So this week we've been focusing on our first major papers, so we thought it would be appropriate to blog about our experiences with that. Some people have been very frustrated with the process; others may have had an easy time writing this paper. We were wondering what each of your personal experiences were with this paper. Was it hard to pick a primary source? Find secondary sources? How was the writing process in general for you? Was it easy to make each source complement each other, or was it difficult to write a coherent paper? Overall, did you enjoy this paper, or was it an awful experience?
Leah: I went into the paper with an open mind, excited to get to write about “Moulin Rouge.” But the overall process turned out to be much more difficult and time consuming than I had expected. I found some great secondary sources, and used Sontag, but I had a lot of trouble connecting each idea I wanted to write about to each other. I got very frustrated when my paper didn’t make sense or fall into place itself like my papers usually do. I had to spend a great deal of time editing and revising my thesis to make everything make sense. I think now I have a better idea of what my paper should focus on, but at first I didn’t even know what my argument was supposed to be. I think the outcome of my paper will be successful and well-written, but the process was much more difficult and frustrating than previous papers I’ve had to write.
Kelly: For my primary source, I used patient accounts that I found on a Fibromyalgia website. This proved to be a little more difficult than using a text by one author I think, because I had to synthesize them all into one argument. I also had difficulty finding a secondary source, but ended up finding several studies that included patient interviews, and those worked. I had a hard time starting this paper, and choosing a topic and argument was difficult for me, but after I got going it became much easier. Now I just have to finish the actual writing part, which is my least favorite part. But it shouldn’t be too hard as I have a good outline for my argument and enough evidence to support it.
I have yet to finish the final draft of my illness essay. Considering my experiences so far, though,it shouldn't be too bad now that I finally have a concentration within my primary source. I didn't have a difficult time finding a primary source; the first book I checked out proved to be very promising, and luckily, there are a lot of secondary sources on testicular cancer and the emotional and societal effects of such. Narrowing down the topic I wanted to focus on within those effects has been the most difficult part. The story I chose to analyze is full of symbolism and implicit references to the metaphors and perceptions that surround testicular cancer, so I had trouble choosing exactly what I should focus on. The confusion of my topic was reflected in my first draft and my first thesis. Yet, after finally deciding to concentrate on masculinity in testicular cancer, I think (or at least hope) my final draft will be more concentrated and thus, more coherent.
ReplyDeleteGeoffrey suggested a book to me, which I found fascinating. It is an oral history of the early AIDS doctors, and I enjoyed reading about the AIDS epidemic from the doctors’ point of view. So, I knew I wanted to do my paper on some aspect of this book; however, I was unsure of how to go about this at first. After revising my thesis several times, I was finally able to come up with something I could build a paper around. Also, although writing the body of the paper has not been that difficult, I feel like I am not doing the book justice, as it is so well written. Another difficulty I have been having is in incorporating my secondary sources. This paper has been very time consuming and difficult to put together, so hopefully it turns out okay.
ReplyDeleteI had a pretty easy time chosing a primary source - I just used "Flowers for Algernon," a book which I had already read and enjoyed and which fit the topic well. The problem was deciding what my central argument should be. It took me a while to determine what the main message of the book was. It was relatively easy to go to the library, find the section of books about mental illness and society, and browse until I found something that seemed applicable; it was much harder to find secondary sources which applied specifically to my book. Once I had all of my information, I had a lot of frustration getting started and incorporating all of the information, and I am still a bit frustrated trying to articulate and support my thesis. However, I found the workshop and my personal visit with Geoffrey very helpful.
ReplyDeleteThis paper has pretty much kicked my butt. I knew that I wanted to write about AIDS in Africa and the United States but I didn't know how to narrow it down. I didn't really have a primary source. Once I found one, I realized I was trying to cover way too much in one paper. I talked to Geoffrey and he helped me narrow it down to a manageable size but I've still been having difficulties with it. My biggest problem is trying to figure out how to use secondary sources to supplement a primary source when you're supposed to be analyzing the primary source. I think something in the process is not quite connecting for me. I'll figure it out. I haven't really found it to be frustrating yet but that might be because I haven't looked at it since we edited them on Wednesday. That's what I will be doing after posting this blog. I have found the paper and information to be very interesting but I am having a hard time articulating myself and putting down my thoughts onto paper. It's definitely been a challenge which has actually been refreshing since last quarter seemed to be more of a review. I'm hoping once I figure this out, it will be a lot easier than it has been!
