After review my memo and map I decided to re-read the assignment sheet. The assignment sheet came off as very vague which I like. This allowed me to express my creativity through the memo and map. My first draft was very rough. I spent a long time reviewing it. My first draft was more a combination of ideas and less a final piece. After reviewing I was able to take those ideas and put them together. For most of my pieces, my first draft often looks like this. I reviewed my first project in the same environment that I started the project in. The familiar surrounds allowed me to better focus on the task at hand. The review process was also very different than my first draft. With the revision I had to much more careful with things like spelling that I didn’t care about in my first draft. This took a long time to go through because I wanted to make sure everything was spelt right and cohesive. During homework I usually do not stress because I always like to start assignments earlier rather than later. I do this because if I start something early I have the ability come back to the work another day. I fell like this strategy of homework really helps me succeed in school. I am very interested for class on Monday. I can’t wait to see how my classmates interpreted the project. Also I really enjoy peer review workshops because it give me the ability to help others and get feedback on my work. Everyone thinks differently and maybe I will tweak my project a little after receiving feedback. In conclusion this project really helped me reflect on my social life as a whole. By discovering all the different rhetorical ecologies I am apart of I realized how diverse my life is.

The writing process during my first draft of the project was very similar to the one I described in my first blog. The only thing that greatly changed during my writing process was I was in a noisier environment. Instead of working on my project in a quiet place I was forced to go into the lounge in my dorm where there was a lot of chaos. Most times during my writing process I do not listen to music but in this case I had to because the noise was very distracting. I decided to write my first draft on paper instead of on the computer. Especially for a draft I find it much easier to brainstorm my ideas on paper instead of online. I like to write down something and have the ability to change it or erase it. Even though this was still my first draft I expected to be able to brainstorm more. Throughout my “mapping” I often got stuck asking myself what more can I write. After reading Lamott’s “Shitty First Drafts”, I feel much better about my first draft. Throughout the text, Lamott explains how the first draft should be messy and not perfect. She told us that we should not stress about have a perfect first draft. Before submitting a final project you will ultimately go through multiple rough drafts. Lamott explains how this is okay because she argues that writing is a process and changes very quickly. Another thing I also interpreted from the text was that the first draft should only help you figure out what you want to do your project about. The last argument that Lamott makes is that the sloppier the first draft the better your final piece will be. She claims that some of your best work comes from your most “rough” drafts.

As a writer I am always exploring and changing my writing process. Even though this is true, when I think of my writing I start with picking a quiet and non distracting environment. For example a bright room with no windows helps me concentrate on the task at hand. After picking the right environment to work in I then like to get all the information in my head down on paper. Instead of trying to remember everything I am going to write about, I prefer to write down bullet points that I am planning on writing about. After writing down all the information I had in my head I then go to the internet. The internet helps me gain a more general understanding of the topic I am writing about. For example when doing a researcher paper I look at articles that I can use to support my claim throughout my writing. I also like gather quotes from different sources because I feel that quotes greatly strengthen my argument. Differently when writing a personal narrative or poem I instead do not use the internet for content but instead for vocabulary. I like to look up synonyms of words so I avoid saying the same words over and over again. As I am writing, after each paragraph or so I like to go back and check my work and almost revise on the fly. By doing this I am able to check my work multiple times as I go and at the end of my paper. Once I am finally complete with my writing, I like to check the whole paper over with a friend so I have another persons point of view on my piece. After reading both texts, my writing process is similar to Lawson’s. Throughout the text Lawson explains how his process is more leisurely. He writes whatever is on this brain and almost seems relaxed and not pressured. This style of writing works for him because he feels he writes best when he is not stressed.

