Chapter 1 Response to Discussion Question #1 "They Say/I Say"

     In chapter one of They Say/I Say the authors state that writers should always respond on the controversial issue they are addressing before stating their opinion or shortly thereafter. The authors claim that in doing so, readers are more engaged because they are reading the material in the best way for their brain to comprehend.

     But experienced writers have gradually acquired the ability to introduce sources into the middle and even the conclusion of their papers and still produce a organized and understandable paper. How do they do this you ask? I believe that writers can bring sources into the middle and ends of papers successfully in a few ways. First, they can insert supporting sources into the middle of papers. When they introduce their main source and respond to that, they can bring reinforcing sources to prove their point. Second, although putting your predominant source towards the end is frowned upon by many, I think that doing so can build up curiosity and cause the reader to continue reading so that they can determine what the writer is responding to. By stating the I say before the they say, you evoke questions from the reader that could keep them interested in reading the whole paper.

     All in all, I don't think that order in which writers address the argument in their paper really matters. As long as they include all the necessary elements of a substantial paper they will do a fine job.

Preface/Introduction Response to Discussion Question #1 "They Say/I Say"

     After reading and contemplating this passage I have found myself agreeing and disagreeing with the ideas displayed by the authors of this book. I believe that, when writing academic pieces, people and especially students follow the structural guidelines without considering the need for counter-intuitive and argumentative statements. They have been taught over and over how to write a five paragraph essay with a thesis statement and supporting evidence but they aren't aware that they are, in a way, holding a conversation with someone. As stated in the last paragraph on page 3, “It (academic writing) is deeply engaged in some way with other people's views.” I consider social relevancy and placing outside sources in papers very beneficial to comprehending having “conversations” within papers and incorporating others opinions. For when writers use these tools they become aware of just how influential utilizing others opinions can be on the quality of papers.

     However, I don't think that the ideas of the other person to which writers are “responding” to should be very prevalent in their papers. In my opinion the idea that the writers are “replying” to should be mentioned twice, maybe three times, in the writer's paper. I believe Martin Luther King Jr.'s “Letter From Birmingham Jail” is too structural and summarizes his critic’s words too often. