Portfolio

                                                                 Cover Letter:

Dear Classmates,

            It was hard- very hard- to choose only a few of the projects we did over the last year to revise, “remix,” and to list as hits or a misses. First and foremost, there was the revision. With 95% on two papers and 97% on the other, the task of setting aside one as the piece with the most room for improvement was honestly, a little heart breaking. How could I turn my back on one of these papers, each of which I put so much effort into? In the end, though, I settled on the Literary Analysis, entitled “The Startling Negativity of Jean Shepard’s ‘Endless Streetcar Ride into the Night, and the Tinfoil Noose.’” From my memory, I had the most trouble fine-tuning this piece, and the comments encouraged me to expand my support of the quotes. Here, I’ve added more discussion of the excerpts, and changed up the word choice through metaphors and images in the additions.

 All that being said, the easiest piece to assign was my Research Paper, entitled “The Second: For You and I, or Soldiers Only?” to the “remix.” The suggestion of a billboard struck me. Which of my papers held the most interest to the public and would be simple to display in an eye-catching, appealing, understandable, logical way, such as a billboard? The answer was sitting right in front of me. What is a hotter public and political topic than the debate over the Second Amendment gun rights? In my billboard, I have aligned pictures representing each side of the debate, paralleling the arrangement of my paper, hung an image of the opening words of the Constitution, “We the People,” above the pictures, and captioned it all with the ultimate conclusion of my paper: “it’s our choice.” In my opinion, the billboard is a success. He who is ill informed as to the national hotspot of gun control, may find it a bit confusing, but a deeper look (i.e. my paper) would pull back any curtains of mystery.

Lastly, came the calls on my hits and my misses. This was, by far, the most difficult part of this assignment. How could I label something I put careful thought into a miss? However, in a through inspection of my pieces my first miss was my literacy narrative. Why? Even though I got a 95% on the paper, and in the moment I was proud of the work, looking back, I feel like something is missing. It is well worded, and gets my point across, but in retrospect it could have been better. My other papers have overshadowed it, despite receiving nearly the same grade across the board. My second miss is even more difficult to name than the first. However reaching far back into my blog, I found the post “In Defense of Little Brothers: A Big Sister’s Manifesto.” While this blog was generally good, and I did put a lot of thought in to it, I find that I could have portrayed the sibling relationship between my brother and I in a better way.

As for hits, the first one was obvious: my research paper. Not only did I enjoy working on it because I am passionate about its subject, but I also found it challenging. I was constantly coming up with counter arguments and things I would personally consider absurd to contribute to the overall conclusion. I feel that I kept up the passion throughout the paper, not fading as the assignment wore on. More than any other paper, I have a lot of pride invested in the research assignment. I truly enjoyed writing that paper.

The second hit is a bit harder to designate. However, in my search of my blog, I ran across what I at the time simply called “Free Post 3,” but now I should refer to it as “LSU vs. Bama.” Even for its overall lack of significance to the greater story of the world and meaning of life, this little blurb about the mixed feelings of an LSU fan and SEC die-hard turned out far better than expected. I distinctly recall sitting on the couch with my feet propped on the coffee table, listening intently as the Game Day hosts blabbed about the chance for an LSU upset. The fact that I can tell you where I was, what I was doing, who was in the room, and what the weather was like while I composed that blog, says something to me. Therefore, I list “LSU vs. Bama” among my hits.

Overall through the year I know that I have become a more developed writer. One thing that stands out to me as particularly improved is my ability to conclude a piece in a way that leaves the reader thinking and considering what I’ve said. At the beginning of the year, I was a decent writer. I’ve always liked writing. I would rather write a paper than take a test. As far as grades, I could give you what you asked for, plus a little bit, receive a solid “A,” and walk away happy. Now, with another year under my belt, I find that I want more than a grade. I want my words to mean something. I don’t want someone to read my work, or, more likely, skim your eyes over the black characters on the page without giving any attention to the meaning and efforts put into them, and move on. I have the need to make a difference in someone or something. If that means you read my research paper and are suddenly, intensely aware of the gun rights debate, then I have succeeded. If that means you read one of my reading response blogs, and go read other reviews of the book, before reading the actual thing, then I have succeeded. If that means you listen to me reading aloud anything I have composed and you walk away lost in your own thoughts about the meaning of my words, then- then- I have succeeded.

Sincerely,

 Mary Beth

                                                           Revision:

The Startling Negativity of Jean Shepherd’s “The Endless Streetcar Ride into the Night, and the Tinfoil Noose”

            Even in a society obsessed with the lives of its celebrities, few people will ever take the time to wonder what set those stars apart, what essential quality the rest of the population is lacking. The answer? Very little, according to Jean Shepherd. In “The Endless Streetcar Ride into the Night, and the Tinfoil Noose,” Shepherd presents his distaste for the distinct division in society through figurative language, historical examples, and a personal anecdote. His sarcastic humor and degrading descriptions of both the “dynamic molders of the Universe” and “the accursed, anonymous Audience” demonstrate that distaste in a darkly negative tone (167).

