perceive the tree, and how it affects their design.  For instance, Walt Peregoy describes the tree as "a marvelous piece of engineering." He then attempts to reproduce it "graphically," focusing more on shapes and patterns that are commonly found in architecture.  In contrast to Walt, Josh Meador believes the tree is "a living thing, full of personality." In turn, Josh uses oil paint and lighter fluid (which dries quickly), and paints fast in order to capture the tree in the moment.

WP2 Journal Q&A

In the end, I think my WP2 paper went pretty well. I was definitely happy with the evidence I was able to use, both in terms of direct evidence from the sources and the tie-ins to the class readings. However, I still feel my writing was a bit too choppy and robotic, and it detracted from the flow of my argument.  I feel like if I could make my writing just a little more fluid and cohesive, then I would be able to form my arguments better.

The comments that were the most helpful for me were the ones that talked about flow. Getting a second perspective in those areas really helped me see how readers can get confused if my writing doesn't flow. Furthermore, they helped me see what I could do to fix these sections and make them more coherent for the reader.

I think Monday's peer reader session was much better than the old-school one from WP1. In this session, the review came entirely from a second person, whereas for WP1, part of the review came from your own judgement (the highlighting session). I feel more comfortable getting critique from another person as opposed to trying to see my own writing in a different way, which s why Monday's session was more successful for me.

PB2B - Moves

With regards to the field of writing, a “move” is a decision that the writer makes in order to shape their work a certain way; it could be word choice, paragraph transitions, or even sentence phrasing.  As such, understanding a writer’s moves is crucial to understanding their thought process behind the creation of their work.  With different purposes and audiences for each work come different moves to back them up and help get the point across. 

            Consider Mike Bunn’s essay, How to Read Like a Writer.  Bunn wrote this essay with college students in mind, intending to help students understand the idea of “reading like a writer” which involves analysis of a writer’s moves.  Of course, Bunn uses some moves of his own in an attempt to get this idea across to us.  For instance, he opens his essay with an anecdote about his life as a college graduate in London.  This is an important move that Bunn makes, as he knows his target audience consists of college students.  By including such an anecdote, and more specifically by revealing his status as a college graduate, Bunn presents himself in a relatable position to the readers; thus, they can see Bunn as a credible source, and might be more open to reading and understanding his work.  Looking at that decision, he could have just as easily gone straight into the topic of “reading like a writer” instead of putting the anecdote first.  However, Bunn’s awareness of audience played a role in his decision to go through with the anecdote.  Bunn also incorporates insight and advice from his students about learning this new style of reading.  With this move, Bunn accomplishes two different tasks.  First, by mentioning his former students, it shows that Bunn is or was a professor, and has taught this reading technique in classes prior.  This, in turn, may help the readers open up even further to his opinion, as Bunn is trying to get the readers to learn just like his own students.  Also, he asks said students for advice on how to read like a writer, even saying directly, “who is better qualified to help you learn…than students who recently took the courses themselves?” By doing this, Bunn shows he values the opinions of his students, and he believes their thoughts will be conducive to helping other students (the readers) learn.  Alternatively, Bunn could have tried to make points in his own way, but he recognized that hearing the idea from his former students would be more successful in teaching the student audience. 

            In a similar vein, Janet Boyd shows other kinds of writers’ moves in her essay, Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking).  For instance, she writes this article with definite breaks, explicitly telling the reader to stop reading and complete certain activities before continuing, almost like a lesson plan.  As a writing professor, this essay is Boyd’s effort to teach rhetoric to the readers.  As such, by following along with the essay, Boyd can get the reader to understand why rhetoric is important and how it applies.  By putting these breaks in, Boyd also breaks down her “lesson” in to smaller, digestible parts in order to keep the interest of the college-student readers.  This was an essential move from Boyd, as keeping the interest of the reader is crucial to getting her message across, especially if the readers are college students.  Another move that Boyd makes in her essay is that she poses many questions for the reader to think about.  Again, Boyd’s role as a writing professor could have played a role in this move; since she is dealing with a student audience, she can understand that learning about rhetoric may be harder for some students than others.  By posing the right questions, Boyd can help the reader think in the right way and ultimately help them understand how rhetoric works. 

            Despite having a similar purpose, Bunn and Boyd approach their work in different ways; they make different moves as a result, each with varying degrees of success. For instance, both Boyd and Bunn provide examples or advice from their own students to help solidify their points.  This is a successful move for both writers because they play to the target audience properly; students may be more compelled to take advice from other students instead of hearing it directly from an authority figure.  In Boyd’s case, her “lesson plan” approach can fail; students who don’t take her activities seriously will not get as much out of Boyd’s lesson as intended.  However, the rest will benefit from doing said activities, and will get the most out of Boyd’s essay.  Finally, Bunn’s opening anecdote in his essay is a successful move because he opens a door into his own personal life; readers can relate to his past status as a young college graduate and recognize Bunn was once in their position.  Thus, they can be more open to his ideas presented in the essay.     

