Yurt Repairs

Drag to rearrange sections
Image/File Upload
DSC07705.JPG
attachment 22760563  
Drag to rearrange sections
Rich Text Content

Broken race bike the day before League Finals

rich_text    
Drag to rearrange sections
Rich Text Content

"All mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated...."

—John Donne

rich_text    
Drag to rearrange sections
Image/File Upload
attachment 22759555  
Drag to rearrange sections
Image/File Upload
attachment 22759558  
Drag to rearrange sections
Image/File Upload
attachment 22757476  
Drag to rearrange sections
Image/File Upload
attachment 22757487  
Drag to rearrange sections
Image/File Upload
attachment 22757499  
Drag to rearrange sections
Rich Text Content

Papers without revisions would be royal pains, to both professors, and humanity. It would simply be a chaotic mess of thoughts, waiting for a giant evil cat to untangle the yarn ball of philosophical madness.

I have exemplified my substantial revisions that satisfy Outcome 4, in both Major Paper 1 and Major Paper 2. Both papers were written based off of complex claims involving multiple stakes and levels of recognition, metacognition, and application.

 My significant problems encompassed unclear structure, lack of a “roadmap”, and a decisive piece of evidence, contextual misconceptions, incorporating footnotes, and incorrect MLA citations. 

Initially, I was overwhelmed by these substantial revisions. I tackled these revisions by considering feedback, revising feedback, correcting content, rearranging structure, and proofreading. By revising in this order, I developed my own method of revision that seems to be efficient; so far, I have applied it to revising the works of this portfolio.

My ever-enthusiastic and sagacious professor, Tesla Schaeffer, advised me to revise the structure of my Major Paper 1. Although my content and line of inquiry were engaging, the structure could be stricter and more solidified. I revised my structure to a general outline of: Introduction, Argument, Language, Practical Application of Language, Language Constructs Identity, Identity, Identity’s Lasting Effects on Ebonics, Power, Practical Application of Power, Method of Influence, Depth of Power, and Conclusion. This structure captured both philosophical concepts, with practical applications. By doing so, I transformed my essay from a long-winded explanation to a more concise, distinctive argument. 

Major Paper 2’s content was concise and conveyed the necessary persuasive information in a decisive, determined fashion. My initial introduction included an effective rhetorical strategy, “Nowadays, modern society has pushed the boundaries on intellectual works, expanding this realm to physical, auditory, and physical realms. Human progression has developed a much more complex field for recognition and identification of rightful ownership. This extensively refined system of intellectual ownership questions the validity of the laws’ current purpose. Societies’ needs evolve with human development, as laws are amended to better compensate for societies’ demands. Do Fair Use Laws retain a modernized purpose parallel to that of past society? Or has human progression completely altered the purpose of Fair Use Laws?” (1). This summary is much more summarized and short-winded compared to my first attempt that seemed to fly repetitively.  

Later in my work, I included a more decisive piece of evidence, one directly from a First Nations thinker in response a recent Native depiction by a reality modeling show,  ‘I think this is completely a reflection of the sad, sad state of our society if a proud Native woman feels the only ‘iconic figure’ that ‘everyone knows’ of her race is a 12 year old who was famous for ‘saving’ and marrying an old white dude, and then becoming a Disney character. Awesome.’ (1).” (7). By incorporating a more direct perspective, my claim is proved to be more decisive.

It was brought to my attention that my claim that Disney is a significant contributor to misinterpretation of appropriations, could be misinterpreted as blaming Disney for the entirety of the problem. Therefore, I reevaluated that section of my argument and repositioned it in a more general sense, to avoid a superlative blame on Disney. 

In addition to these major revisions, I clarified some lengthy descriptions by adding footnotes describing Lethem’s “Commons” and a photo of the Victoria’s Secret model modeling a floor-length Native headdress. Last, but certainly not least, I corrected and varies my MLA citations by utilizing embedded citations within my text to keep the audience engaged in a variety of sentence structures. 

My developing my own flexible revision strategies for editing and proofreading in this portfolio, I have demonstrated and successfully completed Outcome 4.

rich_text    
Drag to rearrange sections
Rich Text Content

"The idea that culture can be property—intellectual property—is used to justify everything from attempts to force the Girl Scouts to pay royalties for singing songs around campfires..."

—Jonathan Lethem

rich_text    
Drag to rearrange sections
Rich Text Content
rich_text    

Page Comments

Ryan Kelley Doctorow
Dec 2, 2014 at 11:14am
"The idea that culture can be property—intellectual property—is used to justify everything from attempts to force the Girl Scouts to pay royalties for singing songs around campfires..." —Jonathan Lethem

Add a New Comment:

You must be logged in to make comments on this page.