Digging Deeper
Digging Deeper
Throughout my schooling, it has always been very hard for me to start my essays. When trying to start an essay, I have caught myself daydreaming about saving a six-year-old boy who had just fallen off of the Huntington Beach Pier or about how my life would change if someone walked into the classroom and gave me four billion dollars. Even when I do come up with ideas, my doubts subjugate the confidence I had for the essay. I usually end up deleting what little I did have. In fact, this is the sixth time I’ve started this reflection.
When we got assigned our descriptive essay, I started out as usual: Whom do I write about? Should I make someone up? It took me a while, but I finally decided to make this one about my grandpa and him taking me to Hof’s Hut.
As I told my stories, I dug for description. I noticed (also a skill I developed in this class) that I didn’t need to fluff up my essay. As I wrote exactly how everything was, it fluffed itself up; it was real fluff. I noticed that my sentences started to have more meaning, or so I thought.
This was the first essay I have ever written that I was proud to turn in. I felt proud of it, but it wasn’t done. It wasn’t until I got feedback from Mr. Ziebarth that I realized the deeper meaning in my sentences. The deeper meaning did not come in the descriptive sentences as I had thought:
“Lifting it with my bare hands and ignoring the barbecue sauce slowly dribbling down my hand, I took a bite of perfectly cooked, juicy meat, smearing more sauce on my small, soft cheeks.”
They came in the simple, honest descriptions of my grandpa’s actions:
“We all reach over for his fries as he willingly lets us dip them in his chocolate malt.”
I had never before realized where the deeper meaning came from. As I dug past the simple description, I didn’t need to pay any attention to the doubts I had. The point I was trying to make about my love for my grandpa and his kindness brought itself out in the small details.
Finding the “Right” Answer
When we began reading The Catcher in the Rye, I felt like everything I said was wrong. Almost every time I made a comment, I didn’t feel like I connected with anyone else. I wanted it to change.
I recall Mr. Ziebarth asked us this question: Is Holden leaning more towards adulthood or childhood at the end of the novel?
My first thought was that he was leaning toward adulthood but I couldn’t find much evidence for it. Nagging at me was the thought from deep down inside that said I was wrong because I was always wrong. I became frustrated. I decided it was a lot easier to go with childhood because it seemed to have clear evidence as Holden returned to all his favorite childhood places. I tried to justify my decision with the wrong reasons: My first instinct was probably wrong anyway, right? That’s how it’s always been.
When I commented, I didn’t feel like anyone was satisfied with my response. I heard silence and saw uninterested slouches. Immediately after me, as if the blank stares weren’t enough to boost my self-confidence, Elise commented on why she thought Holden was leaning toward adulthood. I loved it. She wasn’t even done explaining herself before I knew she was right. Why couldn’t I think like that? Why couldn’t I ever be right?
If there is one thing I’ve learned through the course of this English class, it’s that you are rarely ever wrong. You might have a different opinion than someone else. You might disagree. You might be too abstract in your argument. You might not know how to express yourself. Wrong doesn’t have a place in opinion if you have evidence and support for your writing.
This became clear to me when we started the Question Exploration posts for The Scarlet Letter. I was able to create small excerpts of work that I was proud of. I realized that the only way to be wrong is to not show that you’re right.
Embracing Differences
When our class read Disturb me, Please! by Margaret J. Wheatley, I connected with it very quickly. I loved the idea that we could be “brought together by our differences rather than separated by them.” I was able to further develop this idea with my family at a reunion. My parents found a packet that talks about some cognitive distortions that contribute to negative feelings and bad relationships. After discussing all of the patterns, my family was able to connect on a higher level.
For example, a few of the patterns were blaming, using words like “should’ve” and “ought to have”, and all or nothing thinking (“if something falls short of perfect, you see it as a total failure”). After the discussion, my dad told my sister, “You should’ve played trump” (we were playing a card game). Immediately everyone started shouting things like “should, could, would!”; “All or nothing thinking!”; and “blaming!”. We were able to laugh together as we learned how to treat others and communicate.
Get Tyler Huffmire [Student FVHS]’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
This relates to Wheatley’s essay because people will always disagree and have differences, but until we embrace those differences and communicate, we can’t connect with others.
One of the ideas in the packet to help communication was to use some acronyms. FAST is short for fair, apologies, stick to standards, and truthful. In order to communicate, we do not need to agree with others. This acronym will help with keeping your standards and expressing what you want. You must be fair to yourself and the opposing opinion. You should never apologize for having an opinion. Apologies may be necessary for bad deeds done but it is okay to have an opinion. You need to keep your standards while the other person might be trying to persuade you. And lastly, you need to be true to yourself and what you believe.