In the book titled “Green Culture, Environmental Rhetoric in Contemporary America”, authors Carl Herald and Stuart Brown write about rhetorical discourse and criticism. This book was edited by Herald and Brown who both worked in the English department at New Mexico State University. “Green Culture, Environmental Rhetoric in Contemporary America” is intended for the students of these two professors students. The book was also published in 1996 by the University of Wisconsin. The reading consists of many components, but the authors begin the book by explaining environmental discourse and how it is created. In the introduction, Herald and Brown state that a single environment can have many different and unique discourses. These discourse allow for various connections with different types of people. They also show different environments promote different discourses. Discourses in an environment are said to cause problems and become difficult according to Herald and Brown. Later on in the book, on page 11, the authors show a rhetorical model for environmental discourse. The model is represented by a triangle which connects “poetic discourse”, “regulatory discourse” and “scientific discourse”. This model shows how all three of these discourses are connected and related. Herald and Brown explain how without one of the discourses, the others can not be obtained nor supported. This model also directly ties into the authors claim of how disourse and rhetoric are need in order to solve world issues. For example rhetoric helps humans better understand the environmental and social problems and components in the world. Therefore Herald and Brown wrote the book “Green Culture, Environmental Rhetoric in Contemporary America” to help students better gain an understanding of how discourse and rhetoric play a role in the world and society. In conclusion I greatly enjoyed reading this text and learned a lot about the impact of discourse on our environment.

In Jenny Edbauer’s article titled “Unframing Models of Public Distribution: From Rhetorical Situations to Rhetorical Ecologies”, Edbauer writes this article to student. In the article, Edbauer tells her readers that previous definitions of rhetorical situations are not as complex as older definitions. She argues that these older models are a static view while the more recent models take a variable view of rhetoric. This article is meant to persuade and inform her audience of the difference between the new and old definitions. Edbauer splits her article into sections with the most important section being the first section titled “Elemental Framework”. Within this section Edbauer mentions the sender receiver model. She describes the sender receiver model as a homeostatic relationship of public communication. Later she says that definition of a sender receiver model is too fixed and therefore not complex. Towards the end of the section Edbauer talks about the difference between Craig Smith and Lloyd Bitzer’s models of rhetoric. Lloyd Bitzer’s model of rhetoric can be defined as rhetoric relates to external social circumstances and conditions of material. Edbauer states that this model has been recently disproved by Craig Smith. Craig Smith argues that rhetorical situation relates to the complex relations between interest and the audience that rhetoric pertains to. This is another example that the author gives to strengthen her claim. In the song section of her article, Edbauer explores the etymological tropes within popular theories. She describes the latin roots of the word situation which resonate with our current definitions of location and place. The author then relates this to rhetorical situations by stating “the latin word situs is closely tied to the originary position of objects…the concept of rhetorical situation id appropriately named insofar as the models of rhetorical situation describe the scene of rhetorical action as located around the exigence that generates a response”. This quote shows the connection between models and place or location. In conclusion Edbauer writes this article to inform students about the difference between older more complex models and newer models of rhetorical situations.

In “Rhetoric is Synonymous With Empty Speech, Roberts-Miller explains the difference between rhetoric in the professional. In the first paragraph, Roberts-Miller shows the reader how different professions can define rhetoric differently. The authors audience is for anyone who is interested in the different definitions of the word rhetoric. Roberts-Miller implies that people who study the subject of rhetoric interpret the word differently than those who do not. The author says that professionals always believe that rhetoric can be incorporated in any sentence while non-professionals think it is added words to make a sentence more elaborate. Professionals think that even the simple sentences have rhetoric in their own unique way. Towards the end of the reading, Roberts-Miller includes how Aristotle argues that rhetoric teaches you “how to approach political, ethical, and legal problems, how to come up with an argument when you can’t be certain you are right”. Finally the author finishes the text by stating that rhetoric is uniquely present in every sentence short or long, and simple or detailed.

