When I first walked into Writing 101, I didn’t know what to expect. I knew that it would be more difficult than any other writing class I had previously taken. Like any normal person, I have strengths and weaknesses when it comes to writing but I’ve always been able to overcome the weaknesses. In Writing 101 however, it seemed like all my weaknesses were being amplified and my strengths weren’t really that strong anymore. In my portfolio is the first and second essay I wrote in Writing 101. These essays show what my strengths and weaknesses are, how my writing has grown between the essays, and what I still need to improve on.
Although my first essay is the weakest one that I wrote this year, I also feel that it showed what some of my strengths are. The first essay is about Bacon’s Rebellion. I feel that this essay shows one of my greatest strengths: attention to information and detail. I like to focus on everything when I write to make sure that I don’t miss anything. I’ve always felt that it’s more important to include everything than to only include the bare minimum. This is one of my weaknesses. I included too much background information about the events leading up to Bacon’s Rebellion. This caused the majority of my essay to be about that, not the topic I was trying to focus on. Another one of my weaknesses in the first essay was the hook because it didn’t capture the reader’s attention. It wasn’t interesting enough for the reader to want to keep reading. I had many problems with this essay. The first time that I turned it in, I didn’t pass. After I revised it and turned it in again I got a C-, which to me is a great improvement. I wanted all the problems that I had in the first essay, I wanted to fix when I wrote my second essay. I didn’t want my weaknesses to be evident and I wanted my strengths to shine.
The second essay that I wrote this quarter was the strongest essay that I wrote all quarter. I wanted to fix all the problems that I had in my Bacon’s Rebellion essay so that they wouldn’t be problems in this essay. The second essay was about Patriots vs. Loyalists in the1700’s. In the first essay my background information was too long and much of the information was unnecessary or unrelated to my topic. In the second essay I was able to cut down the information to what was most essential, as a result the paper was much more clear and concise. The hook of my Bacon’s Rebellion essay was boring, uninteresting, and wasn’t memorable. In the second essay the hook was amazing and immediately captured the reader’s attention. A common weakness in both essays was my transition sentences. I try to transition as smoothly as I can to the next paragraph but I can never do it well enough or clearly enough so that the reader knows that’s what it’s there for. I got a B- on this essay. That’s up a full letter grade from the first essay. Although I wasn’t entirely satisfied with the grade I received I know that it is much stronger than the first essay could ever be.
I still have weaknesses and bad habits that I need to work on, and am working on. My major problems with writing are transitioning and the length of my papers. I’ve always had this problem but every time I write, I work hard to improve this. I know that it won't be perfect after one day, but I always hope that it'll be better. My transitions were awful in my Bacon's Rebellion essay but they improved a great deal in my Patriots vs. Loyalists essay. The length of my first essay was also double what it should've been but in my second essay the length was exactly what it was supposed to be. As you will see in my portfolio these two weaknesses have drastically improved from the first essay to the second.
Although I know there is still much to improve on so that I can become a better writer, I’m happy with how I write. It’s good but I know that it has the potential to be great. My strengths are the ones that are essential to being a good writer and my weaknesses are things that can be worked on over a long period of time. Writing 101 has made me a better writer. The lessons I have learned here I will take and use the rest of my life.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Portfolio: Essay 1
Bacon's Rebellion
The definition of a rebellion is the act of defying authority by a person or a group of people. Throughout national and world history there have been times when this has occurred. Rebellions would occur especially when this country was first getting started. One example of this is Bacon’s Rebellion. It affected many people, colonists and Native Americans alike. The rebellion had disastrous consequences for both sides. No one really won, but everything was lost for one group of people. Colonists were fighting for their rights while Native American rights were lost. The consequences of Bacon’s Rebellion had major effects on the future of America. While some people think that Native Americans deserved what happened to them, Native Americans suffered at Virginian colonists’ hands after Bacon’s Rebellion.
Bacon’s Rebellion was a revolt by a group of poor settlers, former indentured servants, and slaves fighting against corruption in government and against Native Americans. “Bacon’s Rebellion was the result of discontent among back-country farmers against corruption in the government.” (Bacon’s Rebellion. wikipedia.com). Colonists were fighting for policies about Native Americans to change, lower taxes, and against corruption within the government. A young settler named Nathaniel Bacon led the revolt in 1676 Virginia. Bacon repeatedly went to the governor, William Berkeley, to gain commission to fight against the Native Americans and each time the governor refused. “Berkeley’s policy was to preserve the friendship of tributary Indians” (The Governor and the Rebel: A History of Bacon’s Rebellion in Virginia, pg. 22). One implication of Governor Berkeley’s policy when it came to Native Americans is that he wanted peace with them so that it wouldn’t affect their trade agreements. The colonists wanted to get back at the Native Americans for the attacks that had previously taken place on them. It angered many colonists that their own governor was favoring Native Americans over them. When Nathaniel Bacon and his followers attacked Jamestown and Native American tribes in the area, without commission, their goal was to drive the governor out and to slaughter Native Americans. His forces spared no one. When Bacon died suddenly it stopped the rebellion and allowed the government to take control again. Governor Berkeley may have taken back Jamestown but the treatment of Native Americans didn’t change at all.