PB2A - SCIgen vs. Academic Publications

Scholarly publications make up a new type of genre that we haven’t done much work with yet.  They are highly nuanced, with conventions that are not often seen outside of this type of work; these works are somewhat comparable to the paper generator, SCIgen, although there are a couple of major differences between the two.  One similarity between a paper from SCIgen and a scholarly publication is that they both use lots of complicated jargon.  With Pui K. Lam’s “Special Relativity at the Quantum Scale,” an academic paper attempting to link special relativity and quantum mechanics, the particular jargon used here wouldn’t be understood by many outside of the field of physics.  Meanwhile, SCIgen papers use jargon that pertains mainly to the field of computer science, another technical field that is difficult to understand from the outside.  Another similarity shared by Lam’s paper and a SCIgen paper is that the sections of both papers are clearly labeled.  Both have an abstract to describe the topics presented in the paper and a brief introduction followed by sections to describe methods of research, experimental results and discussion, and a brief conclusion.  This shows that both papers have a higher degree of organization, something to be expected from such publications.  These papers are also similar in the sense that they both have references cited at the end of their conclusions.  The writers are aware of where their ideas came from, and take care to give credit where it’s due.  They all appear in a separate section, with labels to show where each idea was used throughout the paper.  The last similarity between SCIgen and Lam’s paper is that both use graphs and tables to further explain their results.  This allows the reader to look at the writers’ findings through their experiments – or any resulting theories – and understand it at another angle, or perhaps clarify their findings if the writing alone isn't enough for the reader to understand.  However, the one big difference between both papers is that SCIgen’s paper is a random generation – as such, it is not coherent, and it really means nothing in the field of computer science despite its jargon.  The different pieces of information that SCIgen presents don’t line up with each other, and as such the paper draws no real conclusions.  This may also be part of the reason why SCIgen’s paper is shorter, since the generator relies more on the use of jargon, rather than complete arguments which would take up more space.  On the other hand, Lam’s special relativity paper flows well from section to section, and the majority of text is backed up by more relevant graphs as well as thorough – albeit complicated – mathematical proofs.  In the opposite manner of SCIgen, this adds to the longevity of the paper, and makes it all the tougher to read, but it is at least coherent to those who are supposed to understand it. 

            With respect to Lam’s special relativity paper, I feel that one of the most important aspects of such a work is its coherence.  Research papers and other sorts of academic publications are held to very high standards; these works are typically presented at conferences, peer-reviewed, and published in academic journals.  As such, they will be read by many other experts in the writer’s respective field of work, and it naturally follows that such a paper would have to be coherent to the reader.  Lam’s paper demonstrates this convention well, with each piece of information connecting well to one another, and ultimately outlines the theories and arguments presented through the writer’s findings.  Another important convention of the academic publication is the organization used in structuring it.  By labeling each section, the reader has a clear understanding of what will be covered throughout the paper.  Also, by incorporating graphs, tables, and math into each explanation, the reader can break down the entire explanation into pieces and be able to understand it in multiple different ways.  Since these readers are themselves experts, it will prove to them the writer is also an expert in their respective field. 

PB1B - Genre Generators

“Genre generator” websites are great resources to help understand the conventions of a given genre. By taking input and reformulating it by applying the genre’s conventions, it might be a little easier to see the pattern that goes into making that genre. 

            First, the SCIgen website takes user input (in the form of author names) and applies them to a randomly generated computer science paper. These papers are unlike any genre we've discussed before in class, with major differences in structure and language. For starters, the structure of a CS paper is very rigid and well-defined, complete with labels for each section. Every generated paper begins with a short abstract, which briefly summarizes the main ideas covered in a paper. Following an introductory section on the paper’s findings, there are sections that discuss the findings’ implementation and experimental results, and finishing with a conclusion and appropriate citing of sources. Another unique convention of a CS paper revolves around word choice. As a scientific research paper, it is loaded with technical jargon; with the use of terms such as “hierarchical databases” or titles like “Evaluating Multi-Processors and the Ethernet with Adulate,” it is clear that the papers’ main audience would be those heavily involved in computer science, as very few others would be able to understand the writing. With all of these scientific terms, it may be tough to tell that all of the papers have no real basis (as they are indeed randomly generated); however, this may also prove that this generator is very effective in creating works of this nuanced genre.

