Outcome 1: Picking Our Destination

Outcome 1 requires composition to be tailored to various audiences and contexts by acknowledging how different parts of a rhetorical situation an author is analyzing affects the essay and the distribution of texts. Furthermore, in outcome one, the author experiments and collaborates, as well as recognize, with different composition strategies; including recognition of the genre, analysis of content, utilization of writing styles and languages (including rhetorical strategies and appeal), and the organization of the author’s writing. This allows the author to create and recognize a diverse rhetorical effect appropriate for the given audience, purpose and situation. Finally, to strategically compose, the author must evaluate and communicate why they and other authors made the composition and rhetorical strategy choices and the effects of the choices on their writing.

The first step in planning your perfect vacation is to know what you want out of your trip. Do you want to relax or do you want to explore ancient ruins? After a tiring year of non-stop work, I would want to relax. The next step would be to figure out where you want to go? Bora-Bora or the warm beaches of Greece?

For the ultimate relaxation experience, I would choose Bora-Bora. From there you would need to think of things that you will do, who you will bring. Why would you bring these people? Why would you partake in these activities? Will they add to your relaxation experience or detract from it? I would bring along my mother, and we would skydive, paddle board, swim, and scuba dive. These are all relaxing yet fun activities to partake in. Be analytical in your choices for the perfect vacation, make sure you know exactly what you will bring along and be able to communicate why you brought it. For example, I will bring a bikini along with me when I go to Bora-Bora because I know I will be on the beach a lot there.

I kept this analytical mindset when designing and writing my Major Paper 2. We had to first figure out what kind of artifact we wanted to make. After a few hours of brainstorming, we decided to create a puppet show. Our audience was the high school students that grew up with such shows, like Sesame Street. We decided to tackle the issue surrounding whale hunting because it is a hot topic between Native American and White American people. We created three characters within our script, a white American man, a Native American man and the whale that the Indigenous people were hunting.

We composed strategically for a variety of audiences, because we wrote the script to be understandable to high school students (our primary audience), and then to adults who are involved in such conflict. We made references to pop-culture, “I drive a Prius for this” in order to create more relatable and humorous content to draw in and engage our audience. But to also relate to the older generations that would be the secondary audience in our play, we included references to Moby Dick by naming our whale, Moby Jane. These references would keep the audience engaged because they could relate to the situations at hand.

Through Major Paper 2, we recognized how different elements of a rhetorical situation matter for the task at hand and affect the options for composing and distributing texts. We set the play in the ocean, with the conflict occurring between the two men who were on different boats. We knew that different elements of the conflict had to be brought up by their respective man. For example, the White American man would begin the conflict by stating that the Native American man could not hunt for whales. This is the first element in our rhetorical situation, and we chose the white man to begin the conflict because historically, the white settlers initiated the oppression of Native Americans. Then, we had the Native American retaliate with government proof that it was their right to hunt. This element in our situation matters in the grand scheme of our message because it shows how despite being legally allowed to partake in cultural activities, Native Americans are limited. It affects our options in composition because we needed to keep up the Native American responses to be within the legal limits of government policy. For example, our Makah man could not kill the whale with a spear but instead a “ .50 caliber rifle.” This is because the US government recognizes harpoons and spears as inhumane for whales and a .50 caliber rifle will get the job done quickly. We also recognized that since we picked to do a puppet show, our options for composing and distributing were different. With this genre, we were limited in the fact that we could not explicitly act out scenes, so actions had to be stated instead of shown. An example of this is when Jonah, the white man, tries to “save” the whale but instead scratches her with the propeller. We explicitly stated that Jonah did this when the Makah man points out what happened, “YOU are the one going from port to port with your giant propeller and leaving a trail of oil behind you everywhere you go! You use the water for your economic gain! You see? Your propeller just hurt the whale!” Having to explicitly state actions that happen between the character leaves a lot to the imagination of the audience. They would have to think about how the white American approached the whale and visualize the propellor scratching her, leaving a trail of blood. This is beneficial because we are able to engage the audience and allow them to have some imaginational reign in our puppet show. But we also were free to include as much subtle references and messages within our script, such as incorporating Jonah and the Whale Bible story and references to immigration laws. These choices in our composition affected how we presented our message in our artifact.