Before Bacon’s Rebellion even occurred, Native Americans were being misused and mishandled. Colonial governments sometimes made peace treaties with Native Americans to get something or to make natives do something. A peace treaty was an agreement between a native tribe and colonists agreeing that neither would attack nor in any way harm the other group. Colonists often used these if they wanted something. Once they got what they desired, however, the treaties were usually broken. What colonists wanted the most from Native Americans was land. “The…peace treaty between colonists and natives…stripped Powhatans of their independence…lands…freedom of movement” (Michael J. Puglisi, pg. 76). Although Puglisi does not say so directly, it seems that colonial governments tried to restrict what Native Americans did in any way they could. Native Americans would also sometimes be accused and persecuted for crimes that they didn’t commit. “Nathaniel Bacon disregarded the Governor’s direct orders by seizing some friendly Appomattox Indians for “allegedly” stealing corn” (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/bacon.htm). Common sense seems to indicate that Native Americans would be accused even if there was no evidence. “In a dispute over the nonpayment of some items…”[it led to]“a retaliatory strike by the colonists, they attacked the wrong Indians” (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/bacon.htm). Many people would assume that colonists would attack Native Americans if they didn’t like how they acted or if tribes did something that the settlers found disrespectful. This treatment would be considered tame before the rebellion even occurred. After it occurred, however, Native Americans were treated worse than ever before.
Native Americans have always been treated severely, but after Bacon’s Rebellion it reached an all-time high. Before the rebellion occurred colonists would limit the amount of land natives could live on. This was so that colonists could have more land and the natives would be as far away from them as possible. After the rebellion colonial governments began to limit the natives’ land even more. “The Indians were sent to assigned towns, placed under the supervision of militia officers or selectmen…” (Michael J. Puglisi, pg. 83). Native Americans were placed in towns and settlements, by colonial governments, which separated them from the colonists. The government claimed it was for “security” but I don’t think it made a difference, safety wise. Neither colonist nor Native American was any safer after they were placed in separate towns. After Bacon’s Rebellion colonists started using the small land that Native Americans were forced to live on for their own purposes. “Some military leaders suggested fortifying the Praying Towns ‘as a wall of defence’ for the colony…that…strategy would have protected more populous towns from attack” (Michael J. Puglisi, pg. 79). Colonists used towns where natives were living as a defense blockage in case they were ever attacked by outside forces. When this planned was carried out, many Native Americans were killed. I believe that colonists were willing to sacrifice natives, even the ones they got along with, as long as it meant they were safe. Colonial governments’ control of Native Americans became even harsher after Bacon’s Rebellion occurred.
After the rebellion colonial governments became more controlling over what Native Americans did for them. Colonists would force tribes to provide them with warriors for their militia. Many of the tribes that were asked had suffered heavy losses at colonists’ hands. “Tottopottomoy’s widow…was…pressed on the issue of supplying men to support the militia” (Michael J. Puglisi, pg. 78). It is unbelievable for me to think that colonists would even consider doing this when they had just slaughtered so many people from the tribes they were asking. The colonial government thought that it wasn’t enough for Native Americans to be living in separate towns. They thought natives should be moved somewhere else completely. “‘For their own & country’s security.’ the Praying Indians should be moved to islands in Boston Harbor” (Michael J. Puglisi, pg. 80). Colonists wanted to move the Native Americans away from the land that they had known their entire lives. “Torn from their livelihoods and left with no means to provide for themselves” (Michael J. Puglisi, pg. 81). Colonists left the natives on an island where they had no food or shelter. They were unfamiliar with the new landscape so they didn’t know where or if they could hunt for food. While the Native Americans were living in those islands, they almost starved. Even though the colonists forced the Native Americans to live somewhere else completely and almost starved because of it, the natives still acted kind and humble. They never complained about anything that was happening to them. They just accepted it. The way that colonists were treating the Native Americans was inhumane.
While attacks on Native Americans by colonists were common before the rebellion, after the revolt occurred they became more harsh and frequent. After Bacon’s Rebellion, colonists found new ways to attack the Native Americans. “A series of unfounded indictments against Praying Indians by their white neighbors” (Michael J. Puglisi, pg. 79). Colonists were accusing and putting natives on trial for crimes that they did not commit. Most of the accusations had no evidence that a Native American had anything to do with it at all. Native Americans were suffering for mistakes made in the past. Mistakes that they were often encouraged to make by the colonial government. “Governor Berkeley’s policy…encouraging the Indians to terrorize the frontier” (http://www.jstor.org/stable/2191476). Before Bacon’s Rebellion took place, Governor Berkeley would encourage attacks on the colony by Native Americans. Native Americans were suffering for something that wasn’t entirely their fault. Colonists also used different methods to attack the natives. “Colonists added racist words of attack to the weapons of war” (Michael J. Puglisi, pg. 79). They began to attack Native Americans not only physically, but also verbally and psychologically as well. Colonists made fun of Native Americans and demeaned them using racial slanders. Native Americans suffered more than ever after Bacon’s Rebellion. They didn't deserve anything that happened to them.
