Reading Response (Heilker and Yergeau)

In their article, "Autism and Rhetoric," Paul Heilker and Melanie Yergeau, argue that Autism is a rhetoric and they analyze it from their own perspective. He does it from the perspective of the father of a boy with autism and she does it from her perspective as an Asperger's autistic herself. They explain that autism is not a disease but a "a way of being in the world though language, through invention, structure and style" (263).
This article related with the others we read about autism, specially with Wardle's. She explains how people have to adjust their writing and communication ways once they enter a new work environment. In this case, the authors explain how most scholars think that it's not possible for autistic to adapt and communicate with neurotypicals. Herilker and Yergeau disagree with that statement and explain it from their own perspectives.
I enjoyed reading this article, the topic was interesting and the authors had great arguments. The fact that they included their own experiences and points of view made it more attractive. It made me think how autistics are stereotyped nowadays, specially in movies, and how that doesn't show what people with autism go though and how they really are.

Reading Response (Anzaldúa)

In her article, "Tlilli Tlapalli: The Path of the Red and Black Ink," Gloria Anzaldúa explains what writing means to her and how her writing process works. She feels her writing process is deeply influenced by her cultural believes and identity. She likes to think of her stories as performances and not as dead objects.

Her process begins in her soul, she sees these stories before she writes them. In her mind she is the director, the performer and the audiences of these stories. After she 'sees' them, her work is to find the perfect words to describe what she saw.

This piece reminded me of the others readings we've done about identity. First I thought about Cixous who wants women to write as women. In this case Anzaldúa want as to write from our souls and not to ignore our origins and believes. Then I thought about Villanueva who was sad about having forgotten his background an so many stories and memories that he had left behind. Instead of that, Anzaldúa embraces her culture and 'exploit' it in every was possible.

I liked this article because it was short and easy to follow. The topic was interesting and I liked learning about her culture. I was also happy to see that I'm not the only person who sees things in her head before they happen. I have a similar creative process when a make paper mache toys. First I see in my mind what I'm going to do every step of the way and then when I actually do it, it goes mostly the same way as I pictured it in my mind earlier.

APPLYING AND EXPLORING IDEAS

1. Her definition of individual and communal art is based on how culture is shared. She argues that Western culture is becoming more and more selective or elitist. If you want to see a painting or a sculpture you have to go to a museum hence you have to pay. On the other hand, communal art is there to be reached by everybody who wants to get in contact with culture. Like aborigines who painted in caverns.

2. I don't think it would have been more effective. In fact I think that writing that way helps her make her point. Also, it she had written it in a traditional academic format, it wouldn't have  been her writing it, it's not who she is and is not what she believes.

Reading Response (Cixous)

In her article, "VIEWPOINT The Laugh of the Medussa," Helene Cixous has a single objective: she wants women to write as women. She has a strong feminist point of view. She believes that writing is ruled by men and that women are being oppressed by men's literature. She wants women not to be afraid of writing as themselves and showing who they really are and what they really think.
This article made me think about Alexander's transgender theories. It's funny how he wants us to embrace differences and understand others while she is so focussed on separating men from women.
I didn't like this article. It felt like I was reading a transcription of a motivational speech. She makes herself clear but I don't like the way she expresses herself.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND JOURNALING
1. The reading didn't make me uncomfortable but I didn't like it. I'm a woman but I feel that her ideas are way too feminist. I can't imagine what men would feel while reading this. I think they would feel uncomfortable or maybe upset in a way.
2. I think she wants women to write without keeping anything to themselves. She thinks that women keep thoughts in secret because they feel ashamed or scared to show what they really think and feel.

Reading Response (Alexander)

In his article, "Transgender Rhetorics: (Re)Composing Narratives of the Gender Body," Jonathan Alexander intends to demonstrate how transgender theories along with feminist compositionist approaches can help us understand the narration of gender as a social construct. He explains that gender is "neither natural nor essential, but rather the performance of self-expression within any dynamic relationship" (201).
Like Gee, Villanueva and Delpit, Alexander focuses on identity and its importance in the writing process. He believes that how we understand ourselves as gay or straight is socially infected by labels that can stigmatize certain behaviors and reify others.

APPLYING AND EXPLORING IDEAS
3. I believe "normally" gendered students can gain a new perspective about transgender lives and maybe relate to them somehow. We can apply this to other social constructs or minorities.
4. He describes gender as a construct because people have an idea of what gender is and most of the times that idea is wrong. I think that gender is both personal and political because, as he explains, "there are many ways to be a human being" (200) and we all get to choose how we live our lives.

Reading Response (Delpit)

In her article, "The Politics of Teaching Literate Discourse," Lisa Delpit explains that even though she agrees in a lot of aspects with Gee's theory and ideas about Discourses, unlike him, she believes that enculturation is not absolutely necessary to acquire a new Discourse. She thinks that students can be taught and Discourses can be acquire in a classroom if the teacher is committed enough to teach them what they need to learn and in the way they need to learn it.
I liked what she said because I felt the same way when I read what Gee thinks about people not being able to completely acquire new Discourses. I like the examples she uses to prove her point and how she shows that people can learn new Discourses without loosing their identities.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND JOURNALING
3. I agree with what she's arguing because I believe that people's identity is important but is not the only thing. People should learn about other things besides their own history and values without loosing them and I believe Delpit explains this really well with the examples she uses.
4. She thinks that teachers should acknowledge and respect their students' backgrounds without limiting their work to it. They should be committed to teach.

Reading Response (Villanueva)

In his article, "Memoria Is a Friend of Ours: On the Discourses of Color," Victor Villanueva explains how including our own experiences and memories in our written work can help us consolidate our identity as writers. He argues that "the personal does not negate the need for the academic, it complements, provides an essential element in the rhetorical triangle, an essential element in the intellect-cognition and affect" (174).
Like Gee and Wardle, Villanueva feels that identity and how identity as a writer is formed is really important. In his article he shows how his identity was formed among different Discourses.
I liked what he had to say in this article, I found it interesting and I agree with his point of view but I didn't like the way he chose to say it because it got confusing at times.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND JOURNALING
7. Using Gee's concept of Discourse we would think that Villanueva's primary discourse is Puerto Rico but he has lived his whole life in America and Puerto Rico is now a memory. So I would have to say that his primary Discourse is now America and Puerto Rico is a secondary Discourse that he is trying to acquire.

Project 3: Introduction and Conversation

The concept of discourse community is discussed constantly among scholars who try to define it. While Swales talks about discourse communities that share knowledge if rules of the conduct and interpretation of speech, and defines it according six specific characteristic, Gee introduces a much broader term which is Discourse (with capital D). To Gee what's important is not language but saying-doing-being-valuing-believing combinations, language is just another part of the Discourse. Gee introduces the term Discourse as an identity...

When I was a kid, I had never thought about the idea of playing a sport outside of what I did in school during Physical Education hours. I had never heard about field hockey either. Anyway, when I was ten years old, my older sister started playing field hockey in a club near our house and I decided to go too. I loved it from the first moment I hold a stick in my hands. First I learned how to hold the stick, then how to move the ball and push it in the direction I wanted it to go. I learned dribbling, passing and shooting on goal. I also learn to play defense and to be part of a team. And all of the sudden I was part of it, I was part of a team, and I also was part of a new discourse community. Gee would describe it as a Secondary Discourse since my club was one of the non-home-based social institutions with which I interacted. 

Along with learning how to play, I learned new words, new definitions, new uses for words that I already knew. I also learned values and acquire a new way of thinking. I started to think for the team and not just for myself.