English Portfolio

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.

At first the personal analysis essay was the paper that I dreaded and hated the most. I had absolutely no intention of keeping it in my portfolio until I revised it. It was then that I really started to feel invested in the paper, and I started to feel passionate about my own story and what I wanted to say. I think this essay is a really good example of my non-formal writing. I use a specific event in my life and elaborate in detail about it, making connections both to my famous person and American society. As far as formal/academic writing I think the research paper shows some of my best work. On the other hand it is also the paper I am most invested in, and the one that needs to be edited the most. My research paper still has a very long way to go with my own analysis and expansion of ideas, but I feel really comfortable with the historical context and sources I have used thus far. I really need to rethink the structure of this paper, and find a way to incorporate smooth transitions between new ideas that I introduce.

Krakauer's Credibility

In what ways were Krakauer's research and authoritative methods successful and unsuccessful in your opinion throughout his development of Into the Wild. Pick a couple examples from the text to back up your viewpoint.

I think that Krakauer did a beautiful job researching and writing the novel Into the Wild. In the beginning of the novel it is slightly obvious to the reader that Krakauer has a deeper connection to Chris, but this becomes more and more eminent as the book progresses. First, with the comparison to Krakauer's own experience Mountain climbing, second when Krakauer makes the journey to Stampede Trail to see where Chris spent his remaining time, and finally with the depth he goes to find what exactly killed Chris. All three of these narrative techniques reach out to the readers showing how others can relate to Chris and his situation. However, these techniques should also be noted for their ethos and the way they force the reader to feel. Krakauer bluntly states in the beginning of the novel that he wants the reader to make up their own mind about Chris, yet he has his own agenda for continually portraying Chris in "good" light. For me Krakauer was very successful with his authoritative methods. He showed a story and side of Chris which I deeply want to believe is true. This makes me both ignorant and biased because like Krakauer I want to believe that Chris's death was not his fault, and he would have been successful and proved his critics wrong. For other readers who were expecting to be given just the facts, and no in-between emotions, I could see how they would frown upon Krakauer's twisted research and think less of him.

Primary Source

I think that my primary source, The Wizard of Oz, visually shows the audience and the reader of my paper the stereotypes the characters represent. Through imagery and the emotions of the characters the viewer can see how the helpless and hopeful Dorothy compares to the American, and the how the brainless, foolish scarecrow represents the farmer. In my paper I addess this point of view through specific scenes in the movie, and also with an analysis of the music's lyrics. This is important because it lays the foundation for my papers argument and provides examples for my analysis. Readers should care about my topic because the movie the wizard of oz was a cultural phenomena in America. Everyone has at least heard the movie and it is even played yearly on TV. My paper shows a different side to this movie that most Americans are unaware of, and I believe would be intrigued to read.