I write this after having completed my final portfolio for the class. Looking back on my work this semester I am satisfied. I believe that the portfolio shows my best work, but I would have been happy to include every piece that I wrote because I liked every piece that I wrote. I think that learning that writing is a form of activism has been very valuable to me. I hold pretty strong opinions on a lot of things and to this point I haven’t had a vehicle to transmit these opinions to the world effectively. Now, I feel that I have this vehicle. Through my writing I can organize and give proper thought to my ideas. When challenged verbally I often freeze and stumble over thoughts, often forgetting key components of my argument. I’d like to see someone challenge me through writing when I have time to think and process.
Here is what I think the in-class presentation should contain:
- no requirement for a visual aid
- clear representation of activist effort
- explanation for why the form of activism chosen was chosen
- brief statement about your activism subject
That’s what I definitely want to see in the rubric but there has to be more to it
So, I’ve done some research on letters to the editor and I still like my idea, but here’s the catch. Most letters to the editor have a strict word limit of approx. 200 words. I was going to write a research-filled analysis of the system… this obviously won’t work now. What will work is making every single word count. Word limits are fluff-killers, especially when you have to make an argument. This is going to be difficult for me because my typical voice when I write is kind of meandering in that I generally don’t get right to the point. This is going to have to change. I’m going to have to make an entire argument in the amount of words I typically use to introduce one. Wish me luck
Nervous and unsure would be an accurate way to describe me going into this final activist inquiry. I can write all day about topics, and I can think about how things need to change until my brain aches, but putting things into motion isn’t anything I have ever done. I’m not a “front and center” type of person generally, and these are the people who seem to be effective activists, so I was worried.
Then my idea hit me. I would write for my activist project. I can organize my thoughts in writing and through writing, better than through speaking, I can inspire my audience to action. So I’m going to write a letter to the editor regarding the current state of American education under NCLB and try to spark dialogue about the issue. I will try and get this into at least one paper and hopefully many more. My audience, if I am successful, will be huge.
This is an interesting idea, guerrilla art. Part of me sits here and thinks “wow, what a great way to get your ideas out,” while another part of me sits here and thinks “who’s really going to pay attention anyway.” It’s an idea that, to me, seems akin to billboards- placing your thoughts and ideas in the middle of an environment hoping that someone will see them and act on them in some way. However, this is probably just cynicism because I think I would like seeing random notes of philosophy or kindness placed throughout the mundane environment of everyday.
My research question for this inquiry is “How can we claim that we are “the land of the free” when we still allow Native Americans to live without opportunity on reservations?” This question fulfills all of the requirements of our checklist, and not just with a “yes”, but most of them with “absolutely”. I’m confident that I will be able to construct an argument that will shed light on this issue, and hopefully change some people’s minds on this issue, this domestic tragedy. I don’t know what my audience will think about my argument- I hope they will recognize the wrongs committed against these people and desire change. That is my hope and this is what I hope to achieve through my piece.
This argument is a bit more personal for me, I am guessing, than for anyone else in this class. That is because I have lived in Nebraska, I have family from Nebraska, and to me Nebraska is not some backwards, 100% rural hole in the country. I found this review to be scathing towards the rural life, and I for one disagree with the assessment. For me this took away from the rest of what she was saying. I found that her argument against prejudice was laced with it- that if this same event had occurred in Los Angeles, there would not have been the undertones of ignorance that coursed through this piece.
It is a general prejudice, I believe, that small, rural towns are filled with ignorant idiots and bigots; that people that are different just don’t fit in because people just can’t tolerate their differences. While like all prejudices, sometime, somewhere it made sense, to apply this to all small, rural towns is backwards in itself.
So, to me, to a part-time Nebraskan, this is a story about two prejudices. One prejudice that resulted in murder and one prejudice on the other side of the pen. I’m interested to see what you all thought.
This is what I find most interesting about activism: there is a time for it, and at that time nothing stops it- everything is consumed by it- and once that time arrives the movement goes. Activism, especially in the form of mass movements, as the one detailed in the reading was, is really a perfect storm. Various factors must come together- these factors vary by movement, but it is a fact across all activism. Because of this though, it is rare to see a long lasting radical activist movement.
It seems to be that these perfect storm activist movements burn hot, but they also burn fast- quickly consuming all the tinder and fuel for the fire. But like a fire, these movements leave their mark. I like these movements- gone in an instant but leaving a lasting impression…
This inquiry went well for me. I found a good text to analyze, and I think that that was very beneficial. I never found myself stretching to come up with an appropriate analysis of the arguments made. The text, a testimony before a congressional subcommittee, was loaded with rhetoric. I would say 85 percent of the speech was either logos, ethos, or pathos- with limited exposure you want to make every word count, and Lavinia Limon, the source of my text, did just that.
It was interesting to view her arguments through the lens of the audience. I think she did an excellent job in hitting the triggers for her listeners- emotional appeal, and logical appeal. She was asking for money and a change of policy- emotion changes their hearts and logic opens their wallets.
I still haven’t completely decided whether or not I liked the play… I thought it did some things well, but I was disappointed at the lack of character development. The story of Freedom Summer, for me, is one of humanity. Not just humanity but two sides of humanity. I expected to see some portrayal of the conflict- not just have it implied. Through conflict you would see the hatred of the white Mississippians, the determination of the oppressed Blacks, and the mental toughness and compassion of the SNCC workers.
The fact that the play skimmed over human interaction by only having 3 major cast members, did not do the movement justice. I didn’t really know what the playwright wanted the focus to be. It didn’t really make me want to go and be active in something- I didn’t find it all together inspiring.
I love the story of Freedom Summer because it is a story of humans triumphing over wrong in the name of right. This play did not display this as well as I would have liked.