ReplyDeleteI did not have too much trouble with this paper. At the start I knew I didn't want to write about AIDS of cancer, so I choose to find a primary source on diabetes which is a disease that I know a lot about. I wanted to use a short story that I had read in high school about diabetes in American Indian communities. I couldn’t end up finding the one I had read before but I found another short story and poem by the same author. I had no trouble at all finding sources that backed up the points I was trying to make. The hardest thing for me was rewriting my poorly organized, poorly structured first draft.
ReplyDeleteOverall, the hardest part about the process was trying to get the ideas that I had into words. I also struggled focusing my paper on a central argument. I found it pretty easy to find a primary source. I chose the play, W;t, which I had read, seen, and performed a monologue from a few years ago. It fit the topic really well, but then I had to decide what I specifically wanted to write about. Looking at different secondary sources helped me in that aspect. I was able to see what other people were writing about. However, in the end, I diverged from what my secondary sources said and discussed the humor and its relation to cancer in W;t. So, in order to weave my secondary sources into my paper, I had to make my own claim and show how it differed from previous accounts. This proved to be harder than I had anticipated because I would sit down to write, but fail to find any words to put down. Once I got everything on paper, though, I found it a lot easier to revise the paper overall because I had a purpose and ideas that just needed to be reordered. The argument was there, it just needed tweaking so that it was coherent for the audience.
ReplyDeleteI found the most difficult art of this process was sitting down to actually write the paper. I chose the film i am sam as my primary source and, due to my background in film and video production, was used to writing extensive film analyses. My main concern wasn’t writing about the film because I decided to do it much like I would any other paper of its kind, but without going so far in-depth with it since I had to use it to bolster an argument in five pages. I also had an easy time finding secondary sources; having retrieved several books from the library, I felt as though I had a wide range of materials to choose from. I was most concerned about building a coherent thesis and continually supporting it with my sources, but I found that as I wrote, it all sort of came together. Something interesting that I discovered was that I had difficulty using my secondary sources throughout the paper. I use them primarily as support for the greater theory on which I build my thesis, instead of using them to prop up the thesis throughout the paper. I don’t think this is necessarily an error, but I do need to, in revision, go back to it and refer back to my secondary sources in the end to pull my paper together. Overall, I would say that this was one of the easier papers I’ve written at college, but largely because I felt as though I had a good direction in mind and because I was writing on a topic with which I was familiar
ReplyDeleteWhen we started this project, I knew I wanted to do a disease that was not talked about very often. I therefore chose leprosy because there are a lot of myths surrounding it and it has always been an interesting subject to me. I found an interesting novel about the subject and I had a really good time reading it. Secondary sources were not too difficult to find either. When it came time to write it, however, I didn’t know what my thesis was going to be. I decided to start writing my paper anyway and hope that my thesis would come out as I wrote. The good news was that I did discover my thesis as I wrote. The bad news was that I had written my paper by combining the information from all of my sources rather than by analyzing my primary source and using my secondary sources as support. I went back a few days later and fixed all of my paragraphs so that they were analyzing my primary source. It took a lot of rewriting and a lot of work. After this step, though, I felt that my paper was promising. After a few more revisions, I think my essay will be okay.
ReplyDeleteI found the most difficult part of writing the paper was finding a primary source to base the paper off of. Eventually I found the movie "The Bucket List" which I felt was a good fit for the paper I was planning to write. Since the movie was recently released though, it was difficult to find secondary sources that related directly to the movie. Geoffrey suggested a source that I could use but I wasn't able to obtain much information from that source. I ended up using Sontag's writings as one of my sources along with several others I found through Penrose. All in all I felt the paper wasn't too difficult to write but it was difficult to get the motivation to sit down and write it.
ReplyDeleteI thought the most difficult part of writing this paper was finding secondary sources besides what we had read in class to connect to our primary text. Eventually I found an additional text that commented on the importance of popular figures in breaking the stigma of AIDS. I also had some difficulty in narrowing my paper down to a specific argument i wanted to make. After we did our first peer review in class and the exercise on picking important sentences then guessing the thesis I was able to develop my claim much better and make this more evident in my final text. Overall I didn't feel like the paper was too difficult, I just got hung up on certain parts of my writing and searching for secondary sources.
ReplyDelete