Looking back on the way I thought about writing in high school, I had a basic understand of how sentences should begin and end. I wrote like I talked. Re-evaluating my writing process showed me that my language had little or no structure. I merely rambled. I thought that my words made my paper sound more interesting but now I realize that it made my paper more confusing to understand. When editing my first project, I put away my thesaurus and told myself focus. In effect, I learned how to create sentences that were actually applicable to the rhetorical situation - writing to explore. Once I thought about exploring through my writing, I focused on talking about what Becky was thinking when in the midst of this dangerous situation.
During Project #2 was when I learned the most of rhetorical situations. Viewing other peer's essays and seeing how they responded to the photos I had seen made me realize how many different interpretations people can come up with. Even another students essay about the exact picture I wrote about was completely different. She noticed the same things, yet worded it differently. She noticed the amount of brand-name food items on the Revises dining room table, but then talked about how humans trick our own minds into thinking that certain foods taste better. She also saw different things that I didn't even notice before, like how their faces were greasy from the hot weather, causing them to feel dehydrated and want more liquids in their diet. It's interesting how humans personalities can be so different from one another, and this especially intrigues me being a twin. We are literally two different rhetorical situations - meaning that we both explore and analyze the same things differently. We have the same genetics, same up-bringing, somewhat of the same environment, and yet we have completely different personalities. I now realize this is because the both of us interpret the same things slightly or substantially different. As a unique individual, when writing an essay, I need to explain my own thought process to other people because they probably do not interpret my words the same way that I do.
The first draft of my second project was negatively affected by the context I had put in. I overly focused on getting the point across that corporations have total control over the food industry, and I lost site of my photo. I also missed the whole point of the essay, being that I had to analyze ethos, pathos, and logos. Once I realized this, I edited so that I still could add in parts about corporations, but I could support it to my original argument. I think my research was also affected by my previous mindset. Most of my sources were about America's obesity, and I wanted those facts to be in there a lot. I had to construct my essay however to make those points flow and not just stick them in there out of the blue. To the readers, my first draft was confusing as to what the point was: Was it about how corporations are bad? Was it about how Hungry Planet is good? I knew what my point was, I just had to make it clear to my readers. It's like when you say a joke out-loud, and you realize it sounds funnier in your mind. That describes my writing weakness to a tee. I know what I am trying to say, it is just the actual communication part that I was having trouble with. I think my strongest point in my analysis however is my emotion. I am an emotional person, period. I do not take things lightly. This is clear is my work, and my peers often said this was very clear to them as well.