Bacon’s Rebellion had a disastrous effect for all Native Americans after it occurred. The rebellion led to assumptions made about Native Americans that weren’t true. It also cast an aura of suspicion around all Native Americans, even the ones that were previously considered trustworthy by colonists. Men, women, and children were slaughtered during the rebellion and the ones that remained suffered greatly because of the colonists. They were forced off their land, forced to work, and almost starved because of the colonial government. One person isn’t to blame for what happened. It is the colony and their governments’ fault. So many people suffered because of what they did. Bacon's Rebellion also had implications on today's society as well. “Historians considered the Virginia Rebellion of 1676 to be the first stirring of revolutionary sentiment in America, which culminated in the American Revolution” (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/bacon.htm). The American Revolution was a major rebellion that occurred after Bacon's Rebellion. Bacon's Rebellion led to a chain of rebellions that affected society then and now. If the American Revolution had never occurred our world would be a very different place than it is now. If the English colonists had never fought against the British government, we might still be under their control. The Declaration of Independence might never have been created and our country wouldn't be the great nation it is today. We might not have been able to enjoy all the freedoms that we have now. Further research needs to be done about what else colonists forced natives to do. I want to know what else happened besides Native Americans being forced to live on separate land and a completely new area. It needs to be made clearer that Native Americans were the real victims of the rebellion, not unhappy colonists. Native Americans did nothing wrong, but the colonists killed and terrorized them anyway.
Works Cited:
1. Bacon’s Rebellion. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/bacon.htm,
October 15, 2008
2. Bacon’s Rebellion. http://www.wikipedia.com, October 2, 2008
3. Howard Zinn. “Who Were the Colonists?.” A Young People’s History of the
United States Columbus to the Spanish-American War Vol. 1: pg. 37
4. Michael J. Puglisi. ““Whether They Be Friends or Foes:” The Roles and Reactions of Tributary Native Groups Caught in Colonial Conflicts”.
5. Title: Review: [untitled]
Author(s): Lester J. Cappon
Reviewed Title(s): Torchbearer of the Revolution: The Story of Bacon's Rebellion and Its Leader.
Reviewed Authors(s): Thomas Jefferson Wertenbaker
Source: The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 7, No. 2 (May, 1941), pp. 245-246
Publisher(s): Southern Historical Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2191476
6. Title: Review: [untitled]
Author(s): Susie M. Ames
Reviewed Title(s): The Governor and the Rebel: A History of Bacon's Rebellion in Virginia
Reviewed Authors(s): Wilcomb E. Washburn
Source: The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Jun., 1958), pp. 122-123
Publisher(s): Organization of American Historians
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1886705
Rhetorical Analysis of http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/bacon.htm:
The title of the article, on the website http://www.globalsecurity.org/military
/ops/bacon.htm, is Bacon’s Rebellion. I’m not sure who the author(s) is because it is not stated anywhere. I would infer that the author(s) is someone who knows about Bacon’s Rebellion. I don’t mean a history professor or someone who is an expert on the rebellion. I think it is someone who has learned and studied the causes and effects of Bacon’s Rebellion. The audience is anyone who wants to know what Bacon’s Rebellion was and find out information about it. The author(s) uses words and vocabulary that makes this article easy for any person to understand. The vocabulary is relatively simple making it even easier to read. The purpose of this was to explain what Bacon’s Rebellion was, what the cause was, and who was involved. The main idea was that Bacon’s Rebellion was less about a fight against corrupted leaders than about two people wanting all the power. The author(s) was very persuasive in this article. It seems that the author(s) is credible because the details of the rebellion that the article gave is accurate, fair, and unbiased. The emotion that is shown is how Governor Berkeley and Nathaniel Bacon dealt with the other person. It is logical because the author(s) explanation is clear and examples are given to explain why something was said or done.
Portfolio: Essay 2
Patriots vs. Loyalists: North Carolina
My life is being controlled everyday by people that I’ve never even met. I used to have rights. I used to have freedom. I don’t have any of that anymore. This is my life in an American colony, a life with no power or independence. American colonists are being controlled by England. Although most of the royal government has never been to any of the colonies, they act like they know everything that is going on in North Carolina when they don’t. They don’t know the struggles that we have day after day, then they decide to add even more problems to the ones we already have. Our colony, along with all the other colonies, has repeatedly sent petitions to the King of England asking him to change what he has done. We have sent him requests asking him to lower or get rid of taxes, to change the laws he has imposed upon us, and to get rid of the soldiers he has placed in our colony. All of our petitions have been ignored by him and by Parliament. What gives Parliament the right to take advantage of us and take away everything that we have built up for ourselves? They have no right at all. We need to stop them before they destroy us. England's actions, specifically military presence, taxes, and laws, have forced my fellow patriots and I in North Carolina to work against them.