            Another website, Pandyland Comic Generator, takes three random comic panels and arranges them to create a new comic strip. Some of the results make for a somewhat coherent sequence, but others end up making no sense at all. In terms of structure, the first two slides always seem to set the scene, occasionally setting up for some punchline that would occur in the final slide, indicating that the creators were possibly aiming for humor with these particular comic strips. Another convention to note is the occasional use of blood and gore, a few suggestive lines, and some foul language. This suggests that Pandyland’s target audience could possibly be adolescents, or at least people who can handle more mature themes. One last convention of this genre stems from the fact that comics can use page layout to affect story interpretation. In particular, since the generator only uses three panels for each strip, there is a lack of context for some randomly generated strips; thus, much is left to the imagination of the reader. This may invoke different emotions in the reader, depending on both the material presented in the strip and said imagination. From this generator, it's clear that comic strips are more visual in nature, and thus use both page layout and text to present stories and show humor.

            The last website, Meme Generator, is similar to Pandyland in the sense that both text and visual aids are used to convey information. To create a meme, one selects a picture from the list, and superimposes their own text over it. What makes Meme Generator unique, however, is the fact that the pictures themselves are primarily used to convey specific messages to the reader. For example, one picture depicts Boromir from The Fellowship of the Ring, as a reference to his line in the film, “One does not simply walk into Mordor.” As such, this meme’s text will typically begin with “One does not simply…” in order to describe a difficult task. The pictures on Meme Generator are used to convey a more general message, while the inputted text makes it more specific and personal. Since this is a quick and humorous way to get certain points across, memes are used widely on the internet. Lastly, memes seem to target those who are aware of pop culture, since many pictures have such references; along with Boromir, pictures also include Fry from Futurama as well as Willy Wonka.

            Overall, these generators represent their respective genres pretty well, as they rely on each genre’s conventions in order to create a randomly generated work. By analyzing the process involved in the work’s creation, one can identify said conventions and ultimately come to an understanding of why they make each genre unique.

PB1A: The Petition Statement

One unique textual genre that has some relevance to our student lives at UCSB is the petition statement.  In particular, there is a student petition going around campus to stop the overwhelming police presence in Isla Vista for events such as Halloween and Deltopia.  In terms of context, a petition statement is usually written by a group, in response to a rampant problem or inconvenience, with the intention to have it solved in some way.  The typical audience of a petition statement can be broken down into different groups.  The primary audience of the petition would be the person (or group of people) with the power to change whatever the petition may describe.  In the above case, the primary audience for the student petition is Chancellor Yang.  Like this case, most petitions will directly address the primary audience in writing, although that is not always the case.  The secondary audience of the petition would be others who agree with it, and would thus push for action as a result.  In the UCSB petition, this audience consists of other students, with the intention for them to sign the petition and spread it around.  The constraints that surround a petition can sometimes make the writing tricky; typically, the language has to stay somewhat broad in order to gain signatures from a wider group of people, yet also specific enough to prompt action from those in charge.  More specifically, this forces the writer to choose their words carefully in order to gain approval from both audiences. 

The argument of a petition is similar to that of a persuasive essay, but with a few minor tweaks.  The appeal to reason (logos) in a petition normally consists of statistics and reports on past events regarding said inconvenience, and logical conclusions following these reports.  The student petition in particular goes over the current funding efforts to develop “anti-policing models” for Ferguson, and how it shifts focus away from the same issue in Isla Vista.  Perhaps the most important part of a petition’s argument is pathos, or appeal to emotion.  The use of pathos in a petition usually calls one’s morals into question, implying that those who sign the petition are making the ethical choice and doing the right thing.  The student petition does this by describing the riots of Deltopia 2014 in full detail, as well as the aftermath and the following police crackdown on Halloween 2014.  By doing this, the students are portrayed as victims to unnecessary police brutality, which is effective in causing readers to question morality.  Lastly, the appeal to character, or ethos, can be used in a petition to show the writer’s eagerness to work with those in charge to help create change.  However, it can also be used to show the writer’s stubbornness, depending on what the petition itself entails.  In particular, the student petition uses ethos to show the latter by consistently using the phrase “we demand.” In one case, this phrase is fully capitalized for extra emphasis, implying the student body means business, and will not take "no" for an answer. 

A petition statement is a unique, nuanced genre in a few different ways.  For one, while being aware of audience (that primarily being Chancellor Yang in the example), it completely disregards conventions that are typically associated with that audience; the use of harsh and demanding language, despite writing to someone in a position of power, certainly emphasizes this.  Second, it’s a persuasive work that’s written in first person plural.  While only one person may have written it (UCSB’s was made on an open Google doc), the signatures on the petition signify agreement; thus, this perspective is used to show unity for the cause at hand.  A final difference is that it has two distinct audiences that will respond differently to the petition.  For UCSB’s petition, the other students who read the petition might sign it in agreement, while Chancellor Yang might possibly implement change after reading it.