Have a little Fisher with Porter

In Porter’s article, there are many valid (and comprehendible) ideas explored. I enjoyed how it argued that all writing is intertextual and students should be taught to utilize this as a tool  [for rhetoric]. We (as students) are given texts to read and analyze and then have to “create connections” with in those texts and, as Porter argues,  “intertwine codes [the learning] in new ways” (41) and write those connections down in a “mundane…explicit citation” (34). Within every class environment, sometimes the same students: sometimes different, same with professors, there are different constraints and discourse communities. If I am in a  class such as this one, I am bound to write differently, in my opinion, than if I were sitting in one of my Lit classes. One reason for this may be the assertion that one of those lit professors is extremely intimidating to me and there fore my comfortablity to write in that class maybe significantly impacted by that intimidation and feeling of inferiority. This would align well, I think, with my potential as a “pre-socialized” (42) writer. My audience to which I am writing for influences my writing based upon a multitude of variables, versus; I feel less constrained in my writing to write for a professor that I am less intimidated by. This assertion could possibly be called Writers Response Theory. If Readers response Theory is how a reader responds to writing, then arguably Writers respond to a whole mess of variables that influence how they write or why they are writing the way they are. Side note: (if this exists as a theory already, I’m not plagiarizing! This just makes sense to me and are my own thoughts unfolding before my eyes faster than my fingers can type!) Which if this is a theory somewhere else would just prove the theory of intertextuality—my writing would then be including “traces” (34) of something else that I am not yet aware of.
Ok back to my main point here; If a student is writing for a particular class, in a particular fashion it can be argued that the student has presuppositions surrounding their writing—such as the assumption that some things need not be expanded on as heavily because the professor or a fellow student even has the same or similar knowledge surrounding the writing being done. If the writing were being written for an audience that is not assumedly informed on the topic being written about, then perhaps more summary or background knowledge would need to be included in the writing. Because a group of students are reading the same text and listening to the same lecture they become their own discourse community and share some foundational “common knowledge” of the material. Then to compound this ideology, each student may come from a variety of other discourse communities—at least three or four other classes as an example. And maybe they bring connections from “outside” texts from those classes—which then gives them a different edge, but nonetheless may influence how they write or speak in the class. If a student then is a senior in a class of peers versus a senior in a class of underclassmen—this may also influence their writing or authoritative voice while speaking within those communities… I apparently had a lot to say about this, huh… who would have thought. Some of this ties into something that stood out to me in Fisher’s Piece.
            On Page 388 Fisher argues “feasibility in regard to administrative approval”. Well here we go, college is bureaucratic and students do seek admins approval (a grade) based upon some strategic scale.  However could writing in a class be considered public? I think so. If the writing is written for any kind of audience—professor or peers—it can be considered public. And on page 385 Fisher discusses the hierarchal system as “a community in which some persons are qualified to judge and lead and some other persons are to follow”. This module is the epitome of  the discourse community I was attempting to dissect. I am surprised at how much I had to say about these articles and feel like I could keep going, but since I am over 700 words at this point I am going to desist! I am just really interested in applying this theory to “real world “scenarios and how does this apply to us now mentality…