Portfolio

Out of the papers you are putting into your English portfolio, which one do you think shows your best work and which one do you think needs to be edited the most? Explain why. Be specific. Provide examples of your best and weakest areas.

Then, when you comment on another person's blog post - address how they might fix their weakest areas.


It is hard for me to say which of my papers is strongest or which one shows my best work. Personally, I don't think any of my papers are that strong or close to being satisfactory as a finished product. I still have A LOT of work to do until I will be satisfied with any of them. Having said that I would venture to say that my research paper is my strongest paper thus far. It is the one that I felt most prepared to write and because of that preparation I was able to write with a purpose and goal. My other papers were more last minute and unfocused. My research paper is not at all near completion though and I have not even revised it yet. So although it is my best paper so far it still needs just as much work as every other paper since its not even complete yet.

My weakest paper right now is my paper regarding literature on a global scale. It was first written without any motivation or purpose and I failed to write any compelling argument that I actually believed in. This paper will need to be completely revamped and revised to argue something important. I may use a different source to examine besides Huckleberry Finn and it is major changes such as this that provide me with a ton of work to do.

Out of the Wild

Describe the kind of things you think Chris would do if he did make it out of the wild alive? Would he contact his parents? What would he say to them? Would he get a job, go back to school?

Back up your answers with examples from the text that make you feel this way.



It is extremely hard to say what Chris would do if he was able to make it out of the Alaskan wilderness alive. There are certain cues and hints that we can look at to give our best guess but I still think anyones best guess is a shot in the dark. Chris lived the last two years of his life SOOO spontaneously that it makes deriving any sort of pattern out of his life nearly impossible. Also, I believe the answer to this question would depend a lot on how he made it out alive. Did he walk out with no problem and without ever coming so close to death? Or was he rescued and saved right as he had given up and was prepared to die? A near death situation like that can play heavily on a person's mindset later on in life.

Without knowing the circumstances of how he made it out, I do believe there is evidence to help predict what he would have done later in life. I think after leaving Alaska he would spend a good deal of time in the company of others. He wrote into a book while alone in Alaska, "Happiness only real when shared." This makes me think that he would want to have some human interaction for a while and revamp his inner battery. And the person I think he would be most likely to see would be Wayne Westerberg. Chris really had a lot of respect for Wayne and he kept in contact with Wayne more than anyone else. I don't think Chris could resist visiting Wayne and telling him all about his time in Alaska.

On purley a personal level I would hope Chris would go see Ron Franz (the old man that wanted to adopt him). I thought that was one of the saddest parts of the book and I felt bad for Ron so I would just want Chris to spend some time with him too.

Topographic Map Response

As we approach the end of the this documentation of McCandless's journey, has your overall view of Chris McCandless changed at all regarding this topic? Do you think that this is a sign of arrogance, ignorance, or just a human being challenging themselves? The chapter appears to be heavily defending Chris's mistakes in the wild, while still acknowledging them. Are Krakauer's methods effective for you in this case?


Regarding the fact that McCandless was seen as unprepared and unofficial, I still stand with my original view of Chris. Chris has been consistent with his actions and emotions towards other people on his journey. Ever since he embarked on his trek to Alaska, he has been very manipulative, as in he is always stopping at various places and accomplishing different things. This goes to show that Chris has never 'followed the rules'. Meaning that he goes by his free will, wherever that may take him or allow him to do. This argues against what the feedback Krakauer received from the magazine. The naysayer argued that Chris was not prepared for the wild, and did not have a map with him which they said was the number one rule about living in the woods. Krakauer backs up Chris by implementing scenarios where Chris 'goes with the flow'. By this Krakauer means that Chris has always done things his way. Chris wanted to experience the Alaskan terrain alone without anything to assisting him. He wanted to do things his way and experience life the fullest. In my opinion, I believe Chris was trying to fulfill his dream by living in the wild. For this occasion you don't need a map or supplies to help you. All you need is yourself and the correct mindset to lead you to what you have been striving to attain. If Chris wants to enjoy time alone in the wild by himself and only with himself, so be it. He is not considered arrogant just because he wants a challenge in life. Krakauer adds in many responses from people backing Chris up. I see this as a method to show that Krakauer believes in Chris and his mindset. Krakauer experiences the same lifestyle as Chris, and I believe he is trying to emphasize the fact living your life by your own rules and believing only what you believe in, is a priceless gift. People today follow rules, and contradict themselves making choices against what your supposed to do and what you want to do. You cant live your life by following others and what they think. Life is about doing things you want to do, not others. All in all, Krakauer's methods of backing up Chris in this case display a great effect on me.

