Who Are My People? (E)

     "You see out those windows? That's where your people are. Through that door? Those aren't your people. You haven't met your people yet. The people here are your roots but they aren't your people."

    Welcome to AP Lang? 

     I wrote down what McMahon said that first week of class in my notes the period after she said it. I don't know exactly why I decided to write down what she said in my notes but it has stuck with me all year and left me with questions since I first heard it. The main ones though are who even are my people? What do they look like? What do they do? Where do I find this group of people?

     All year I've been trying to decide who my people are or what they would be like. I've been trying to find them and decide who they are in my head so I can look for them now or in the future. So here are 10 things that my people must be. If a person meets all of these, then they are part of my people.

1. My people will be kind but not too kind because I need to be humbled by being called stupid every once in a while
2. My people will be empathetic to others even if they don't always understand them
3. My people will be active in politics and have the same standing on them as me
4. My people will like the same music as me so we can always listen to our favorite bands together
5. My people will love animals (even snakes because I have one and she's lovely)
6. My people will be smart and will want to be educated on the world
7. My people will be adventurous and want to try new things but they won't be stupid or go to jail for trying something a little too wild
8. My people will always be on time to plans and will always come prepared
9. My people will be protective of me but will also give me my space because I don't want to feel constrained
10. My people will be there no matter what and have my back in any situation

     I look at this list and I'm pleased. That's what my people look like and I want to meet them. The thing is, they don't exist. In my head, these people are perfect. They have no flaws and love the same things I do. I never get mad at them and they can do no wrong. But I've realized that they don't exist. 

     At first when I say that, I'm saddened. It's a loss for me. These people who have never and will never exist. I miss thinking about them and hoping that they'll come find me. I always wished they'd come and I'd just be happy with them all the time because that's what life is supposed to be like. Perfect.

     But then I'm not so sad anymore. I guess I've been thinking about it a lot and I don't want these people. They're agreeable and they're happy and they like what I like. But that's not what I want. I don't even really know what I want anymore. All I know is what I have. What I have now is a Main Friend Group. And they aren't perfect by any means.

     Me and Tori constantly bump heads because we're both competitive (Kahoot in earth science gets fiery). Marissa asks controversial questions in our groupchat for fun which usually leads to debates between us and gets me heated. Vanessa mixes her ice cream until it's soup when we're out to dinner which is blasphemous. Grace is so cryptic and I usually can't guess what she's thinking (she could be a serial killer, I'd never know). And Emily has said many times that she wants to make me cry because she had never seen me cry. It's a weird group. But it's mine. We may not always get along and we may get mad at each other but we're together on this Island of Misfit Toys. 

     I don't think McMahon was right when she said our people aren't in this school. Maybe they are my roots, that's true. But that doesn't mean they aren't my people too. Our people change with us and when I leave I know things will change. I know this Group will not be the only Group I experience when I get to college or when I'm 30 and starting a new job. I know that. But I'm me right now and these are my people with who I am in this moment. 

     There is no formula for who my people are or what they do or where they're from. My people are whoever I love in the moment. I'm open to the future and I'm open to new people in my life, but the present is a pretty good place to be with My Group. 

Choose Wisely (D)

(The following passage is excerpted from a recent book about the United States Declaration of Independence.)

(The following  passage is from an essay published in the 1920s.)

 Questions 14-28. Read the following passage carefully before you choose your answers.

  I'm well versed in the world of multiple choice. I've had to do it since I was first in school. It's nothing like rhetorical analysis (A) which I had to learn from scratch. It was still very different from what I'd been used to though.
     I'd always been asked "What does so-and-so word mean in line blah blah?" This year got to the meat of a writing piece rather than just the minute details. It was harder but still manageable. But I really didn't like learning multiple choice

     When we got to the multiple choice section I was ready for it. Bring it on! A foolish mistake on my part that shan't happen again. I didn't realize just how many Scantrons I'd see during that unit. It was everyday. Read one or two passages and answer 15 questions for each of them. Try to get at least half right. Oh, also you have 15 minutes. 
     Not only all of that, but most of them were also those old timey passages with big, fancy words that look like Shakespeare threw up on the page. I don't like those. I've gotten better at reading them since that's what most of the rhetorical analysis (A) unit was. Still don't like them though. 
     I didn't like these days of multiple choice but I got quicker. I put in my ear plugs and got on with it. I was finishing a few minutes early by the end of it. I learned, through trial and error, that skimming the passage and then going back to it to answer certain questions was the right way to do it for me (D). I had tried following along with my finger, reading thoroughly first, reading out loud, and even not reading the passage at all. Ultimately, this has worked best for me. A lot of people I talk to just don't read it first though which is so crazy to me because I could never do that. My brain needs the first read to get me started. 
     I never realized that I needed to practice for multiple choice before I got to this class. I thought it was just something you had to do. I figured that they were all different passages with different answers so it wouldn't help me to practice since they're all completely different. Think again, dumdum. Practice makes perfect in most aspects of life I suppose. Who woulda thunk?

