Primary

Man’s all compelling need for survival is evident in the development of the main characters, the boy and the man, in The Road. Some critics argue that McCarthy suggests the possibility for redemption of mankind. This is indeed how Ashley Kunsa views the portrayal of these characters as she believes, “we discover the seeds of the works unexpectedly optimistic worldview.” However, this is a contention with which I vehemently disagree. The Father and the boy, who are described metaphorically as those who are “carrying the fire” and “the good guys” appear to be moral characters who do not succumb to barbaric acts such as cannibalism. Yet, the impressive moral standard of the father and the boy simply provide a false illusion to the reader that there are those who can triumph in McCarthy’s truest test for optimism.

– Here i quoted Kunsa as a foundation for the development of my own argument. I implemented the “They say, I say” structure that was so strongly emphasized in class and in doing so made my argument stronger and more valid. By quoting someone with a different idea, and then immediately rejecting it, I have effectively proven that I have considered opposing view points but still remain steadfast to my original beliefs.

Secondary

This is effective because the poster is an altered version of the iconic propaganda used in George Orwell’s celebrated novel ‘1984’. Its is at once recognisable to the audience. The use of the image of google, which we are all familiar with and is central to many of our lives, makes concept of a totalitarian society wherein everyone is watched becomes very immediate and imminent.

– the secondary source i used in this paragraph is George Orwell’s 1984. Not only is this directly related to the poster that I was analyzing, but the novel itself is also an icon of totalitarianism and therefore makes the posters relatable to the general audience.

One example from one of my posts where I quoted a primary source was blog post 6 when I wrote this: An example of a close reading is on page 21 when Jessica Hale mentions that Victor in the story describes Elizabeth as “a possession of my own”, which is very effective because it clearly shows that women were perceived as objects. This can be seen as both a primary source because it is quoting Frankenstein and a secondary source because it was in a peer-reviewed article. One example from one of my posts where I quoted a secondary source was blog post 7 when I wrote this: In Haste’s paper, she states that Lewis Wolpert argues “that scientific knowledge is counterintuitive and requires us to go against the obvious, the commonsensical.” I usually introduce the quote with a phrase, embed the quote, and analyze it at the end of the sentence and extend the analysis to the next sentence.

Revised Quotation Statements:

In her book, Frankenstein, Victor mentions Elizabeth as “a possession of my own” suggesting a submissive and objective quality to Elizabeth rather than a human being worthy of equality. In other words, by making this comment, Mary Shelley hints social standards regarding woman value at the time period.

In Lewis Wolpert’s view, “scientific knowledge is counterintuitive and requires us to go against the obvious, the commonsensical.” The essence of Wolpert’s argument is that we use common sense of what we know to make sense of the unknown through both metaphors and science.

I quote from a primary source in my first blog post, where I write about the issues that “Eye in the Sky” by Radiolab. On the other side, I quote from a secondary source in blog post six where I analyze Jessica Hale’s paper and mention her use of someone else’s argument. Though her primary source is Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, her secondary source represents other writers’ critiques. In both cases, I utilized quotations to either create my thesis statement or understand the “they say” component of an argument. After giving a short summary of what “Eye in the Sky” presented, I used that upon building my main-point in my argument. In analyzing Hale’s argument, I mentioned writer Shoene-Harwood’s literary writings to explain how the author of the paper employs others’ opinions to build upon her own.

Here are the revised versions of the quotations I used in my blogs:

1. In “Eye in the Sky”, a podcast by Radiolab, the issue of surveillance is discussed. The post talks about an “eye in the sky”, or a modern camera, that allows investigators to “scroll back in time”. The authors of this podcast emphasize there being an eye in the sky that allows for time to become more fluid in order to suggest that the government is invading people’s privacies.
2. In her paper “Constructing Connectedness: Gender, Sexuality and Race in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”, Jessica Hale argues that males show signs of femininity by being nurturing towards their female lovers. In her paper, she supports writer Shoene-Harwood’s point that “men who feel secure enough in their masculinity to display feelings of domestic affection…who seem perfectly balanced in their manliness which incorporates rather than categorically excludes the feminine”. Because Hale emphasizes the importance of homosocial relationships between men in the novel, Shoene-Harwood’s points emphasize her main-point.

