Thursday, September 13, 2012

Porter IWA


Pre-reading Exercise
“Make a list of all the ways you get ‘help,’ of any kind, in your writing. Where do you get ideas, advice, feedback, and assistance?

The writing that I do consists of writing about literature, so research is a big part of where I get my ideas.

1.     Internet
2.     Sources
3.     Scholarship
4.     The professor whose class I’m writing the paper for
5.     My mentor
I don’t often get assistance for my papers. I did use the student writing center once, and it was a huge help. However, being able to submit a draft to the center takes planning ahead, and I am a procrastinator who is usually rushing to meet a deadline.

Summary
            In his text “Intertextuality and the Discourse Community,” James Porter argues that by teaching students to look at texts as intertextual- that is, as containing ‘traces’ of other texts that have come before- educators can begin to move students away from thinking about arguments as completely original. Instead porter argues that a Writer’s originality comes from being able to “to create new meanings” (90) or “alter the Text in some way” (93) from the other texts or traces. Porter also argues that it is not writers who create discourse, but the readers, who interpret texts that were created with them in mind.

Synthesis
            Porter’s piece recalls several different pieces we have red thus far. Right away, Porter mentions the writer as “a collector of fragments,” recalling Kleine’s hunter/gatherer model and applying it to the writing process rather than reading (87). Porter also mentions “building a framework” as something the writer does, which of course goes back to Greene’s concept of framing (87).  Furthermore, Porter’s idea that all text are intertextual goes back to Greene’s idea that argument is a conversation and that to successfully enter a discourse community, one must do his or her homework by seeing what other people have said before. More substantially, in this article, Porter challenges the notions of an author’s creativity and originality. Like Sarah Allen, he argues that romanticizing the creative genius writer as detrimental to students. Also related to Allen is Porter’s discussion of the discourse community, which Allen portrays as a perpetually “alien discourse.” Porter sees the discourse community as constraining to the writer, but he does not necessarily think that it completely eliminates originality. Lastly, Porter mentions how much the audience shapes the text itself. By presupposing the audience’s expectations and interpretations, writers create a text accordingly. This recalls both Berger’s and Kantz’s ideas about audience interpretation and their role in the rhetorical triangle.

QD
4. I think that judging a piece of writing by its ‘acceptability’ within a certain discourse community is an appropriate evaluation for upperclassmen and graduate students, certainly. But I don’t think this idea is at all accessible to freshmen students. I can’t forget Allen’s discussion of the “alien discourse.” Adhering to the conventions of a given discourse, even if it eventually allows for creativity and originality in other ways, seems so inaccessible to younger students. How will they be able to navigate an original statement when they won’t even be confident enough to know what is the “right” topic to explore?
5. Porter makes connections throughout his piece to other “fragments”- the Eco pieced, Vygotsky, the Declaration of Independence, and so on. His argue is that intertextuality constrains a writer, because he or she must acknowledge what has come before and makes it impossible to be completely original, as no text is without traces to other texts. But there is room for an original, creative argument within those confines. Porter finds room by suggesting both that community-oriented writing is not a bad thing and that constraints on writing focuses it, but does not necessarily kill creativity.

AE
1. I was actually thinking, while I was reading, of doing this activity in class. Here is the commercial I would show:


Some of the cultural text I see is that the mother is dressed very traditionally feminine, which is significant in explaining her own discomfort with her daughter’s lack of femininity. The house setting suggests that the family is upper-middle class, which becomes significant when considering the intended audience for this commercial. Perhaps most important ‘text’ or I guess context of this commercial is an awareness of traditional gender roles for young girls and boys. I think the biggest question with this commercial is whether or not the audience is supposed to sympathize with the mother or laugh at her discomfort. I do think that the joke is on the mother, but sometimes I think it would be lost on an audience made up of the traditional, upper-middle class American family who really is that uncomfortable with gender fluidity.

MM
Porter’s piece hasn’t changed the way I think about writing because I had already agreed with him to a point before I read this. But this piece has made me think more about actual collaboration on writing and how it would really just be an extension upon what Porter is describing i.e. “collaboration” with writers across time and space-writers who have come before you.

I really enjoyed Porter’s piece and I have a soft spot for it because it was the first dialectic notebook I did with Dr. Gradin during orientation. I think the students will like the parts about the Declaration of Independence (and the point that Jefferson could have been called a plagiarist) and I also think they’d enjoy looking at commercials for Intertextuality. I do think, however, that Porter’s ideas about writing for the community discourse might overwhelm them as will his notion that creativity and originality is really only possible within the confinements of the discourse community. I’m awaiting our 5890 class to see if there are ways to makes this more accessible and less daunting to them.

No comments:

Post a Comment