PB3A - My Pitch

The article I have chosen for WP3 is called “Addressing the Texting and Driving Epidemic: Mortality Salience Priming Effects on Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions,” by Ioannis Kareklas and Darrel D. Muehling, an article about the driver’s perception of texting while driving.

For the genre aimed at the younger audience, I’m planning to create something like a Buzzfeed list because it would allow me to write in my normal, informal speech as opposed to the style of a children’s novel or an academic essay. I can take a scholarly article and “dumb” it down for an audience of my age or kids in their teens. I think it’d be satisfying to be able to write an assignment with tons of slang and colloquial language. Many teens aren't too interested in this sort of “texting while driving” debate, shown by the fact that teens are the ones that most often break that law. A prime example includes me, a student guilty of getting a ticket for texting while driving. However, Buzzfeed lists can easily grasp teenagers’ attentions, so creating one about texting while driving could easily spread the importance. To convert the article, I would title the list as the main idea of the article, and the numbered bullet points would all implement the article’s evidence. In addition, because the scholarly article and the Buzzfeed list are geared toward difference audiences, the tone will be completely opposite. Moreover, I believe that a Buzzfeed article really captures the essence of what makes up a genre aimed toward a younger audience, such as the tone and style, the inclusion of pictures, the short length, etc. Because the author is of the younger audience (me), the scholarly article could easily be translated into the Buzzfeed list.

The older audience is a tricky one. Though I’m not definitively sold on this, I want to create a talk show’s interview. Texting while driving is a very important topic most often argued by adults, so two or a group of adults having an interview on that subject wouldn't seem too far-fetched. However, I’m having trouble translating the article into a script of an interview, most likely due to the fact that an interview doesn't necessarily only pertain to an older audience. Thus, to narrow the audience, I must aim the interview towards the emotions of the parents. Most people hate seeing Public Service Announcements because of the guilt that comes with it. Yet, parents often take these PSAs to heart if it affects their children. Therefore, if I can combine both the interview and the PSA, I believe the conventions and tone would constitute a genre intended for the older audience.

So those are my two ideas… 

PB2B - Show Me Your Moves

Thinking about an author’s “moves” is a very interesting and advanced method of analyzing a literary piece. To be honest, trying to understand an author’s “move” is actually more interesting than the context itself. Why does an author choose to underline, italicize, or boldface a word? Why does an author format his/her writing a certain way? Why does this author choose to ask these questions in parallel structure? Asking yourself why an author elects to write a certain way over another can help lead one to understand the writer’s motives. By comparing two articles that use different methods of enticing the reader, one may be able to see the effect of the author’s moves and choice of style.

In the first example, Kerry Dirk in “Navigating Genres” utilizes a unique approach to create an informative journal. Many of her moves keep the reader engaged in the essay. One arguable move that Dirk includes is ignoring the “high school essay” rule of using personal pronouns in writing. By addressing the reader as “you” and herself as “I,” the tone of the essay is revealed as more of an enlightening conversation than a tedious Wall Street journal. In addition, within the first few sentences, Dirk incorporates a joke (a very humorous one at that) into her writing. It’s no coincidence why Dirk adds a joke into the introduction of her essay. While still continuing that conversational tone, it grasps the reader’s attention, forcing the reader to further view the writing. Another move is her use of bullet points. When observing students writing notes from a lecture, one would find that students as well as professors often use bullet points. Similarly, Dirk uses them to explain the characteristics of country songs without boring the reader. They make for quick, easy reading as the context is succinct, yet informative. Furthermore, Dirk titles a section called “Scenario” to call for the reader’s imagination by picturing a scene that involves a ransom note. Yet another example of keeping the reader involved in this “conversation.” As an objective reader not sponsored by Kerry Dirk, I can personally say that moves such as these kept me – a math major apathetic about literature – interested in not only reading, but also enjoying this essay. As mentioned in class a while back, there is a difference between hearing and listening. Likewise, there is a difference between reading and attentive reading. I attentively read “Navigating Genres” because of its appealing tone, and now here is an example of an article I merely read.

