but why is all the rum gone?

How do both of these poems address the nature of making meaning?

Both of the poems tie back to the idea that was mentioned in the Bruffee piece; writing is a conversation and thoughts aren't really thoughts until they are externalized. It gives the image of throwing something out there and allowing the reader to make something of it, like the rum was thrown into the ocean and came back oh so sweet. Or in the poem by Hass when it seems he agonizes over how to describe the tree move in the wind. He finds it hard, because he realizes there is a difference in each word he uses. But he leaves it open to the reader when he ends the poem with "he did something in the wind."

How is language a slippery vehicle?

Language is present as a slippery vehicle in both poems because of the choice of words. In Hass' poem, he fights with himself as presented in the poem, about which word would be appropriate to describe the tree's motion in the wind. It proves that there is an heavy importance on the words in which a writer chooses because it effects the meaning that the reader will perceive and the message he or she will walk away with. The idea that what a writer create will be thrown into the ocean of the readers and the idea will come back to you slightly different, as in the Jones' poem.

collaboration and conversation

Bruffee didn't structure his piece like I'm choosing to explain it, but it makes more sense to me. I had to read his piece in a previous class and the focus was a tad different. But, what I got out of the piece was that writing is a conversation. First, thoughts are internalized and through writing, it becomes externalized. Writing is a conversation that you have with a reader in which you have the ability to give them your thoughts, opinions and arguments. It is one of the only ways you can communicate with another human being with out opening your mouth. Respectively, collaboration works well BECAUSE of the fact that writing is a conversation. When you collaborate you are forced to talk things through. You are forced to verbalize your thoughts that you wish to put on paper. You get to "try them out" on a reader, before writing them down. When you write, you must understand who you're writing for and therefore you must understand what your intended reader will know and what they won't know. This is why it is very helpful to collaborate--when you collaborate conversation happens. They found that in collaboration, it didn't change what the student learned, it changed how the student learned it. The argument is that learning should be shifted to these new understandings and successes of peer education through collaborative work and through simply having a conversation about material. To perhaps think of learning as a "social process" and to teach it in that manner. Although collaboration is a slippery slope and can quickly become the general group with one hard worker, one who tries and one who is disengaged, teachers must familiarize themselves with such work and form tasks in which collaboration can flourish.

Shakespeare Play

This Sunday I went to see the Shakespeare's Play in Adam's Playhouse. I thought it was really good. I liked the scenery because it wasn't cheesy at all, which is the way you would expect unprofessional plays to be. I like watching what I've read come to life. The play was comical and interesting. I loved Sir Toby, Sir Andrew and the Fool's parts in the play. They really made the whole thing so funny even though they rarely had large parts. The second half of the play was funnier. I didn't really like the live music on stage. It didn't add to the show at all. And I think the music in between the scenes was... interesting. I didn't enjoy that much at all. Otherwise, it was a good show and kept me entertained. The cast was wonderful.

language is a slippery vehicle...

...and most writers choose their words very carefully. They agonize over every and each word in which to lay their meaning and hope that it will convey the message they've intended it to. Speaking is different from writing, because when you are speaking and you say something you wish you didn't, it cannot be taken back.

"Academic writing is writing about other people's texts."

-Ethna Lay

in class thematic strand

1. greedy, envy, want, desire, grow, thumb, money, Ireland, rain, shamrock

2. public, structure, citizens, community, norm, stagnant, want change, laws, rules, controlled.

3. plant, grow, harvest, plow, dig, water, cut, weed, control, have patient

4. His argument is that the tree is hard to describe because all of them are so different. The motives for the trees swaying in the wind are all different and it is hard to describe. Does it simply sway? Does it dance? Or are the branches moving only because they are dying and are easily pushed by the wind? It is hard to articulate the words because there are no words to describe nature. The author has trouble finding the right words and he fights with himself to express what he sees in the poem.

5. Dear Professor Lay,

My argument in Paper II was that Malvolio is presented as a fool in the play and can be applied to the sonnet CXXIX. It stresses the fact that others made him look foolish--that Maria understands the desires of humans and their instincts and she plays on that until Mavolio takes the bait. He becomes so engulfed in his desires that he would do anything and does do anything, until he realizes that he only looks like a madman and that he is still left with no one and nothing.

I liked the way I kept relating Malvolio to the sonnet. I kept taking quotes from the sonnet and incorporating it into my own language. I think it flowed nicely--so nicely that it sounded like the sonnet was actually made for Malvolio instead of me just relating the poem to him. If I do say so myself =]

-Jeanmarie