Once upon a time...

...a student, similar to Gloria Anzaldua, believed that books "saved [his] sanity," (Lunsford 45) and writing allowed him the opportunity to "put sentences together to form beautiful patterns for the purpose of making [his] ideas clear." (Swearingen 37)

As I read Lunsford's interview with Gloria Anzaldua, I was pleasantly surprised that Anzaldua and I share similar writing experiences - while I saw Swearingen's piece to be the outcome of my earlier experiences in the English field. Early on in my relationship with English, I too, believed that "there is no separation between life and writing," (Lunsford 45) because everything that I wrote seemed to take a toll on every aspect of my mind, body and soul. Sometimes it became "too hard on my body" (Lunsford 55) because I would "get all psyched up, and then I do the writing. I work four, five, six hours; and then I have to come off that. It is like a withdrawal. I have to leave that anger, leave that sadness, leave that compassion, whateverit is that I am feeling; I have to come off of that heightened , aware state." (Lunsford 55) I put such an exorbitant amount of energy into my writing because even after the assumed agony of writing, I gain my sanity. But, if at any time while I was writing I couldn't "find a voice, style, a point of view, then nothing [could] get written." (Lunsford 57)

I write because of the potential I see in it, and I study English with such fervor, because I appreciate the "layer upon layer of double meanings and allusions; parallelisms that link past and present, levels of meaning, and layers of meaning that are far more intricate than allegory, symbolism, parable, analogy, and similar double structures" (Swearingen 33) that language allows, which has also been seen in the study of Chinese rhetorical traditions. I feel an understanding of the above is crucial, because, "in order to make it in this society you have to be able to know the discipline, if it's teaching, if it's composition, if it's carpentry. Whatever field it is, you have to know your way around. You have to know how to wire the house before you can start being an innovative electrician." (Lunsford 60)

Even as I attempted to become a rhetorical carpenter, I agree with Swearingen that even as we attempt to learn it all, and understand everything - 'meanings get lost in translation.' Rhetorical situations are constantly changing and looking for a definitive. It seems that a never ending 'understanding' of language and it's rhetorical knowledge is essential in the understanding of contact zones. I feel confident in making the claim that language is defined differently by most people, which is why as a writer, now, I continue to push my body to its limits as I continue to adapt, and try to understand, different discourse and contact zones.

A goal I set long ago, during my earlies memories of writing was "to have a larger audience" (Lunsford 60), and studying contact zone rhetoric(s) will allow that to happen.

Adapt or Dance?: An Inquiry of Foreign Discourse

Learning, and being able to use, new discourse(s) is, as Gee states, "how people build identities and activities and recognize identities and activities that others are building around them (20) - which is why I do not agree with Gee's use of the word 'dance' as he describes his concluding diagnosis of what a Discourse really is. 'Dancing' is used to describe Discourse as "a coordinated pattern of words, deeds, values, beliefs, symbols, tools, objects, times, and places in the here-now- as a performance that is recognizable as just such a coordination. Like a dance, the performance hear and now is never exactly the same..." (28) However, even as Gee describes this 'dance' that he feels people continually experience; is it really a matter of 'dancing,' or adapting?'

Gee uses the example of gang vernacular and jargon, with hopes of illustrating his idea of 'dancing' among other gang member, in order for the gang to accept or authenticate the person attempting to show his fluency in the gang's choice of discourse dance. Although I understand the point he is attempting to make, I question his understanding of the interaction that is happening. I argue that it's not a matter of 'dancing,' it's a matter of discourse adaptation. As the above quote by Gee states, discourse is made up of different variables which are all essential in displaying a certain level of understanding and recognition when using the new discourse - "recognition work" occurs "when they [people] engage in such work when they try to make visible to others (and to themselves, as well) who they are and what they are doing." (29)

As I consider my experience teaching English 101, and the way in which I have to adapt to the numerous discourses that my students bring to the classroom, I know that both the adaption of 'vernacular' and the 'technical variety of language' are crucial to the relationship that I continue to extablish with my students. If I were to treat learning new discourses as a dance, then I would feel as if I were putting on a show - when I should be adapting different discourses and proving my validity as an educator, and not a showman. And, like Gee so eloquently states, "there are no once and for all tests [dances] for who is a 'real' feminist, gang member, patriot, humanist, cutting-edge scientist, 'yuppie,' or 'regular' at the local bar" (25) - instead, we can only gauge one's discourse level by their adaptations of the said discourses learned.

Online Communities and Mass Media are > Bedtime Stories?

Thinking back upon my childhood, and the ways in which I learned of the world around me, I immediately think of my mother, and the limitations that she would set on the amount of television that I watched. Due to my appreciation for literary works, and my current position in academia, I feel I can say with certainty that the story time I shared with my parents before bed was crucial to the success that I have today – as well as the strict limitations that my mom placed on my television intake. I can remember her telling me that reading would always make me think, whereas watching television would make me lazy because they do the thinking for you. I never would have thought that the amount of television that children watch a day would play such pivotal role in their literacy development. And yet, now that I am older and more ‘experienced,’ I am appalled at the amount, and type, of mass media consumption that we are subjecting our next generation to.

The generation I see being raised now appears to be much less interested in one-on-one time with their parents before bed, and more interested in an extra half hour on line or in front of the television; and because of this, it is in the best interest of our parents and educators to embrace this media/technology ‘preference’ and come up with new, and innovative, ways to educate through this new apparent preference. Children are being subjected to adult themes, with no explanations, at a very young age, and unless we take the time to refocus the education we give to the younger generations, the literacy levels will remain unbalanced and inadequately educational. However, the internet and other forms of mass media are introducing advanced reading levels and ‘much more academic like language than…first grade school texts’ (Gee 25). This is where I see the biggest issue. Where , and how, do we effectively prepare these young children in the homes for what the world has waiting for them, if the advanced material produced by media today is already in the home teaching them a type of discourse that goes unnoticed by the parents. Children are growing up on technology, making the parents the illiterate ones – and the ones that are then teaching the parents in the most up to date technology. I recently taught my mom to text message, and seeing the ‘joy’ in her face after she understood the basic concepts was an educational moment that I will not soon forget.

Then I think to when I have children, and the approach that I’ll be taking. I know that I will definitely be respecting the internet and multimedia devices, but I also will make sure that story time with pops does not get swept under the rug. Online communities are the communities largely responsible for raising children. I think it is just a matter of balance and humility of the resources that one uses, however, that goes the furthest with educating the youth of today.