Parliament angered many people in North Carolina when they decided to place soldiers of the British Army here without our consent. Parliament claimed it was for our protection and to keep the peace, but there are no problems here that haven’t always been there. The British Army’s presence is doing more harm then good because they aren’t protecting us from anything. North Carolina colonists are even being forced to house the soldiers and provide them with food. The only reason they are here is so that they can see what kinds of anti-England, or patriot, activity is going on so that they can report back to the King of England. The army killed many of us when we were trying to protect ourselves from attacks against them. “George Washington said, ‘To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace’” (Walter 1). We know that their presence here is only the first step, something bigger and more deadly is coming. We need to ready ourselves now so that we will be ready for war when the time comes. North Carolina representatives have constantly written to the King and to Parliament asking them to remove the soldiers from our colony as well as the other nuisances they’ve created for us, such as the taxes he has imposed upon us. Our petitions to him have all gone unanswered. The King has never, nor I think will ever, listen to us. All the other colonies have tried seeking reason within the King as well, with the same result. Parliament refuses to lower taxes for us.
British Parliament has created unfair taxes for the colonies, which now restrict what we can and cannot do. They are taxing North Carolinian colonists for the silliest things such as tea, stamps, and products that are coming to us from other countries. In 1764, Parliament created a new tax called the Sugar Act. This raised taxes on all goods being imported to North Carolina, such as molasses and sugar. Not only did Parliament raise taxes, they created new ones. The Stamp Act was created by Parliament in 1765. This act placed a tax on all British paper goods coming here. All the taxes we are paying are going directly back to England to pay off the debt they accumulated during the French and Indian War. “North Carolina taxes…included dues to the Crown and taxes levied by Parliament” (Kay, Marvin). All of this has created much animosity in patriots living in the colonies. The tension between North Carolina and England is growing more everyday. We have always believed, and will always believe, that we should not be taxed without are consent. They are taking away our independence and everything we stand for. Not only did the Parliament produce new taxes, they have also taken away some of our rights and laws.
-----England has gone power hungry over how controlling they have become of North Carolinian colonists by creating outrageous laws. These laws that Parliament created took away some of our most essential rights. They were created so that England would have even more dominance over us. “Statues have been passed for extending the jurisdiction of courts of admiralty and vice-admiralty beyond their ancient limits” (Declaration of the Causes and Necessities of Taking Up Arms). Parliament thinks that just because we don’t live on the same land as British citizens living in England, we don’t deserve the same rights. One right that has been taken away from us is the right to trial by jury. If someone in North Carolina were to be charged with a crime, they would be sent to England to stand trial. Before England made this law, the accused would be tried by a jury of their peers in their own colony not complete strangers in England. Parliament is interfering in our government process. They have put in officials that they want who they know will never favor us and will always go with what England would want. These favored officials ruin our right to a fair and unbiased trial. “The wary, uneasy equilibrium within society degenerated into violent disorder…destroyed lower-class autonomy and became too harsh, excessively vindictive, or patently unjust” (Crow, Escott 375). The King has also allowed criminals to walk free without punishment because he put them in North Carolina. This has put all of us in danger and annihilates our right to safety and security. England doesn’t treat us like subjects; they treat us like objects and slaves. This directly violates our right to freedom as British citizens. There is too much corruption within our government system. We are never treated fairly because everything is always favoring the British Parliament. How can we continue to serve England when we know we are nothing more than slaves for them?
It is England’s fault that so many people within the North Carolina colony have turned against them. For years, they have done nothing that would benefit us. All they’ve done is create laws and taxes without our consent. They have taken away our rights and our liberties. Our growing resentment of England’s treatment of us could ultimately only have one end result: war. "The American Revolution was our first civil war, pitting neighbors against neighbors and splitting families apart" (Raphael). The colonies have been split into two categories, patriot and loyalist. Loyalists are the people who are against us, they are against everything that we as patriots stand for and love everything that Britain stands for. In North Carolina, who you support usually depends on where you live. The area in North Carolina that I’m living in is very patriotic, as is most of the colony. A large area of the colony, however, is neither patriot nor loyalist. Both sides are heavily contesting this neutral area because we both want to be the more predominant group in North Carolina. There is also a small portion of the colony that is loyalist, however, living in the lands surrounding this area are patriots. North Carolina will never back down against England. We know that we do not deserve this treatment and would be better off ruling ourselves. Even if we lose, the fight against England will never die down. It will continue until we get what we want. As Patrick Henry says, “Give me liberty or give me death!” (Henry 1). In other words, we would rather die than continue living the way we are.
Works Cited:
1. Crow, Jeffrey J., Escott, Paul J. "The Social Order and Violent Disorder: An Analysis of North Carolina in the Revolution and the Civil War." The Journal of Southern History. Vol 52. Issue 3. August 1986. pg 375. 13 Nov 2008 <>.
2. "Declaration of Independence.” The Avalon Project Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy. Lillian Goldman Law Library. July 4, 1776. 13 Nov 2008 <>.