Primary Source:

“The page I chose was page 88. On that page, Lenny and his friends FAC (From A Community) with a group of ladies in a bar and compare their information such as “Fuckability”, “Personality” and “Sustainability”. This scene makes me feel dystopian not only because of the lack of privacy but also the void of humanity. Human beings are supposed to contact with each other through words and gestures.”

I integrate this quotation from primary source directly since I want to introduce the scene to readers. However, this way of introduction might seem too abrupt and fails to provide enough content. I quote this part of the story in order to draw a relationship between the picture I chose for that assignment and the novel.

Secondary Source

“In Jessica Hale’s article “Constructing Connectedness: Gender, Sexuality and Race in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”, she reveals four “relational trajectories” known as familial, homosocial, sexual, and racial in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein by including and referencing to contemporary criticisms. The author then suggests that “these four levels of human interconnectedness” oppose the stability which the society “sought to establish” among families and races in the nineteenth century and thus exposing the fragility behind.”

I refer to this author’s article in order to demonstrate the relationship between the author’s article and my essay proposal. The quotation is essentially the author’s thesis statement, which explicitly expresses the author’s major idea. The way I quote this quotation is fusing the author’s original content with my own words. This way is rather effective and vivid instead of quoting the author’s words verbatim.

Rework

Primary

In Gary Shteyngart’s novel Super Sad True Love Story, the author attributes “Fuckability”, “Personality” and “Sustainability” as quantitative data to human beings. Basically, Shteyngart admonish that the seemingly easy way to socialize corrupts our society and eliminates humanity.

Secondary

Writing in the journal “Constructing Connectedness: Gender, Sexuality and Race in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”, Jessica Hale complains about “the stability which the society sought to establish among families and races in the nineteenth century”. In making this comment, Jessica demonstrates the essence of her argument is to expose the fragility behind those superficial harmony.

In blog post two, I used a primary source where I stated “On page 38, Lenny, while looking for information about Eunice, comes across her and her sister’s purchases that are mostly comprised of boutiques in L.A. and New York, footwear, and expensive socks.  During his analysis, he feels the need to save them from themselves and ‘the idiotic consumer culture that was bleeding them softly.’”  I introduced the quote, and gave background information in the novel that pertains to that point, so that readers could understand what was being said without having to read the novel.  I didn’t relate the quote to my argument until later, but it would be beneficial to tie in this point before making the next one, which could be accomplished by adding in a sentence or two after the quote talking about the socioeconomic issue faced in this novel that is mirrored in our own society.  I also could have moved, “The novel seems to comment on the societal obsession of consumer culture, and how this dangerous cycle is connected to the financial crisis of America” to follow the quote in order to clarify how this relates to what I’m saying.

I used a secondary source in blog post five, where I expressed, “As Nilles bluntly states, ‘technology seems to be subtly destroying the meaningfulness of interactions we have with others’ and nothing can replace the face-to-face connection of body language, facial expressions, and the attention of another.” I introduced the quote with “as Nilles bluntly states” and made it flow into my writing and opinion by explaining its meaning and using it in my argument to give validity to my points.  I also used it as a platform to build off of for my argument.  I could explain it differently by adding in “the essence of her argument is that” after the quote from her article so that her points are very apparent.

“In contrast to this, while following Turkle’s arguments, Eunice, cut off from technology after the Rupture, sends messages that cannot be received by anyone. In one message to Jenny, she says, “White people don’t really care about old people, except for David who tried to help everyone. And then they shot him like a dog” (265). Eunice changes her earlier seemingly apathetic comments about David to empathetic ones. After spending time thinking about the atrocities and having no connection to technology to distract her, Eunice is finally able to connect to David’s strive to help people and be angry with his death.”

