Thlog #3

Dear Blog,

      These past couple of weeks have been insane. With the septa strikes and the election happening it's crazy. Yet our classes have still been going on consistently. And we've also been working really hard. Recently we've had to work on our PB2A's and PB2B's and it's pretty crazy how much more simple yet complicated its gotten. Lately I've been suffering from severe authors block (sounds like a sickness I know). I've tried various amounts of times to write and complete my assignments to its fullest potential. But I still feel a bit weary about it. I feel as though they aren't my best pieces of writing. My WP1, PB1A and PB1B were extremely good so it's pretty hard  I've found that the best way to concentrate on my writing is just to pick a topic that I find interesting then sit down and research other essays that may argue or support your views on the topic then begin. We've also been concentrating more on views of people from different disciplinary perspectives. (That consists of Buisness, Social Sciences, Natural Science and The Humanities.) Which has been a little difficult yet interesting. And detecting moves in different types of writing is a skill that we've been practicing too. I honestly didnt know that a authors choice of inserting things into a piece of writing would be referred to as a 'move'. Now that I understand and am able to decypher moves I look for it in every piece of writing that I read. It's pretty awesome if you ask me. Its really gonna help me in my writing for WP2. And I'll make sure to constantly mention it in my essay also. Overall ive learened alot in these past weeks and I cant believe that this semester is coming to an end so soon.It's only felt like days have passed. 

PB2B

Kassandra Sanchez

11/10/2016

ENG101-108

PB2B

“Go Back To Your Country”

“Go back to your country, you’re stealing our jobs, our lives, our freedom”- every ignant ‘educated’ ‘qualified’ American ever. It seems as though everyone has something to say about immigration nowadays. From those who bathe in dirt to those who bathe in riches. This debate is ongoing and will probably never stop being spoken about. Some say ,that this country was built on the back of immigrants others would object and claim that America belongs to americans not ‘aliens’. In this PB I will be identifying the different players that are involved in this ongoing debate. Also, the organizations and different people that are impacted by this issue . With the help of Shelly Reid’s “Critical Reading Guide”.

Mexicans are the poster children of americans views on immigrants. They are also one of the key players among this debate as they are always being pointed at and mocked. Anglo Saxon southerners are usually the owners of the pointing hand. Making them the other key players to the situation. Notice how I used the word “Anglo Saxon” instead of white or caucasian. I've used this to point out the fact that these people do descend from immigrants who migrated to the states for a plethora of reasons. Just like the Mexican people who in many cases sacrifice their lives to provide a better home, education, lifestyle and environment for their families. But these are just my views on the subject.

Not all southern Anglo Saxon’s think or act the same. Some don't really care about immigrants and their place in society. While others feel strongly about the subject and make it a point for their voice to be heard. “Wetback, Jumping Bean” All though this may sound very vulgar to a northerner it's a very common term used to refer to a Mexican American in the south. In the north “Immigrants” aren’t judged as much instead they’re encouraged. Jobs are scarce in some regions and I understand that. Immigrants will work jobs in any condition for lower wages ultimately taking jobs everywhere because they will do anything. The frustration mixed with anger is relatable, I would hate for a job to be taken from me by someone who isn’t qualified. Yet it’s still not right to blame people who want to make money and live a steady life just as you want to do.

In my personal experience have never seen a Mexican beg for money. Neither have I heard of them living off of government services. Instead you see them at Home Depot trying to find work. Or selling tortas and quesadillas just to bring home money to feed their own children. It’s hard to live below the ‘resident’ status in a country that claims to be run by the people and adhere to everyone’s voice yet does not allow them to speak. A actress on the famous show “Orange is The New Black” is the daughter of immigrants. She one day came home from highschool to find that her house was empty. She had to find out from a neighbor that her parents were deported. They screamed at officers to allow them to contact her school to talk to her, but they were denied because, they're not ‘american’. So she spent years being tossed around from foster home to foster home. This just goes to show what immigrants go through in the ‘land of the free’.

One question that has yet to be answered is “what would happen to businesses if their workers are deported?” Many CEO’s and Investors tend to hire Mexicans to work for lower wages when building and running a business. But what will happen if they’re deported? I feel like they would probably crumble. If you have a constant working flow of workers who you're paying under the minimum wage gap and they are suddenly taken, you have to find others who will give the same attitude and effort for the same price. Which isn't likely at all. Instead wages will have to be higher and benefits would be implemented. Costing the business owner thousands of dollars ultimately destroying his business from the inside out.

In conclusion, although my mind was set on defending one side of the argument, my eyes were kinds opened to what the other side may be feeling. Using the “Doubting and Believing” strategy really did help me write. And it’s made my argument a lot stronger. Now I can definitely say ‘this country was built on the back of immigrants’ with confidence. Im not saying that im right nor that im wrong. I'm just stating what I believe is to be “self evident that all men are created equal”. Disagree with me if you want but make sure to see both side of this argument then think again.

PB2A

Kassandra Sanchez

ENG 101-108

PB2A

11/09/2016

In this PB I will be analyzing moves made by historian Kevin Gannon in his article “I Will Not Argue About The Confederate Flag”

“Introducing an ongoing debate” is one of the first moves Gannon uses in the beginning of his article. I say this because the constant use of the words ‘besides’ and ‘also’ creates a second perspective of a problem and or introducing the problem. “Besides being a monumental tragedy, also gave us the absurd spectacle of South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley (a woman of color) telling us “that we’ll never understand what motivates anyone to enter one of our places of worship and take the life of another””

He also -in parenthesis- points out that South Carolina’s Governor is a woman of color, This move would be referred to  as “signaling who’s saying what”. He is quoting what someone else has said and he does this throughout the entire article because although he is a historian and can openly write about this topic, he uses examples and quotations from others. This use of quotation helps amplify and solidify his argument and or claim. It also allows him to give his input about the quote. As to if he does or does not agree.

”But I am a historian of the Civil War and Reconstruction Eras, and I am qualified to engage with the arguments marshaled in defense of the Confederate Flag now intensifying in reaction to the critical voices emanating from throughout the country.” ‘I am’ is used consistently in this paragraph and it’s used in a very defensive tone. He is stating that he’s qualified to debate and weigh in on this kind of taboo subjects. Which is why I would say that this move falls in the category of  “Introducing Objections Informally”.It creates a sense of trust in the author for the readers. Because he does know what he’s talking about and what he’s saying. And instead of referring to a textbook or historical event, he can create an argument and use whatever evidence or experiences he wants.

The fact that he took an actual stand on such a taboo topic and was able to back it up in his writing was very professional. “When I was completing my Ph.D. at the University of South Carolina in Columbia, the flag actually flew atop the state house dome, along with the US and state flags. In 2000, me and fifteen thousand or so of my closest friends marched on the capitol to demand the flag be removed.” The wording like ‘march on the capitol’ and ‘demand the flag be removed’ gives his tone more spice or as some would say ‘edge’. Since he has already fought in opposition to the flag he is qualified to write in opposition to the flag.

“It is here and now that I will formally make my stand. And I urge my fellow historians to make theirs as well.”  Gannon is establishing his point and standing for what he believes in. This move separates him from other historians who stick to standard ‘formal’ writing. He begins his arguments then separately explains why he believes in it, in another paragraph. And it's very strange yet very cool. He uses pictures and memes in his article too which grabs my attention.

In conclusion Gannon’s moves are strange yet very intentional. It allows the reader to dig deeper into the author's meaning and it makes the readers question “why did he do this?”.


Cites
Gannon Article