February 3, 2010 Archives

For all assigned readings, please bring the requested four-step response.

From now on, the syllabus won't include an extra reminder about the reading response, but it will still be due for every assigned reading.

What is your reaction to the differences between sample paragraphs 1 and 2?

Sample 1

In the 1992 book, Cooking Disasters of the 20th Century, by Fred Smith, it explains why an important state dinner celebrating the Treaty of Ulm was ruined, resulting in a social calamity that caused the host, Lord Alfred, to lose nearly all of his social status and prestige: "Lord Alfred's infamous celebration in honor of the Treaty of Ulm was marred when an assistant chef failed to notice that the cheese was was spoiled. The foul taste sparked a squabble at a side table, which led the French ambassador to believe he had narrowly escaped assassination by poison. While the legal matter was quickly put to rest, Lord Alfred's reputation never fully recovered from the scandal, and his future in politics was all but ruined" (Smith 102). As you can see from the example of Lord Alfred, overlooking a small detail might lead to a great disaster.

Work Cited

Smith, Fred. Cooking Disasters of the 20th Century. New York: Half-Baked Press,1992.

Sample 2

At Lord Alfred's infamous Treaty of Ulm Banquet, a junior chef ruined the cheese, and the scandal "all but ruined" Lord Alfred (Smith 102).

Work Cited

Smith, Fred. Cooking Disasters of the 20th Century. New York: Half-Baked Press,1992.

What point is the author making with both passages?  Would you rather have to read through a long passage in Sample 1, or would you rather read the one-sentence version?

Note that Sample 2 does not present the title of the book or the full name of the author.  Sample 2 only quotes three words from the original source, but they are three carefully-chosen words that make a clear point.

Your reading assignment for today is "Integrating Quotations," a handout that goes into more detail about why and how to move from a rookie's citation style, which uses a lot of words but says very little, to a smoother, more advanced style (that leaves more room for you to develop your ideas).