3. "Declaration of the Causes and Necessities of Taking Up Arms." The Avalon Project Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy. Lillian Goldman Law Library. 15 Nov 2008 <>.
4. Henry, Patrick. "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death." Lillian Goldman Law Library March 23, 1775 15 Nov 2008.
5. Kay, Michael, L., Marvin. "The Payment of Provincial and Local Taxes in North Carolina, 1748-1771." The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series Vol 26. Issue 2. April 1969. pg 218. 16 Nov 2008 <>.
6. Raphael, Ray. A People's History of the American Revolution. First Edition. New York: Harper Perennial, 2002.
7. Walter Jr., Alonzo J. "Preparing for a Generation of Peace." December 31, 2003. 13 Nov 2008 <>.
8. "Declaration and Resolves of the First Continental Congress." The Avalon Project
Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy. Lillian Goldman Law Library. October 14, 1774. 21 Nov 2008 <>.
Portfolio: Final Exam Frame #1
Can a group of people change? Can an entire culture change for the better? These questions have yet to be answered. Some people would answer that our society is vastly different, and better, than it was two or three decades ago. Back then it was almost impossible to believe what we know is possible today. You would think that with our advanced technology and better education the United States would be a more intellectual place. It’s not. There are many people living here that can barely read or can’t read at all. Our world may be a better place with all the advancements we’ve made in our society, but intellectually we’re no better than we were decades ago. We have become too reliant on our own technology. It has become essential for our survival when it shouldn’t be. Technological advances mean nothing to our culture if we forget everything we can do without technology.
Technology has been both a blessing and a curse on the way we function as a whole. It has helped us to make advancements in science that we never thought were possible, but this came at a price. We understand the way the brain works better than we ever have before. This means nothing when “one-fifth of the population is illiterate” (Meredith). We may be smarter as a country, but as individuals we still know nothing. Geoffrey Meredith believes that although more people are getting degrees in college, most of them probably don’t even understand the words in front of them. The technology is doing the reading and the understanding for us. We take in more information than ever, but do we really understand what it’s saying to us? We need to read to understand how to use the technology given to us, but more people are finding that it isn’t essential because a lot of the time it is set up for you and you don’t really have to understand anything. Our society has become based on technology when it used to be based on literature. Technology has helped our education become more advanced as well. More people are graduating high school, going to college, starting careers, and having kids. Then those people are teaching their kids what it means to be an educated person. However, this might be as far as it gets when it comes to education. As Meredith states, “it’s likely to be the best educated that ever will be.” People are no longer learning to learn. They’re learning so that when they’re old enough they’ll get the best jobs that will pay the most money. It’s not learning if you don’t understand the meaning of what is being said to you. This problem can be applied to my life today, as well as other people’s lives.
I like to think that technology hasn’t affected me as much as everyone else. That can’t be true though because it seems like everything in today’s world is based on the newest technology. Growing up as a child, when the newest technology was still the very huge portable phone, I would always be reading and absorbing as much information and words as I could. I had always assumed that people knew what I knew but as I went farther along in school I understood that that assumption was wrong. While in school I used to be astounded when a classmate would be called on to read and they couldn’t pronounce some of the simplest words. I’ve grown used to this and it doesn’t amaze or surprise me anymore. This is the world that I’ve grown up in. People are doing more but understanding less. We are forgetting how to spell words and put sentences together cohesively so that they make sense. It may not shock me quite like it did when I was younger, but I still cannot fathom how some people can’t understand the simplest words or grasp a concept when it is right in front of them. I think that our world is definitely changing and advancing. The only problem with this is that as technology is progressing, we as a people are finding it hard just to keep up with and remember what we once were.
Right now we are at a technological high where everything is getting better and it seems as if nothing could go wrong. The only problem with highs is that once you reach them the only place to go is low. Look at our economy today. Wall Street is going down fast, faster than anyone could’ve ever predicted. This is what is going to happen to us. It’s either going to be technology that will go down or humans. Since we have created technology to live far past the lifespan of any human, it will be us that will fall to that low. The only solution to this is to relearn everything again, without the help of technology. If you said that to someone today, they would think that you’re crazy as would everyone else. Our very survival seems to depend on how far we can go technologically. What new medicines can we create so that no one can get sick? What new food can we create that will feed the hungry? What can we create so that we will never have to die? We are basing our very existence off of all of this. We can’t even remember how it used to be when we didn’t have technology and our world was so simple. The people that do remember though, the elderly, are finding it hard to keep up in this new modern-day technological society. “These are older people with little formal education” (Meredith). It is hard for us to fathom a culture where most people didn’t have a formal education, where some people didn’t go to school past the third grade. Even though the people we’re talking about that didn’t always have what we have now are our grandparents and our great-grandparents. That wasn’t very long ago either, maybe two or three generations ago. How could our world have changed so much between then and now? How could we have forgotten how things used to be? We let this happen to us. We welcomed the change with open arms because we thought it would make our lives simpler and make the world a better place. Our world is more complicated and faster paced than ever. Nothing is simple anymore, nothing is peaceful or easy. We’re fighting the demons overseas and the demons we have in our own lives. Technology did this to us. We let technology do this to the world.
