Journal #2

The most challenging aspect of today’s discussion was observing that the point I was trying to get across in my paper might not have been as clear as I previously thought. Both peers that listened to my draft were on the right track about the conclusion of my paper, but there were a few missing or additional points they came up with. That being said, I am going to focus on being concise but thorough with my analysis in future drafts. By listening to my peers I began to notice the format of his writing, his paragraph styles specifically and the tone of his work. Also, it was nice to see that the broad claims in my paper were consistent with others’. A few new questions I have regarding Wallace’s essay would be the difference in how Wallace portrays McCain as opposed to the fact that Wallace’s intention is to portray McCain. I am curious to explore how these differ and where the bias fits into each interpretation.