Another acronym used to understand others and maintain relationships is GIVE. GIVE stands for gentle, interested, validate, and easy mannered. When trying to maintain a good relationship, it is best to speak kindly with gentle words, be interested and open-minded about their point of view, validate their opinion and try to see their point of view, and finally, stay calm and don’t raise your voice.
The last acronym we learned was how to negotiate with others. This acronym is DEAR MAN. Describe the situation so that you and your audience are on the same page. Express how you feel about the situation. Be assertive and direct with what you want. Don’t assume people know what you’re talking about. Reinforce good behavior by saying things like “thank you” if they validate your opinion. Be mindful of the topic and don’t deviate from the goal. Appear confident so the person you are talking to knows you are taking it seriously. Lastly, negotiate a deal that would make both people happy.
I asked my dad how this would help me in my future. He told me of a story where he disagreed with someone else and used the skills to nicely and respectfully express his opinion and the conversation went very well.
The other thought I had was that our whole country is built on this idea of disagreeing. Disagreeing is just different people having different points of view and different concerns. When we are able to communicate our concerns and listen to others, we can learn to negotiate and satisfy the needs of the majority. This is how The Constitution and The Declaration of Independence were made. This country and its success in the future is dependent on youth knowing that it is okay to disagree and knowing how to communicate their concerns with others.
Persuading the World
During the first semester, we wrote a letter to Governor Newsom telling him our position on certain subjects. I was able to learn a lot about persuasion and the appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos.
Recently in New York, a law was passed allowing abortion up until the baby is born. I found a source by Dan Andros that has an opinion completely against this law and I was able to recognize how he used different forms of persuasion to try to convince his audience that this law is disastrous.
Andros starts out his article with an attempt to convey his credibility when he tells us that “[he] showed how human development begins from the very moment of conception.” This attempt may be sufficient for uneducated people but in reality, does not show enough evidence to convey his full credibility.
He then transitions into an appeal to the reader’s sense of care and moral. He tells us that in these horrific videos, “staffers laughed as they pulled babies apart limb by limb.” The author also uses blunt diction like “Of course not” and “more than ever” to show his urgency and passion for this topic.
Andros also appeals to the reader’s sense of logic by giving them scientific evidence and data. “By week EIGHT, all structures are present in the human body.” In his video, he uses repetition of the word “human” to emphasize that the things people are killing when they have an abortion are HUMAN BEINGS.
Andros’ urgency and intensity in his passage cause the reader to become as flustered as himself. This is ultimately Dan Andros’ goal because he wants to fire his readers up enough to have them share his story and inform others of this atrocity.
After analyzing this article, I wondered what kinds of forms of persuasion an opposing side might use. So, I found this article on CNN.
In this source, the main mode of persuasion is logic and the appeal to the audience’s belief in freedom. There is no evidence for the author trying to appeal to emotion. This is understandable seeing that the only emotional aspect of abortion is the part they don’t want you to think about: killing babies. Likewise, there is no attempt to show credibility. Although, a reader might establish the credibility of the author from what they know about the source’s company.
Instead, this article focuses only on the appeal to logic and natural rights. The author uses patriotic diction such as “to ensure a woman’s right” and “this would protect doctors” to connect with the people whom they think the law would positively affect.
Between the two, I am more convinced from the first article which was against abortion. Despite my bias- I don’t think it’s right to kill babies whether you think they’re alive or not- I noticed how the source with three different attempts to persuade was more convincing than the source that only tried one way.
Recognizing My Success
This English class has helped me understand the English language to a whole new level and through practicing everything from the aspects of persuasion to style analysis, I was able to come up with this reflection. I feel that this is my best work that I have ever produced because instead of fluffing it up with unnecessary and fake detail, I was able to include details that contribute to the purpose of my reflection.
Until I put effort into this reflection, I never really understood how we were supposed to show, rather than tell, our claims. I put more emphasis on my small actions and attitudes like how my family and I laughed together while we learned.
I have also learned the value of feedback and how much it can help improve an essay. Another point of view can be very significant, especially if they disagree. I love getting feedback because as the writer, I have the choice to change my essay if I want to or keep it the same.
I’ve come to realize that I am capable of so much more than the work I’ve been producing all my life. I can’t go back. I don’t think I could settle for any less than my best.