I don’t think that all technology is bad, if I said that I’d be a hypocrite so would everyone else that owns a cell phone, which is basically the entire county. We can’t get rid of technology even if we wanted to because everything is connected to it. Our society would fall and crumble if it all went away one day. People wouldn’t be able to survive. While we still long for the basic human needs, food, water, shelter, added on to that is power and money. These are now our basic human needs and technology has created that for us. Technology is helping and destroying us. We have become too technologically connected. We have forgotten what it means to interact with an actual human being, instead we text them or comment them on their Facebook. Society can deal with change; after all we did survive all the ice ages. We don’t need to learn how to change because we’re doing just fine in that department. What we need to learn is how to grow as technology grows, change as our world changes. We can’t live in the past because then we won’t survive in the future. Society needs to evolve and accept change as it comes, but we still need to remember our basic human instincts. We need to remember how things used to be because although we can’t live in the past, we can learn from it to make our future better. Most importantly we need to remember all the sacrifices that were made to get society as far as it has gotten. We need to remember what has been given up and who’s been left behind in this process because without them we would be nothing. Society has changed since our ancestors first walked these lands and it will continue changing long after we are gone. As the people have changed, the technology has changed. We can never change that, we just have to deal with it.
Technology has been both a blessing and a curse on the way we function as a whole. It has helped us to make advancements in science that we never thought were possible, but this came at a price. We understand the way the brain works better than we ever have before. This means nothing when “one-fifth of the population is illiterate” (Meredith). We may be smarter as a country, but as individuals we still know nothing. Geoffrey Meredith believes that although more people are getting degrees in college, most of them probably don’t even understand the words in front of them. The technology is doing the reading and the understanding for us. We take in more information than ever, but do we really understand what it’s saying to us? We need to read to understand how to use the technology given to us, but more people are finding that it isn’t essential because a lot of the time it is set up for you and you don’t really have to understand anything. Our society has become based on technology when it used to be based on literature. Technology has helped our education become more advanced as well. More people are graduating high school, going to college, starting careers, and having kids. Then those people are teaching their kids what it means to be an educated person. However, this might be as far as it gets when it comes to education. As Meredith states, “it’s likely to be the best educated that ever will be.” People are no longer learning to learn. They’re learning so that when they’re old enough they’ll get the best jobs that will pay the most money. It’s not learning if you don’t understand the meaning of what is being said to you. This problem can be applied to my life today, as well as other people’s lives.
I like to think that technology hasn’t affected me as much as everyone else. That can’t be true though because it seems like everything in today’s world is based on the newest technology. Growing up as a child, when the newest technology was still the very huge portable phone, I would always be reading and absorbing as much information and words as I could. I had always assumed that people knew what I knew but as I went farther along in school I understood that that assumption was wrong. While in school I used to be astounded when a classmate would be called on to read and they couldn’t pronounce some of the simplest words. I’ve grown used to this and it doesn’t amaze or surprise me anymore. This is the world that I’ve grown up in. People are doing more but understanding less. We are forgetting how to spell words and put sentences together cohesively so that they make sense. It may not shock me quite like it did when I was younger, but I still cannot fathom how some people can’t understand the simplest words or grasp a concept when it is right in front of them. I think that our world is definitely changing and advancing. The only problem with this is that as technology is progressing, we as a people are finding it hard just to keep up with and remember what we once were.
Right now we are at a technological high where everything is getting better and it seems as if nothing could go wrong. The only problem with highs is that once you reach them the only place to go is low. Look at our economy today. Wall Street is going down fast, faster than anyone could’ve ever predicted. This is what is going to happen to us. It’s either going to be technology that will go down or humans. Since we have created technology to live far past the lifespan of any human, it will be us that will fall to that low. The only solution to this is to relearn everything again, without the help of technology. If you said that to someone today, they would think that you’re crazy as would everyone else. Our very survival seems to depend on how far we can go technologically. What new medicines can we create so that no one can get sick? What new food can we create that will feed the hungry? What can we create so that we will never have to die? We are basing our very existence off of all of this. We can’t even remember how it used to be when we didn’t have technology and our world was so simple. The people that do remember though, the elderly, are finding it hard to keep up in this new modern-day technological society. “These are older people with little formal education” (Meredith). It is hard for us to fathom a culture where most people didn’t have a formal education, where some people didn’t go to school past the third grade. Even though the people we’re talking about that didn’t always have what we have now are our grandparents and our great-grandparents. That wasn’t very long ago either, maybe two or three generations ago. How could our world have changed so much between then and now? How could we have forgotten how things used to be? We let this happen to us. We welcomed the change with open arms because we thought it would make our lives simpler and make the world a better place. Our world is more complicated and faster paced than ever. Nothing is simple anymore, nothing is peaceful or easy. We’re fighting the demons overseas and the demons we have in our own lives. Technology did this to us. We let technology do this to the world.
