Response to Jane Mcgonigal Speech_B. Busche

Jane Mcgonigal's speech on how gamers can change the world, to me, was riveting. She used statistics to support he key points, used subjects that each member in the audience could relate to, used credible sources and studies, and proved her experience at the end by showing the audience three games that she designed and created. Mcgonigal has an incredible delivery and style throughout the speech and used the slideshow in the background as a visual aid. The order in which she chose to present her speech was phenomenal as well due to the fact that she organizes her topics into an order that first appeals to gamers alone, then appeals to all groups of people through demonstrating the helpfulness of gaming towards benefitting the real world around us. Throughout her speech she constantly adds statistics, facts, or studies done by credible institutions in order to back up her speech. She references the idea that games are so satisfying due to the fact that there is always positive feed back, success is guaranteed, and we as players are more happy working hard for something in the game than we are being lazy in real life. A constant reason for gaming is to shut out an unsatisfying world in order to be accepted by other people or even programs. Mcgonigal strives to prove to people that gaming can be affective in changing our world for the better, by using the drive that gamers use in everyday games to solve global issues. She states that World of Warcraft has the second larges wiki in the world, only second to Wikipedia. Stating this fact demonstrates just how large and important the gamers of this world are. The speech as a whole was great and I have trouble finding anything wrong with it. All in all, I think the piece was beautifully written and well organized.

'Writers on Writing' précis- Bradyn B.

Bradyn Busche

English 101-Diprince

23 August 22, 2012

Rhetoric Précis

           In his article “Writers On Writing” (2000), Kent Haruf introduces the idea that not all writers go through the same process during the prewriting process that allows them to create masterpieces, they just put themselves in environments that their brains are active and thinking. Haruf supports these ideals by giving examples of each writer’s process such as ‘John Cheever writing some of his early stories in his underwear.’ His purpose is to demonstrate the simplicity of placing your mind in a setting that allows it to think and how greatly it can affect ones writing in order to further the knowledge of his readers about getting ready to create a piece. Based on his undertone humor behind previous writers ‘techniques, Haruf’s audience is a slightly younger audience (most likely in college) that strives to create more analytical, qualitative, and persuading pieces of literature.

Rhetoric Précis- Intro and Chap.1 of Choices

Bradyn Busche

English 101-Diprince

23 August 22, 2012

Rhetoric Précis

            In the intro of his book “Choices 2.0 Situations for College Writing” (2010), Joe Marshall Hardin introduces the idea that writing a great piece of work rarely is done so without hard work, which is contrary to popular belief that most writing is done by genius’ and effortlessly. Hardin supports these ideals by introducing the parts of planning, revising, and grammar and describing each one; through them he can convince the reader that writing is simpler than first believed and can now persuade them to give it a shot. His purpose is to inform the simplicity of writing in order to establish the process in which experienced writers go through in order to further the knowledge of his readers about preparing a piece. His audience is a base of writers trying to create a stronger argument, or more compelling and informative piece by reading this book.

In his first chapter of “Choices 2.0 Situations for College Writing” (2010), Joe Marshall Hardin demonstrates that the writing process (prewriting, drafting, revising, and proofing), Using rhetoric, following the Rhetorical Triangle, using the three appeals (logos, pathos, and ethos), and having a simple argument are the basic components to creating a masterpiece of writing. Hardin supports his claims of the significance of these facets by demonstrating the world renowned Greek philosopher Aristotle’s ideals and also by listing each aspect of the set, then describing it, and relating one another in the grand scheme of creating a masterwork of writing. His purpose is to inform the audience of each step, and persuade them to use these tools in order to allow them to write more impacting pieces. Given the language used by Hardin, he appears to be writing to an audience of a wide area of writers, most likely striving for excellence in their work and are looking for tools allowing them to do so.