Tantiwassadakran 1
Alan Tantiwassadakran
Writing 39B
Greg McClure
3 March 2017
During my ten weeks in Professor Greg McClure s Writing 39B class, I learned
many new attributes that I can take into my future writing classes . Throughout the entire
course, we were challenged to analyze multiple texts and create our own engaging
texts and stories. I learned countless useful tools during the course , but the main take-
aways I received from the course were how to comprehend rhetoric , how to close-text
analyze, and how to improve my communication skills through different
medias/mediums. We read texts, had discussions, and created our own stories to
sharpen our new knowledge of the take-aways I mentioned . The main novel we read for
rhetorical analysis was I Am Legend, by Richard Matheson, and to learn about the
horror genre we read articles like Nol Carroll s The Nature of Horror. The Rhetorical
Analysis Essay was an instrumental assignment in our class to allow us demonstrate
our knowledge of rhetoric and how to identify an author s intentions. The Rhetoric in
Practice Project/Video gave us a chance to display our creativity, while incorporating
our knowledge of the horror genre and its expectations . In this reflection essay, I will
talk about my overall impressions/progress of the course and myself as a writer , my
Tantiwassadakran 1
own drafting process and experience, how I revised my own work, and how I intend to
apply what I learned in my future classes and life .
When I first entered Professor McClures class I initially felt that I was not
capable of the demands and challenges that Writing 39B brought . Through patience
and willingness to learn, I believe I brought myself to be proficient in understanding and
analyzing rhetoric. In the first few weeks of the course, I felt that I could not grasp the
concept of identifying an authors/creators rhetoric. For instance, in the assignment
where we had to analyze Trent Reznors and Johnny Cashs version of the song Hurt, it
was quite evident that I was still unsure of what I was doing and I had no clue of either
of the twos rhetorical situation. It took me about two weeks to get a better
comprehension of rhetoric. We had an assignment to watch and then respond to a short
horror film named No Way Out, by Kristoffer Aaron Morgan. This assignment is where I
felt I hit my stride in terms of identifying and understanding an author s rhetoric. I made
assertions not only about what was going on in the film , but also about the underlying
metaphorical messages Morgan was trying to get across to his audience . I think a
combination of things learned in the class gave me more insight to rhetoric . Reading,
writing, and analyzing became common to me and I believe this is a huge reason why
my progress as a writer improved. Articles like The Nature of Horror, by Nol Carroll
gave me a better of the horror genre and its expectation , while the countless
Tantiwassadakran 1
assignments where we had to analyze rhetoric gave me a better understanding of
rhetoric in general.
Every time a new assignment presented itself, Professor McClure required us to
make drafts before turning in a final product. Drafting was essential for making a
persuasive and adequate essay. I feel that rhetorical analysis, in particular, requires the
writer to draft extensively since the discussed materials are exceedingly dense . In most
new assignments, I started rhetorical analysis with the same set of rules . I would do the
following in order: Read, analyze, re-read, question, then finally write. Every time I read
for the first time, I would think about the superficial aspect of what the author wrote . I
would read with this question in my mind: What would the average person think about
the words I am reading?. In the analyzation phase I, would attempt to start to delve
deeper into the mind of the author. The analyzation phase and questioning phase
usually happen simultaneously. I read while thinking about possible metaphors ,
symbols, and hidden messages, this is the hardest part in my opinion of this whole
process. Many times, I found myself re-reading the text to re-question and think about
the authors intentions from different angles. When we read, I Am Legend, I caught
myself doing this very process without having prior thought about it , so I stuck with it. I
felt that my methods worked well and kept me engaged while reading . Previously, I
would only read texts superficially and not think twice about an author s intention.
Tantiwassadakran 1
A key component that Professor McClure incorporated in our class was the
revision process. We had to revise ourselves and our peers works numerous times
during the course. I felt this was an underrated portion of the class . It was important to
revise our work to refresh our thinking and look at it from a different angle overall . I
cannot account for my classmates, but in my own revision process I had a step-wise
structure. It mainly involves questioning my work over and over again , but the steps I
like to start with include: writing, questioning, revising, taking a break, then repeating.
The break portion in revising is crucial, in my opinion, since it gives myself time to sleep
on the subject and refresh my thoughts when I come back to it . It allows for me to
realize mistakes and helps me interpret thoughts differently and have a different and
better understanding.
The techniques and skills I learned throughout the course can no doubt be
applied in my later college years. The most obvious one being analyzing texts, but
another notable thing that I will take me is the revision process. Before this class I
revised my works, but not nearly as extensive like the way I did in this course. I think the
main reason it was not as effective in my previous classes was because I simply did not
do it as much. In Writing 39B, basically all the assignments brought along a revision of
some sort. As I leave this class, I know one thing will stick with me in all my classes. I
know see films, texts, and novels through a different lens due to rhetorical analysis. I no
Tantiwassadakran 1
longer see things superficially and I instead, actively engage in thinking about and
questions deeper meanings.