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.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Thursday, April 15, 2010
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.
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.
Friday, April 2, 2010
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)