The question requires me to write a comment on how Junot Diaz, in his novel “The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao,” makes a fictional character feel personal to readers. I identified three techniques Diaz uses to create a deeply personal connection between Lola and the readers: his narrative style that alternates between first-person and second-person perspectives, the detailed exploration of Lola’s emotional landscape, and the inclusion of cultural content. Diaz’s approach to making Lola’s character feel personal is a remarkable example of personal expression. By crafting a narrative that speaks directly to the reader by not using a third-person perspective, he invites them into Lola’s world, transforming the reading experience into a personal encounter. At the same time, Diaz employs critical thinking in his narrative, particularly in how he incorporates historical and cultural information to make the content more credible. His thoughtful presentation of Dominican culture and the complexities of immigrant experiences not only enriches Lola’s character but also grounds her story in a broader context. These techniques are about how critical thinking would be applied to make the fictional story more personal. Therefore, I have reflected that these techniques are focused on both critical thinking and personal expression.

The question requires me to comment on how Kingston uses storytelling to highlight the Asian-American experience, combining analysis with a central point about the power of representing thought through storytelling. In my response, I reflected on Kingston’s use of storytelling in her essay to portray the lives of Asian Americans. I identified three strengths of storytelling evident in Kingston’s work: its ability to capture attention with detailed personal stories, make complex ideas more comprehensible, and serve as a bridge between generations by sharing cultural and historical narratives. Critical thinking is prioritized over personal expression in this blog due to its emphasis on analyzing and evaluating Maxine Hong Kingston’s storytelling techniques rather than sharing the author’s personal feelings or experiences.

For assignment one, I was required to write an exploratory essay using your experience reading a text from this course as a starting point to create new insights into your thinking on a particular topic. I wrote my essay, titled “Why the Concert and Event Industry Should Regulate Ticket Scalping,” which focuses on the issue of wealth inequality, drawing parallels between historical events and the current practices in the concert and event industry. Using J. Drew Lanham’s “Forever Gone” as a starting point, I highlighted the historical exploitation for economic gain and its consequences, relating it to the modern problem of ticket scalping. I explored how scalping harms both customers and promoters, emphasizing the need for ethical action in the industry. My essay suggested legal, technological, and social solutions to tackle ticket scalping, citing various studies and examples to support my arguments.
In my exploratory essay, I effectively utilized critical thinking to construct an argument about the issue of ticket scalping in the concert and event industry. Drawing on various sources, I examined the problem from multiple perspectives, including historical parallels, economic implications, and ethical considerations. This comprehensive approach demonstrated my ability to analyze complex issues deeply, synthesizing information from different fields. On the other hand, the essay revealed areas for growth in personal expression. While my arguments were well-founded and analytical, they lacked a distinct personal touch that would have made the writing more relatable and made it more “explore”.
This assignment revealed that, although I am proficient in critical thinking, I need to further develop my skills in personal expression. Even though personal elements were included, they did not fully capture the exploratory personal engagement typically expected in such essays.

The question requires me to write if poetry and prose represent our experiences differently, and which form I am more drawn to. In my response, I explored the differing representations of experiences in poetry and prose, using Mary Oliver’s and J. Drew Lanham’s works as references. I expressed a preference for prose because of its directness and clarity, contrasting it with the abstract nature of poetry. It is exemplified by Lanham’s writing, which offers a clear narrative. Lanham’s prose effectively communicates complex ideas and historical connections, like the link between the Carolina parakeet’s decline and historical events. This directness in prose which highlights the power of critical thinking facilitates a smoother understanding for me. Poetry, with its clear narratives as exemplified by Lanham’s writings, allows me to engage with ideas more individually. Even though it is rich in lyrical language and evokes deep emotions, its abstract nature leaves me perplexed. Oliver’s poetry requires readers to interpret meanings and emotions that are not always explicitly stated. Having personal expression in poetry is a characteristic of poetry and it could be an advantage and disadvantage depending on the reader. Overall, since I have explained the comparison of poetry and prose, I have written about both the importance of critical thinking and personal expression nearly equally.