In this primary quotation, I have integrated Shteyngart’s writing into my own. I frame the quote with a full background sentence and then directly introduce it in its own sentence. I then explain what I extrapolate from the quote. Here is one revision to introduce the quote:

In contrast to this, while following Turkle’s arguments, Eunice, cut off from technology after the Rupture, sends messages that cannot be received by anyone. Eunice has newfound agreement with the rebel cause when she writes, “White people don’t really care about old people, except for David who tried to help everyone. And then they shot him like a dog” (265).

“One secondary source Hale uses is an essay by Malchow about Frankenstein depicting race in the nineteenth century. Hale uses this analysis to expand her own by signifying that the monster is not just an explicit “Negro monster” by that of an “other” race (18). This enhances Hale’s argument and clarifies to the reader that Shelley did not choose a race for the monster, yet it can be implied that a completely new race can produce the same messages.”

In this secondary quotation, I have not properly integrated the quote, though I do explain what I took from it and how it related to the text. Here is a (hopefully) better version of introducing the quote:

One secondary source Hale uses is an essay by Malchow about Frankenstein depicting race in the nineteenth century. Hale affirms Malchow’s work as she states, “That the otherness of the monster has strong racial overtones seems like a plausible hypothesis, especially in light of Walton’s misidentification of him as “a savage” at the beginning of the narrative (9).”

In my Blog 7, in order to introduce the main point of an article ‘Technology and the Human Limit’, I quoted a sentence from it: “there are both physiological and psychological limitations conditioning human being”. I integrated this primary source by firstly introducing ‘The author believes that…… ’, then connecting it with our actions of overusing machines and expanding into the environment without boundaries in order to illustrate my point “by talking about human limitation, I can analyze the progressing relationship between human and technology better.” By using the template, I can revise my quotation to be: As a writing concerning about human future and technology development, Baker Brownell says that “there are both physiological and psychological limitations conditioning human being”. In other words, Baker believes that we should respect our destined limitation instead of overusing machines to further destroy our environment.

Additionally, in my Blog 2, I talked about how ‘Super Sad True Love Story’ was foreshadowing our future because people were too focused on high tech to notice their over-reliance on electrical devices. In order to describe the situation of people’s addiction to apparat, I quoted one sentence from ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death’: “people hypnotize themselves into addiction to TV.” I integrated this secondary source by introducing that ‘Just as the world described by Neil Postman in ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death’……’ and then connected it with ‘Super Sad True Love Story’ by talking about their difference and similarity. By using the template, I can revise my quotation to be: Writing in his book ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death’, Neil Postman describes that “people hypnotize themselves into addiction to TV.” Basically, Neil is warning that people’s addiction to TV has severely influenced normal life pace and thinking.

I found only one instance in which I quoted a primary source, Super Sad True Love Story in Blog Post 4, when I explained the scene in which Lenny is being searched by security guards, and that the use of technology by the guards was invasive and a prime example of a dystopic society. In this post I stated, “They scan Lenny’s apparat and deduce that he is guilty of ‘malicious pervasion of data’(p. 130). I introduced this quote as more of a narrative to explain the scene, whereas I could use a template and say something more along the lines of, “after scanning Lenny’s apparat, the guards stated that he is guilty of “malicious pervasion of data” (p. 130), which is somewhat ironic considering the guards are gleaning information about Lenny without his permission. This template makes it easier to incorporate my quote into an explanation of the scene while still capturing my argument that the guards used their apparats to invade Lenny’s privacy.

In Blog Post 7, I quoted a criticism by Leila Silvana May, in which she references another reviewer’s opinion on Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. This criticism was my secondary source. I said, “May incorporates Mary Poovey’s statement that the creature is ‘the victim of both the symbolic and the literal . . . it is doubly (and vehicle for) someone else’s desire, yet exposed (and excited) as the deadly essence of passion itself.’” I introduced this quote in this manner because I was explaining how May used another person’s argument to back up her own argument. Using a template from They Say, I Say, I could introduce the quote in the following manner: “Mary Poovey states that the creature is ‘the victim of both the symbolic and the literal . . . it is doubly (and vehicle for) someone else’s desire, yet exposed (and excited) as the deadly essence of passion itself’, which supports May’s argument that the monster represents sororal desire.” This would allow me to show how May uses someone else’s argument to support her own, while still explaining whose opinion I am quoting.