Graff - Whole/Parts

I guess I never looked to closely at how I insert quotations into a text. It may just have something to do with the constant practice of doing it for the last few years as an English major. I do not mean to discredit this look at it, however. I believe that my own quotation usage needs to be questioned. The connection between what we say in our writing and what our quoted authors are saying is especially important, as it not only points out our expanse of knowledge or what we've read, but also our understanding of that text. Quotations are parts of the whole; parts that are necessary (they are often required in lower level writing classes, and highly recommended elsewhere) in order to build ones argument, which is the whole. As Graff points out, "your readers need to see what you make of the material you've quoted, if only to be sure that your reading of the material is on the same page" (46). These quotes supplement our commentary on the subject, as well as support our agenda. I just think that it is interesting that I've never explicitly thought of it that way.

Jarratt, Bartholomae, and Bernstein - Compare and contrast

I found these three pieces to be somewhat gruesome and worthwhile, all for different reasons. To start, Jarratt's piece, "Rhetoric," was a good rehash of ancient rhetoric as well as a fresh eye on current rhetoric study. I found her work to be refreshing and wonderful, but quite a bear to get through, and this latter point for no other reason that its length. In contrast, Bartholomae's piece, "Composition," was not that intriguing. His lists of resources, though possibly helpful as a database to jump-start from, was not particularly enjoyable to read. I definitely practiced my "graduate student reading" here, skipping over book and author names as soon as I felt them arriving.
Then, with great delight, came Bernstein's piece, "Poetics." This work was so smooth, a real pleasure to read.
As far as content is concerned, I think that Jarratt's look into rhetoric was the most useful piece. Her review of the ancient rhetoric was not too dry, and her concern with the place of Rhetoric in the University was interesting. I thought that I would touch on some of a similar problem within Bartholomae's piece, but did not, or if I did it was lost amidst my lack on interest in author names and text titles. I believe that our University has a better grasp on the place of Rhetoric, as well as Composition, than most seem to have. We are fortunate to have such a rich foundation of educators employed in our English Department.
But now to Bernstein: This piece brings up questions, gives advice, and is inspiring. I enjoyed reading about writing in an inspiring way!

One man's eloquence can be another's poison; one woman's stuttering may be the
closest approximation of truth that we will ever know (128).

But not only that, Bernstein asks some important questions:

What is the aim of literary scholarship? What is the purpose of a literature
class?

He brings to focus the idea that writing is process, it requires thinking, and it requires art. He also raises the notion of 'social poetics,' one that "actively acknowledges context dependence as a counter to the appearance of objectivity" (130). As a current student of critical pedagogy, I find this idea especially of interest. I know the cliche is cheesy, but that whole "language is power" thing really got me fired up when I learned about using writing and language as a social response. Thinking of language use in this way makes our actions and our writing take on much more meaning. Especially for someone in their fourth quarter as a grad student, I definitely need that kind of inspiration.

Library Research - Precedents

Much of what Thomas Mann is relating to us is centered on Precedents. When giving advice on where to begin one's research Mann suggests,

The best way to start many inquiries is to see if someone has already written an overview article outlining the most important facts on the subject...(1).

He later recommends, "the first way to find the right subject headings is to look in the red books," the LCSH lists that have been previously generated for us (33). Precedents also concern the history of cataloguing. As students and researches, knowledge of this history is vital if we want to properly utilize the databases at our fingertips. I honestly don't know why this information is not mandatory for all students (unless it is and I missed that day). 

Knowing the history of the discourse we are attempting to respond to is also brought up in Graff's piece. 

As for Encyclopedias I am grateful that Mann has directed us to them. This is a reference point and a starting point that I have overlooked for my entire college career. 

Graff

I first heard the concept of "entering into a conversation" in my English 306. I was told about picking up on language in order to enter into a discourse. Graff expands on the idea and approaches it with the knowledge that we are probably already writers, yet we still need to be reminded of the techniques and moves we are applying in our very practiced writing. Sometimes we forget that we need to summarize anothers perspective without bias or slant.  I like how Graff asserts that listening to others and responding respectfully can "help us see beyond our own pet beliefs, which may be shared by everyone" (13). Our own thoughts can become stale and stagnant if not probed by or opposed by others. Readings some work that we can agree with or disagree with gives us fuel. But we best not use this fuel to fly off the handle and speak too soon or with too narrow a view. Better that we explore what "they say" to more clearly understand where we fit in the conversation, and then respond knowingly and openly. Or am i being too agreeable?