In the text “The Rhetorical Situation”, Bitzer attempts to explain the ultimate dilemma with the word rhetoric. In the text Bitzer is the one who is writing to his audience. Bitzer’s primary audience most likely consists of young adults who know about rhetoric and eager to learn more about the confusing word. Throughout the text Bitzer implies that rhetoric is the ability to persuade in literature and speaking. He argues that the rhetorical discourse or “persuasive communication” in writing and speaking, helps create rhetorical situations. He later says that these rhetorical situations yield a “fitting” response. For example on page 10 Bitzer uses Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to explain a fitting response. He states ” Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address was a most fitting response to the relevant features of the historical context which invited its existence and gave it rhetorical significance”. Bitzer’s purpose of writing “The Rhetorical Situation” was to show the progression of how rhetorical situations yield a fitting response. In conclusion the author supports his idea that rhetoric is situational by explaining that rhetoric is not just the art of persuasive literature and speaking.

A simple definition for the word “rhetoric” is the art of persuasive speaking and writing. Rhetoric can also be the ability for one to speak in a meaningful and persuasive way. In speech and writing, rhetoric is used to inform, persuade and even motivate its audience. The word can be traced back all the way before the birth of christ. During the early stages, philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle argued that rhetoric was the ability for one to persuade. As time progressed, various philosophies have been made on the definition of rhetoric. Broad definitions such as the study of human communication and the reasoning about probabilities, show how different the definition of rhetoric is between each person. Rhetoric is a difficult but very important term to grasp while writing or speaking. Words are very powerful and the ability for one to use them to persuade others can be a beneficial trait. Many world leaders use rhetoric to gain their countries support for a certain policy or global event. One of the most famous examples of rhetoric in literature is Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech. This speech uses rhetoric to inform and persuade his audience.

Rhetoric can be intrepid in many different ways. Some believe that rhetoric is the art of enchanting the soul while others simply think it is one’s ability to speak properly. As you can see, rhetoric can be defined as a more spiritual and less tangible noun while others think it describes a person who is well spoken with manners. Even though these do make sense, the best definition of rhetoric is the art of persuasive speaking and writing. After researching the word and reading responses from various people of different ages, genders and races, it is evident that the majority of people define rhetoric as the art of persuasion. In conclusion the word rhetoric is one of the popular terms in speech and literature.

Be yourself; Everyone else is already taken.

— Oscar Wilde.

This is the first post on my new blog. I’m just getting this new blog going, so stay tuned for more. Subscribe below to get notified when I post new updates.

This is an example post, originally published as part of Blogging University. Enroll in one of our ten programs, and start your blog right.

You’re going to publish a post today. Don’t worry about how your blog looks. Don’t worry if you haven’t given it a name yet, or you’re feeling overwhelmed. Just click the “New Post” button, and tell us why you’re here.

Why do this?

• Because it gives new readers context. What are you about? Why should they read your blog?
• Because it will help you focus you own ideas about your blog and what you’d like to do with it.

The post can be short or long, a personal intro to your life or a bloggy mission statement, a manifesto for the future or a simple outline of your the types of things you hope to publish.

To help you get started, here are a few questions:

• Why are you blogging publicly, rather than keeping a personal journal?
• What topics do you think you’ll write about?
• Who would you love to connect with via your blog?
• If you blog successfully throughout the next year, what would you hope to have accomplished?

You’re not locked into any of this; one of the wonderful things about blogs is how they constantly evolve as we learn, grow, and interact with one another — but it’s good to know where and why you started, and articulating your goals may just give you a few other post ideas.

Can’t think how to get started? Just write the first thing that pops into your head. Anne Lamott, author of a book on writing we love, says that you need to give yourself permission to write a “crappy first draft”. Anne makes a great point — just start writing, and worry about editing it later.

When you’re ready to publish, give your post three to five tags that describe your blog’s focus — writing, photography, fiction, parenting, food, cars, movies, sports, whatever. These tags will help others who care about your topics find you in the Reader. Make sure one of the tags is “zerotohero,” so other new bloggers can find you, too.