The Enemy

Going From Garbage Fire to Prison Shakespeare (A)

"Banneker uses the rhetorical devices of using Jefferson's own experiences and words against him, using a harsh tone, and using contrasting language to both inform Jefferson that slavery is hypocritical to American ideals and persuade him to abolish slavery."

This trash can on fire was my writing in September

      The word use is in there four times. Jesus, no wonder I got a 4 on it. I've just reread the Benjamin Banneker piece I wrote and it really is just hot garbage. I didn't even write a concluding paragraph to it either. That was my very beginning of the year work. 
     I did improve. By November I could get a 6 without trying like on the Queen Elizabeth I rhetorical analysis. Mostly because I then knew how to create a proper thesis.

"Elizabeth I juxtaposes the enemies and her people by providing unfavorable and favorable language, creates long sentence structure, and enhances her speech with her strategic use of pronouns in order to empower her troops, ultimately moving them to fight valiantly for England."

     I improved further from these pieces. I could get an easy 7 by the time we finished rhetorical analysis. Or maybe not easy. Easier than the beginning of the year. Not really easy still though.
     I'm happy we did rhetorical analysis first. The way it's set up is perfect. It made it a lot easier for me to write my argument (B) and synthesis (C) essays because rhetorical analysis is all very technical. It's just about good writing and getting to the why and how of it. It was an interesting learning process for me because I'd always done more creative pieces or opinionated essays. Never just point blank write this, tell me why they did this, how did they show it, give me the details but don't add fluff.  Learning how to do that first set me up for success in the next sections. I learned how to write properly and then I could actually apply it to what I did (A).
     I really do think it has helped my writing so much. I can write an entire essay in under an hour now. The fastest one I did this year was 30 minutes. That's wack. It used to take me hours to write a full essay. Now I can bang one out like it's my job. 
     It toughened me up. I'll thank the Banneker 4 for my writing skills today. Without my lowest lows I wouldn't be able to reach my highest highs. McMahon said "by the end of this year you'll be able to write yourself out of a Russian prison" and I thought she was lying. I didn't think that learning rhetorical analysis would help me all that much in the beginning. Но теперь я думаю, что мой тезис поразит охранников (But now I think that my thesis will impress the guards).

Me and the guard bonding over my essays

No One Listens to Tears or Cockiness (B)

     I'm comfortable with disagreement. Some may even say a little too comfortable. I like to have my opinions, hear other's opinions, and have a conversation about it. I like arguing and getting into it with other people when I'm passionate about something. I obviously like love when people agree with me but where's the fun in that? A bunch of people who think and act exactly like me would be a nightmare. So I like writing about my opinions on all different topics.
     At the start of this year I'd say I was a bit more all over the place in my argument writing. I have a lot of opinions and only so much paper to share them on so I tended to be scattered and confused. Even on the mock exam I only got a 6 on the argument. It was about what my position is on the value of words. My thesis was alright.

     "The everlasting nature of words, their emotional ties, and their historical context all give words their undeniable value."

     Not bad per say, but not great. And, again, the bodies were scattered. You could tell where I was going with it but I have trouble crossing the finish line.

     Maybe it's due to my hotheadedness that I'm so scattered. I'm a passionate person, what can I say? It's hard for me to reel in my emotions and all my thoughts. But throughout the year I've realized that I need more than passion to win an argument (B). I need evidence. I need logos and ethos, not just pathos. I need to back myself up with the facts rather than with my heart. No one cares what I think, it's about what's real and what isn't. What's true and what's not. I can't just say the meat industry is bad and that I love cows so we should change it because it hurts me to see animals that look like they're crying. I need to get expert opinions from multiple sides, show statistics, find articles, and display the argument in a scholarly way because being a kid crying about the poor cows won't get me anywhere. Or, even if I do only use personal examples, you better believe it's going to be a damn good one with a story to back it up rather than just an opinion with no follow up. I will no longer have tantrums trying to prove myself with nothing behind my words. 
     I took what I learned into account and by the end of the unit I could make a halfway decent argument. Like my Certainty vs. Doubt piece which I got a 7 on. 