Through our artifact and major paper, we coordinated, negotiated, and experimented with various aspects of composing—such as genre, content, conventions, style, language, organization, appeals, media, timing, and design—for diverse rhetorical effects tailored to the given audience, purpose, and situation. For example, because this was an oral presentation, we played with the inflection in our voices in order to convey emotion. The only thing that could move from our puppets were the arms, so in order to show emotion or that someone was talking, the voices would have to change. We wrangled with different tones through different parts in the script. When the white American was accusing the Native American of being savage, the tone of my voice was very loud and hysterical. The Native American had an accusatory tone when talking about how white people claim ownership over everything. We put emphasis on words such as “you” in order to draw attention to back and forth aspect of the conflict. An example of this is when the two men argued over who was selfish in their reasoning for hunting, “YOU guys are more worried about losing the OIL, but you never realize how VALUABLE the land is! WE are put on this earth to protect the land for future generations.” The emphasis of these words draws attention to the accusatory claims made by each side. Using words like “you,” “we,” and “our” dissociates the Makah man from the wrongdoings of the white Americans and draws a line between the two. We made very purposeful decisions in our media and design. The puppet show reflected the oral storytelling tradition in Indigenous tribes and we recorded it in order to work with different lightings. The timing of the whale’s entrance is also purposeful, as she enters, in the beginning, to usher a warning to the audience, like the prelude of any play and she exits after leaving the resolution open-ended. We begin the conflict with the legal aspect, and it morphs into a morality debate, economic argument and finally into a religious debacle. This organization kept the natural flow of conversation, with the legal debate melting into a morality conflict because morals and laws usually align. From there we entered an economic debate because the morality aspect encompassed how blubber should not be used for economic gain. From there, the religious conflict ensues because the white person claims that “God made this world and he put OIL on it! Why would he put OIL on it if he doesn’t want us to use it!”. This organization mimics the natural flow of conversation. In arguments, people will not simply stay within the topic they began the conflict in. New ideas and points will be brought up as the argument moves along. Furthermore, we designed the stage to represent the ocean, and the white waves represents the arising conflict (because white foam comes with rigorous wave motion in waters). The red and orange fish also symbolize all the conflicts between Native Americans and White Americans, because the red/orange combination is like fire. All of these choices were tailored to our specific audience and purpose. Our purpose was to introduce both sides of the whale hunting argument to teenagers, and leave them with enough information to take an educated side. We provided humorous lines and actions (like swallowing up both men) but also brought up viable perspectives between Indigenous people and White Americans.

Through my head’s up paper, I assessed and articulated the rationale for and the effect of composition choices. In this paper, I assessed our set choices and explained our rationale for picking the specific colors in our stage, “We created a blue stage to represent the ocean. The white waves on the stage represent the rising conflict in the story. We chose white waves to represent rising conflict because it’s like foam that rises with faster water movement. The orange/red fish represent the pressing issues between Native Americans and White settlers, the red symbolizing the blood and anger.” This evaluation will show my audience that our decisions were deliberate and symbolic. I also explained why we named or did not name each character, and how that related to our purpose. Furthermore, in my edits to this head’s up paper, I included how we adhered and pushed against the conventions in our genre of a puppet show. For example, I state that “We chose to represent a white male in our play because they make up a majority of the American population today, as well as a majority of politicians. Being in a majority, they will have the power to oppress people in minorities, such as Native Americans.” Here, I am clearly assessing and articulating the rationale for choosing to use a white American man instead of a person of color in our conflict. This shows my audience that we did not randomly pick a white American man because we do not like them, but because in the American population, white men make up the majority and thus would be most likely to be involved in such conflict.

By creating an artifact and writing the Head’s Up paper in Major Paper 2, I have learned how to be purposeful in my composition and visual decisions. Before this assignment, I was not very deliberate in my choices when creating visual aids and even in my writing. I typically am a literal person, over-analysis makes me less than happy. But through this assignment, I have grown to appreciate how every little detail can add to an author’s overarching message. I found how important it was for the stage to be deliberating set up, with distinguished colors and how the inflection of our voices changed the meanings of the words we spoke. Furthermore, I’ve learned how different elements in our rhetorical situation can completely change the direction that our artifact goes. For example, different characters or stage could alter how our message is perceived. Overall, Outcome 1 and Major Paper 2 has taught me to be an analytical and deliberate writer.

I have used the skills gained from Outcome 1 in planning my perfect vacation. I have found my purpose, to relax in Bora-Bora. I will take my mother and we will partake in a number of relaxing activities. I figured out the outfits that I will wear there and have rationally defended all my choices. Now it is time to start putting everything together!