Summary/ Strong Response Questions

Where do I agree with the author?

I somewhat agree with the article "Chick Flick Paradox" by Natalia Thompson, when she talks about how most chick flicks don't have any basis in reality. Yes, most movies would probably never actually happen the way they would in the movies. Most chick flicks are too exaggerated and boasting the fact that their characters found love.

Where do I disagree with the author?

Even though I agreed with the fact that most chick flicks are very over exaggerated and probably never would actually happen, I don't agree that they are pointless and should be under the criticism of feminist writers. I personally love watching chick flick movies, whether it is with a boyfriend or just the girls. There is no harm in watching people fall in love or movie about family or friendship. Honestly, I think feminist writers are too adsorbed in trying to judge every piece of entertainment that they have no time to actually enjoy what they are watching or are too busy to actually experience anything that goes on in the chick flicks that they are watching.

Who is the intended audience, what is the writer's purpose, how well does the text suit its particular audience and purpose?

Natalia Thompson most likely aimed her article, "Chick Flick Paradox" at other feminist writers or any other person who would agree with her point of view. Thompson was trying to give her two senses about how chick flick movies are just a way for the box offices to make money and how they have no basis in reality. Most feminist writers would probably agree with her article, and most likely any boy or girl who genuinely doesn't like watching chick flicks. Even if a boy liked watching them, they would agree because chick flicks are girlie and not good for a man to watch. But because these few groups are who the article was intended for I suppose that her article would do a fine job of the text suiting the audience and its purpose.

How well does the author persuade readers that he/she is knowledgeable, reliable, credible, and trustworthy?

I think that the author, Natalia Thompson, did a very good job at convincing the readers that she was credible. If I wasn't told that she was still in high school I would have had a hard time figuring out she was as young as she is. Her writing was filled with her opinion but also opinions of others which made her writing reliable and trustworthy. However, because she is still in high school, she probably wouldn't be as credible as some other feminist writers who have already made a name for themselves and who are older.

Practice Summary

"The Chick Flick Paradox" written by Natalia Thompson discusses her discomfort with "chick flicks" and the way women are portrayed in them. She expresses that she believes that romantic movies are "uncomfortably stereotypical portrayals of gender, race and sexuality detract from their otherwise rosy glow." Thompson then goes on to say that chick flicks aren't made to address real issues with women but to make more money for the box offices. Thompson, being a feminist writer, believes that chick flicks are better than "dick flicks" because they don't focus on violence and sexist views. However, she does not believe that watching something that doesn't have any place in reality is a waste of time. Natalia sums up her article by saying that movies should focus on the real lives of women not romantic, rosy realities that most people will never see.

**sorry i was very sick last night and i tried to go to bed early and feel better in the morning but it got worse as the night went on. i apologize and i will try to get to class tomorrow!

Allyn and Bacon Blog

Chapter One- Thinking Rhetorically About Good Writing

One thing that I found interesting was on page six when it talks about the three major concepts to good writing. The first concept is "Good writing can vary from closed to open forms of prose." The second concept is "Good writers pose questions about their subject matter," and the third concept reads, “Good writers write for a purpose to an audience within a genre." I picked this part because in all of education, this is the first time I have seen these concepts before. I have heard about asking questions while you’re writing but the other two I was completely unfamiliar with and didn't really understand them.

Another thing I found interesting about this chapter is the chart on page 16 and 17. I am a visual learner so I definitely liked seeing the questions generated for the writing in front of me. When I was reading the paragraphs before the charts I was a little confused about what the writer was talking about. However, once I saw the chart I easily understood the concept. There are also many other charts which helped me understand the other concepts mentioned in the chapter.

Chapter Two- Thinking Rhetorically About Your Subject Matter

On page 29 I saw the heading "Professors value "wallowing in complexity."" I was taught this concept by my English teacher in High School. In High School this concept was not my favorite, probably because it was drilled into my head for almost the whole year. She really taught us to go into high level thinking and push ourselves to think outside of our comfort zone. Even though it wasn’t my favorite topic in school it made me a better writer and I’m glad I know what the book is talking about, it makes me feel like it wasn’t a complete waste of time learning it in school.

From page 32 to 38, I liked reading about all of the different ways to focus your writing. Sometimes a get frustrated writing because I don’t know how to start a paper or focus all of my thoughts. These strategies were different ways to help me focus my ideas and use creative ways to write. All of them are stress-free and somewhat fun to do, like the idea mapping or the believing and doubting game. I would consider using these different strategies to start and focus my own writing.