I don’t think that all technology is bad, if I said that I’d be a hypocrite so would everyone else that owns a cell phone, which is basically the entire county. We can’t get rid of technology even if we wanted to because everything is connected to it. Our society would fall and crumble if it all went away one day. People wouldn’t be able to survive. While we still long for the basic human needs, food, water, shelter, added on to that is power and money. These are now our basic human needs and technology has created that for us. Technology is helping and destroying us. We have become too technologically connected. We have forgotten what it means to interact with an actual human being, instead we text them or comment them on their Facebook. Society can deal with change; after all we did survive all the ice ages. We don’t need to learn how to change because we’re doing just fine in that department. What we need to learn is how to grow as technology grows, change as our world changes. We can’t live in the past because then we won’t survive in the future. Society needs to evolve and accept change as it comes, but we still need to remember our basic human instincts. We need to remember how things used to be because although we can’t live in the past, we can learn from it to make our future better. Most importantly we need to remember all the sacrifices that were made to get society as far as it has gotten. We need to remember what has been given up and who’s been left behind in this process because without them we would be nothing. Society has changed since our ancestors first walked these lands and it will continue changing long after we are gone. As the people have changed, the technology has changed. We can never change that, we just have to deal with it.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Portfolio Reflection Letter Rough Draft 1
When I first walked into Writing 101, I didn’t know what to expect. I knew that it would be more difficult than any other writing class I had previously taken. Like any normal person, I have strengths and weaknesses when it comes to writing but I’ve always been able to overcome the weaknesses. In Writing 101, however, it seemed like all my weaknesses were being amplified and my strengths weren’t really that strong anymore. In my portfolio is the first and second essay I wrote in Writing 101. In this reflection I will explain how these essays show what my strengths and weaknesses are, how my writing has grown between both of them, and what I still need to improve on.
I feel that these two essays best show what my strengths and weaknesses, as a writer, are. In the first essay I felt that it showed one of my greatest strengths: attention to information and detail. I like to focus on everything when I write to make sure that I don’t miss anything. This is also one of my weaknesses. In the first essay I covered too much detail and strayed away from the topic. In the second essay I was able to cut down the information to what was most essential, as a result the paper was much more clear and concise. One of my weaknesses in the first essay was the hook because it didn’t capture the reader’s attention. In the second essay the hook was amazing and immediately captured the reader’s attention, as I was told. A common weakness in both essays was my transition sentences. I try to transition as smoothly as I can to the next paragraph but I can never do it well enough or clearly enough so that the reader knows that’s what it’s there for. I need to work on, and am working on, transitioning and the length of my papers. As you will see in my portfolio these two weaknesses have drastically improved from the first essay to the second.
Although I know there is still much to improve on so that I can become a better writer, I’m happy with how I write. It’s good but I know that it has the potential to be great. My strengths are the ones that are essential to being a good writer and my weaknesses are things that can be worked on over a long period of time. Writing 101 has made me a better writer. The lessons I have learned here I will take and use the rest of my life.
I feel that these two essays best show what my strengths and weaknesses, as a writer, are. In the first essay I felt that it showed one of my greatest strengths: attention to information and detail. I like to focus on everything when I write to make sure that I don’t miss anything. This is also one of my weaknesses. In the first essay I covered too much detail and strayed away from the topic. In the second essay I was able to cut down the information to what was most essential, as a result the paper was much more clear and concise. One of my weaknesses in the first essay was the hook because it didn’t capture the reader’s attention. In the second essay the hook was amazing and immediately captured the reader’s attention, as I was told. A common weakness in both essays was my transition sentences. I try to transition as smoothly as I can to the next paragraph but I can never do it well enough or clearly enough so that the reader knows that’s what it’s there for. I need to work on, and am working on, transitioning and the length of my papers. As you will see in my portfolio these two weaknesses have drastically improved from the first essay to the second.
Although I know there is still much to improve on so that I can become a better writer, I’m happy with how I write. It’s good but I know that it has the potential to be great. My strengths are the ones that are essential to being a good writer and my weaknesses are things that can be worked on over a long period of time. Writing 101 has made me a better writer. The lessons I have learned here I will take and use the rest of my life.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Virginia Resolution Text Analysis
Who is writing?
· The writers of the Virginia Resolution are the General Assembly of Virginia.
Who is the audience?
· The audience is all the people of the United States. This includes all the people in support of the Constitution and the people who want it ratified.
Who do the writers represent?
· The General Assembly represents the Unites States government. The writers represent what they want to see for the United States. The kind of change that they want to see. The writers represent the type of future they want for America.
What is being said, argued and/or represented?
· The General Assembly is defending the Constitution against the people who are against it. They feel that their citizens deserve to be happy. They want all of them to have freedom and for those liberties to be protected. They don’t want a law to be created saying that they can’t have something or that they don’t deserve something and should be taken away. The General Assembly is saying that the Alien Act and the Sedition Act should’ve never been created and that they go against everything the United States stands for.