Research Paper

What is your topic for the research paper? How does this topic currently impact American culture (or another country, if that's where you're going with this)? How is your book/show/movie different from all of the other books/shows/movies out there like it? How is it unique? What specific cultural issue will you be addressing in your research essay and why is it relevant TODAY?


I chose the 1972 film The Godfather for my topic for the research paper. This movie has been very influential in various aspects of American culture, it is still current even after 30 years and it displays family values, the corruption that power can have, and the effects of life in crime. This movie is completely different from other movies like it because it essentially created a genre, the gangster movie genre. Every movie since it has tried to measure up to The Godfather (and in my opinion failed). It swayed audiences from thinking mafia movies had to be filled with violence and could actually have a deeper message. I'm not entirely sure yet which specific cultural issue I want to write about but I definitely want to write about the impact it had on Hollywood.

Rhetoric in the Media

"What did you think was the most effective type of media in presenting an aspect of rhetoric? Would you have chosen a different media source if you could for the rhetorical analysis project? Why or why not?"


I think the most effective type of media to present rhetoric is through video. Video is the most dynamic style of media in that it can incorporate sound, images and text all at once. This versatility allows the producer ample flexibility and options to sway the viewer. If I had a way to record and edit video here on campus I definitely would have used this style of media on my rhetorical analysis project.

Favorite Song

"In response to the Taylor Swift article we read and discussed about in class, what is one song that means something to you? Is it by your favorite artist? Analyze the lyrics (if there are any). When listening to the song, what images come to mind? Why?"


A song that has a lot of meaning to me is the song I'm Alive by Kenny Chesney and Dave Mathews.

Heres the lyrics:

So damn easy to say that life's so hard
Everybody's got their share of battle scars
As for me I'd like to thank my lucky stars that
I'm alive and well

It'd be easy to add up all the pain
And all the dreams you've sat and watch go up in flames
Dwell on the wreckage as it smolders in the rain
But not me... I'm alive

And today you know that's good enough for me
Breathing in and out's a blessing can't you see
Today's the first day of the rest of my life
And I'm alive and well
I'm alive and well

Stars are dancin' on the water here tonight
It's good for the soul when there's not a soul in sight
This motor's caught its wind and brought me back to life
Now I'm alive and well

And today you know that's good enough for me
Breathing in and out's a blessing can't you see
Today's the first day of the rest of my life
Now I'm alive and well
Yeah I'm alive and well

Kenny Chesney is not one of my favorite artist but I do really like this particular song. When I listen to the song it really relaxes me and makes me appreciate what I have in life and not what I don't. I sorta imagine myself out by a lake at night just relaxing.

Hitchhiking

I don't know much about hitchhiking but I do know that as of now, it's illegal. And also from the movies I've seen I know that in a hitchhiking relationship, that is the relationship between the driver and the hitchhiker, there is a 75% chance that one of the involved parties is a serial killer, and a 25% chance that both are axe murderers. But in all honesty, I could never see myself picking up a hitchhiker, it's illegal, potentially dangerous and I would imagine, very awkward. I don't know if maybe back in the day it wasn't illegal or maybe it was just before Hollywood put a negative spin on it, but I think it was more common. Now it has sort of become a lost art like train hopping and skitching.