In what serves as his thesis statement, Shepherd introduces the two sides of today’s society: “They are the Prime Ministers, the Presidents, Cabinet Members, Stars, and dynamic molders of the Universe, while we remain forever the onlookers, the applauders of their real lives” (167). His disgust in the rift is shown quickly by the sentence, which lists the most important people in the world individually, while lumping the other billions of citizens into one, unimportant category. They receive no individual recognition. They are passed over as the crowd and the masses, their importance minimal in the life of the world. On the contrary, each named person or group holds a high position in the eyes of the world, being watched and followed by thousands. Shepherd keeps up this image of a performer-audience relationship, as he goes on to title the second group “the accursed, anonymous Audience” (167). He takes offense at the lack of attention given to the average citizen. Clearly, if all people, each of whom came into the world as a helpless baby, fall into one of these categories, there must be a place where the path splits, and children are sent to their destined group. Shepherd states the question directly: “When did I make that first misstep that took me forever to the wrong side of the street, to become eternally a part of the accursed, anonymous Audience?” (167). The image is clear from the question, and the reader senses that this divide is dreadful and menacing, yet unavoidable. Shepherd sets the scene up like a playwright, showing his reader exactly how he envisions the injustice of the situation, carefully leading up to the conclusion that what he speaks of is an inevitable inequality of the world. Disgust rolls off of Shepherd’s pen throughout the tale.

As his story progresses, Shepherd becomes an artist at his easel, sketching enormous amounts of figurative language into his telling. From similes and metaphors, to allusions and personification, imagery becomes a choice medium on the canvas of this story. In the first paragraph Shepherd mentions his two groups of people “all marching together up that long yellow brick road of life” (167), alluding to the famous story, The Wizard of Oz. Later, he refers to the adults of the unimportant category as “grizzled, hardened, tax-paying beetle[s]” (168), including himself in the group. Not long after that, he launches into a metaphor about his emotional state at age fourteen: “Sometimes you feel as though you are alone in a rented rowboat, bailing like mad in the darkness with a leaky bailing can” (168), further dampening the mood. Next he personifies his pants, “…cascading down finally to grasp my ankles in a vise-like grip” (169), making them both ridiculous and almost violent. Among the many examples of figurative language, nearly every one has a negative tone, and the imagery they provide lends dark sarcasm to the piece. While clearly humorous, it is a twisted humor that suggests Shepherd is not being entirely facetious. Such an interpretation is worrisome to the reader, and leaves them still pondering the words long after the end of their reading. Figurative language here paints a brilliant, if gloomy, picture. It throws the readers into the scene, forcing them to share the depressing rejections and somber mood with Shepherd.

Also adding to this dark voice are the two historical examples. The first reference is of Joseph Stalin, no doubt one of the world’s major leaders, but also a man responsible for a gruesome part of Russian history. As a leader of Soviet Russia, Stalin moved the country towards industrial power to the tune of executions and exiles. He strove for complete socialism at any costs, defended his land viciously, and tyrannically ruled the USSR. Fittingly, he is associated with Nazi Germany, and the next of Shepherd’s examples: Adolf Hitler. Hitler, the notorious fascist ruler of Germany and persecutor of Jews, is mentioned later, adding to the negative description of the higher class. His terrible deeds of torture and death are undermined by Shepherd, who uses, of all things, his handshake and smile to tell the reader that it is certainly not social skills dividing the two classes of people: “Adolf Hitler had a notoriously weak handshake. His smile was, if anything, a vapid mockery. But inevitably his star zoomed higher and higher” (167-168). The common knowledge of the works of the two leaders mentioned is overlooked. According to Shepherd’s account, we should take from them that we are not destined for greatness or a life in the shadows by pure personality or natural ability. Apparently, it is much simpler than that, a fact which is dismal at best. Shepherd chose his references carefully, staying within the dreary and depressing tone.

The next literary device employed by Shepherd comes as a personal anecdote. After finally stating that the distinction between the stars and the average Joes is their reactions to a few, unexpected, blinding moments of truth I (that is, a small moment where it is suddenly thrown upon a person that they are not so incredibly special, but, on the contrary, exceptionally average) he begins his own story, writing, “I caught the first one full in the face when I was fourteen” (168). He goes on describing a blind date, painting himself vividly to look and act absolutely foolish. He realizes too late that he is the blind date, and his reaction is to shrink into himself, placing him forever in the audience, never to have the spotlight shown on him again. This, his first moment of truth, is relatable to the reader, and yet it is disheartening that such a small incident could shape your future, as Shepherd suggests. The anecdote personalizes the piece, backing his argument with an experience of embarrassment. Experience transforms a telling that could easily be taken as an extended complaint, making it an argument difficult to refute.