What proof and/or justification is being used to legitimize the request?
· The proof being used to legitimize the request is the Alien Act and the Sedition Act. The General Assembly explains that the Alien Act was created to control a free government and its people. It would restrict what people could do. The General Assembly also explains that the Sedition Act was being used to create a power that was not stated or would be allowed in the Constitution.
· The writers of the Virginia Resolution are the General Assembly of Virginia.
Who is the audience?
· The audience is all the people of the United States. This includes all the people in support of the Constitution and the people who want it ratified.
Who do the writers represent?
· The General Assembly represents the Unites States government. The writers represent what they want to see for the United States. The kind of change that they want to see. The writers represent the type of future they want for America.
What is being said, argued and/or represented?
· The General Assembly is defending the Constitution against the people who are against it. They feel that their citizens deserve to be happy. They want all of them to have freedom and for those liberties to be protected. They don’t want a law to be created saying that they can’t have something or that they don’t deserve something and should be taken away. The General Assembly is saying that the Alien Act and the Sedition Act should’ve never been created and that they go against everything the United States stands for.
What proof and/or justification is being used to legitimize the request?
· The proof being used to legitimize the request is the Alien Act and the Sedition Act. The General Assembly explains that the Alien Act was created to control a free government and its people. It would restrict what people could do. The General Assembly also explains that the Sedition Act was being used to create a power that was not stated or would be allowed in the Constitution.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Essay #2 Reflection
-----The amount of time we were given to work on essay #2 helped me to improve my writing skills from essay #1. I think the reason I liked writing it more was because we were given less time to work on it and I work good under pressure. I hated writing essay #1 because I knew that since we were being given so much time I would over think it and write more than I needed to and was necessary. Essay #2 didn’t give me the chance to over think anything. Since we were being given such little time I only focused on the main points of my essay and didn’t deviate from the topic, like I did with the first essay. The constraint definitely helped me improve my writing from the first essay.
-----Essay #2 was a lot easier to write than essay #1. On essay #1 my background information was pages long and when I revised it I realized how much of that information was unnecessary, which deflected the purpose of my essay. On this essay my background information was throughout my entire paper and was fused with my main points. This helped my essay be more straightforward and to the point. My hook was also much better and engaged the reader more than in essay #1. This hook captured the reader’s attention and kept them interested, which my previous essay failed to do after the first two sentences. I mean when Craig first read my hook he said he loved it, which was really good.
-----The first essay was much easier to research than the second one. We only had to focus on one topic within the topic of Bacon’s Rebellion, which gave us more freedom in what we could say. Essay #2 it was a lot harder to research because we were given a specific colony to research and couldn’t deviate from that. Some of the information, however, did apply to all the colonies, which made the essay easier to write. We were also not allowed to research outside of databases and other reliable sources, which sometimes made it harder to find information. I liked that we were restricted to that though because we knew that the information we were receiving would be accurate and that the sources were reliable. I didn’t like my quotes as much for this essay than I did for essay #1. Although I still thought they were getting my point across and I liked them, I was happier with the quotes from my first essay. The feedback and comments that I got for this essay were much more positive than with essay #1. They helped me a lot more than the feedback I received on the first one. I think it was more helpful because we were each taking the time to read and scrutinize it. On essay #1 we were just reading it, saying it good, then moving on to the next essay because we had to read as many as we could. On the second essay we only had to read two or three essays, which helped us, focus more on what was being said. I loved the end result of essay #2 more than I could ever like essay #1.
-----Essay #2 was a lot easier to write than essay #1. On essay #1 my background information was pages long and when I revised it I realized how much of that information was unnecessary, which deflected the purpose of my essay. On this essay my background information was throughout my entire paper and was fused with my main points. This helped my essay be more straightforward and to the point. My hook was also much better and engaged the reader more than in essay #1. This hook captured the reader’s attention and kept them interested, which my previous essay failed to do after the first two sentences. I mean when Craig first read my hook he said he loved it, which was really good.
-----The first essay was much easier to research than the second one. We only had to focus on one topic within the topic of Bacon’s Rebellion, which gave us more freedom in what we could say. Essay #2 it was a lot harder to research because we were given a specific colony to research and couldn’t deviate from that. Some of the information, however, did apply to all the colonies, which made the essay easier to write. We were also not allowed to research outside of databases and other reliable sources, which sometimes made it harder to find information. I liked that we were restricted to that though because we knew that the information we were receiving would be accurate and that the sources were reliable. I didn’t like my quotes as much for this essay than I did for essay #1. Although I still thought they were getting my point across and I liked them, I was happier with the quotes from my first essay. The feedback and comments that I got for this essay were much more positive than with essay #1. They helped me a lot more than the feedback I received on the first one. I think it was more helpful because we were each taking the time to read and scrutinize it. On essay #1 we were just reading it, saying it good, then moving on to the next essay because we had to read as many as we could. On the second essay we only had to read two or three essays, which helped us, focus more on what was being said. I loved the end result of essay #2 more than I could ever like essay #1.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