“Teaching Two Kinds of Thinking by Writing” by Peter Elbow is an article about first and second order thinking. Though this article was very well written, it did not interest me even a little. Furthermore, the moves made by Elbow weren’t as engaging as those made by Dirk. For example, a move made by Elbow was to style the essay more formally. Although, like Dirk, Elbow does address himself as “I,” this article seems more like a professor giving a lecture than a conversation between acquaintances because he does not involve the reader. However, just because I do not prefer Elbow’s style of writing does not mean his style is wrong. Rather, I am at fault for having the attention span of a toddler. Perhaps Elbow performed this move to retain credibility amongst his audience. Another way to preserve professionalism is consistent structure. Again, unlike Dirk’s essay that included bullet points and sample letters, Elbow decided to write in an informative tone staying consistent with orderly paragraphs, a decision that happened to bore me to death. In terms of myself, because I did not enjoy the reading, I didn’t fully grasp all the knowledge available to me. Therefore, these moves were unsuccessful.

After comparing the moves of two different authors, one can see how important these moves actually are. These moves dictate how attentive the reader will be. Though it is very unlikely one author can please every reader, knowing whether to choose certain moves over others can lead to better writing. Had an author wanted to appeal to an audience of teenagers and young adults, he or she may aim to follow the moves of Dirk. In contrast, one could follow Dirk’s moves when intended for a mature audience. For either writing or reading literary work, grasping a better understanding of moves is a very powerful tool.

PB2A - Exploring Research Journals

To get a better understanding of genre, one should examine the rhetorical features and conventions of literary pieces of the same genre. Comparing and contrasting two writings can determine what features make up that certain classification. Therefore, analyzing research papers from SCIgen and UCSB’s library database should help prove why both of them belong in the same genre.

SCIgen is a “genre generator” website in that it creates a random computer science journal. After inputting a couple authors, the user is presented a research article about some complex topic. For instance, the title of an example generated essay is “Real-Time, Probabilistic Theory for Symmetric Encryption.” Other surface area features of the article is the structure. After the Abstract, a couple of sentences about the topic, there is a Table of Contents that begins different numbered titles (1 Introduction, 5 Evaluation, 5.1 Hardware and Software Configuration, etc.). Lastly, there is a Reference section that lists the different sources used to create the paper. Another convention is the graphs and diagrams that are present on the journal (published as Figure 1, Figure 2, etc.), used to help convey the argument. The audience is specific to specialists in the area. As I read the actual context of the piece, not only did I not understand any of the scientific jargon present in the article, but I also surprisingly felt even more confused. No ordinary human being can understand the context without prior knowledge of the topic because the context is so complicated. The purpose is to inform specialists of recent findings, and to perhaps open the floor for further discussion or research. Those are just some of the many conventions of a SCIgen generated essay.

Using UCSB’s library database, I found an article titled “Symmetric Quantum Fully Homomorphic Encryption with Perfect Security” by Min Liang. Almost instantaneously, the surface area features present in the SCIgen journal are also relevant in this one. The Abstract section and the other numbered headings are still present, both starting with an Introduction and Conclusion. Liang also included the References section at the end of the essay. Although Liang did not use any graphs or diagrams, she used numerous equations far beyond my understanding, which leads to the next rhetorical feature. None of this research is comprehensible by me because, again, the context is too complicated. Thus, the paper is intended for specialists and scholars, with the same purpose of informing the reader of “symmetric quantum encryption.”

There aren’t many things that differentiate one example from the other. For one, both articles are too convoluted for everyday people to understand, a very annoying aspect of the similarities. Although the context is different, the structure of the journal stays persistent. Both have numbered headings that start and end with Introduction and Conclusion, respectively. Abstracts and References are both included, as the former begins the essay while the latter ends it. Liang’s research doesn’t include diagrams, but has equations. However, both aim to help the reader understand the article more easily. In terms of rhetorical features, the audience, purpose, and tone stay the same while the context changes. Because these papers are so similar, it would be reasonable to include them in the same genre of science research journals. In fact, to the naked eye, these pieces might as well be exact replicas of another.

After exploring the similarities and differences between the two papers from SCIgen and the UCSB library online database, one can conclude that the literary pieces are of the same genre. Although the context may be different, in addition to the fact that one contains equations while the other has diagrams and graphs, these two essays share so many similarities in structure, audience, tone, purpose, etc. that it would be irresponsible to categorize them separately.