"Finally, certainty tends to fade as we get older and is replaced by doubt. I was certain as a kid that Santa existed and was coming down my chimney to deliver presents every Christmas. As I got older, I doubted that he did this. I wondered how he got down the chimney when I didn't even have a chimney."

     I still need to work on how I present things and I have a long way to go before I can ever be a lawyer, that's for sure. But at least I know what I need to work on. I was just so cocky before. I really thought that some rando readers checking out my arguments would go with it solely based on what I felt and my thoughts. Laughable. I was put in my place though, thank god. It's a good lesson to learn that the world isn't going to cater to you because you feel strongly about something. Sometimes that's hard for me but that's life and oh well.
     My passion hasn't faded though, don't worry. You'll still hear me arguing with my math teacher about my grades or with my sister about which one of us would win in a fight (it's me by the way). I don't think that will ever change.

Synthesis Essays: They Aren't DBQs (C)

     I never loved things like synthesis before this year. They reminded me of the dreaded DBQs that I had to do in APUSH sophomore year. And don't get me wrong, I loved APUSH (shout out to my man Bridgeo), but good lord I really did hate DBQs. I think it was the vast expanse of articles about Old White Men wanting slaves that I found intimidating. Or the lack of time to write about said Old White Men wanting slaves. Just the thought of reading all of those articles and then having to piece together an essay from that had me sweating. I really didn't know where to start just looking at them. It was truly a cruel and unusual punishment brought upon me from the CollegeBoard gods. I was sure they were targeting me. 

     So then AP Lang rolls around and of course, I thought to myself, of course I couldn't escape something like the DBQs. No, not that lucky unfortunately. But I was lucky enough to not start off the year with them. We stayed on rhetorical analysis (A), and then argument (B), and then synthesis. So I got some time to find my bearings before synthesis. I was still a bit shaky when we were assigned the Disability Synthesis though due to my past dislike for similar writings. We were given a series of four articles written by people with disabilities and had to make a synthesis essay in which we analyzed how the texts interacted with each other and then had to develop our own opinion on disability. First of all, heavy topic. Second, four full articles. I looked at the assignment and just thought to myself, "That's a rough go."  

Harriet McBryde Johnson

     As I began reading the articles though, I begrudgingly got into it. I was as surprised as you are.

     Hearing their thoughts on their own disabilities and how they are perceived really opened my eyes. They were interesting. I actually wanted to write about it. I especially like the article written by Harriet McBryde Johnson in which she talked about her conversation with "the man who wants [her] dead". "Should I Have Been Killed at Birth?" is quite the title and the article definitely lived up to it. Her talking about being the "token cripple with an opposing view" and her small section of a Q and A was fantastic to my pea brain. It was powerful, interesting, and opened my eyes to different perspectives. I liked writing about it and incorporating my own ideas into hers. 

     Not to toot my own horn but I think it was the best synthesis essay I've written all year.
     I never knew, while writing the DBQs, how to pull apart a text. I learned that this year (C). So I could finally see what Johnson was actually saying and implying rather than just scratching the surface. I could pick out what they meant and relate the texts through that way. Not that I'm saying this essay was easy, but I knew how to write it when I got to it rather than just shooting in the dark like I would have at the beginning of the year. I could pull out quotes that would assist my argument rather than making my argument and I could incorporate them properly now. 

     Fast forward to today. I love writing synthesis essays. It's one of my favorite types of pieces to write now. Now that I actually learned how to write them. I can look at the packet of articles on windmill farms (as I did on the AP exam), roll up my sleeves, and get to work. I thought the windmill essay was kind of fun too, as weird as that sounds. I at first thought the Disability Synthesis was a fluke because I just liked the topic but it wasn't. I really do just enjoy making an argument with the help of other's points. It's fun and sets guidelines to what I'm writing. I've always liked a blueprint to writing and that's what the provided articles are which I didn't understand before this year. They're just pushing you off in the right direction and you run with it. 
     I bet that if I went into that APUSH classroom today, I would have a much easier time. I could probably write a bomb DBQ on some Old White Men now. 

The Old White Man agrees