Throughout his writing, Shepherd is degrading and dark, negativity plainly a focus of his account. From comparing people to beetles, to making fun of himself, Shepherd uses his “practiced offhand, cynical, cutting, sardonic humor” (170) to further add to the gloom. He begins putting people down in his first sentences, writing, “Mewling, puking babes. That’s the way we all start. Damply clinging to someone’s shoulder, burping weakly, clawing our way into life” (167). Every word is used to carefully set up the tone of the story. Unusual but effective word choices such as “mewling” and “damply clinging” immediately catch the attention of the reader and prepare the scene for a dark, depressing tale. Shepherd keeps up his prudent wording, never leaving out a syllable that would enhance his intended affect, but never adding an unnecessary phrase. Though he is obviously jealous of the “molders of the Universe” (167), he does not refrain from insulting his own group and himself. As previously stated, he describes his attire so proudly, from an electric blue blazer to the giant red snail on his tie, but them image is absurd. These examples all further add to the dark humor of Shepherd’s writing.

While thought provoking and startling, “The Endless Streetcar Ride into the Night, and the Tinfoil Noose” is also a bit scary. It leaves the reader wondering for days if they have crossed Shepherd’s hypothetical street, or if the potential still remains that they might get a spot in the light, rather than a seat in the shadows. The answer, apparently for many of us, is no, there is no chance. Shepherd’s negativity does not leave room for hopefulness or confidence. If anything, the reader feels the need to shrink back into himself more than ever. Shepherd’s is a sharp knife, and he effectively manipulates it to get at the reader’s heart with pessimism rivaling that of a doomsday prediction.

From beginning to end, Jean Shepherd meticulously paints a depressing portrait of the world. He is careful to maintain the pessimism of his telling, using his humor, his imagery, and his personal account to make one, fairly simple point: the world is not fair, and little of our fate is left up to us. The negativity flows out of the piece, and sets the reader thinking deep inside “the dark dungeons of our souls” (167). Shepherd effectively raises a point that many would never think about, or at least not question: what made them so important?

Works Cited

Shepherd, Jean. “The Endless Streetcar Ride into the Night, and the Tinfoil Noose,” English I. Ed. Edwards and deGravelles. San Diego, CA: University Readers, 2012. 167-172. Print.

Reflection of Writing Center Visit:

Going to the writing center was a new experience for me. I had never been before, and, going in, was a little nervous about the process, even though I was confident in my work. I wasn’t sure I would really get anything out of it, or find it helpful at all. However, the “fellow” that helped me was Kiddie Matthews, a good friend and teammate of mine. This fact alone calmed the nerves and made the whole experience more helpful. She had me read my paper out loud and explain each quotation in turn, and helped me to come to my own conclusions. I quickly realized where more was needed to analyze this quote, or to explain that historical example. Though I went in a skeptic, I found the writing center to be quite helpful in the end. One thing I was a bit surprised by was the lack of revision Kiddie thought I needed to make to my word choice. Therefore, most of the word choice editing came through the additions to support, where I used more metaphors and different structures to keep up a good variety.

               

     Remix: "The Second: For You and I, or Soldiers Only?"

Analysis of Rhetorical Situation:

          From my research paper, I have created a billboard in the effort of reaching a widespread and varying audience. The publicity of billboards makes them ideal for communicating ideas to large audiences. For my particular piece, my goal was to impact said large audience, as the topic of gun rights and gun control impacts all Americans. I have carefully pulled figures and images recognizable to most American adults to demonstrate the greater meaning of the billboard. The audience did not change much from my original piece. Obviously, it is wider and more far-reaching, but in general it remained American adults. The medium I chose (i.e. a billboard) lent itself to graphic design and arrangement. After creating an idea for the overall design and gathering the images, most of my time working on this particular project was spent formatting it for the best possible effect.

          Stance was the trickiest part of my research paper to display. I put a lot of effort into making my original report clean of personal bias, and therefore felt that I needed to stay within that zone for the "remix." The design of my billboard further reflects this unbiased approach. I have the same number of pictures representing each side of the debate, and the largest image is that of "We the People." My captioning words "It's our choice," also add the greater stance that no matter what the final decision on government gun control is, it should ultimately be up to "We The People."

Hits and Misses:

Hit 1: Research Paper: "The Second: For You and I, or Soldiers Only?"

Hit 2: "LSU vs. Bama" http://marybeth47.blogspot.com/2012/11/free-post-3.html

Miss 1: Literacy Narrative: "Read to Write"

Miss 2: "In Defense of Little Brothers: A Big Sister's Manifesto" http://marybeth47.blogspot.com/2012/08/in-defense-of-little-brothers-big.html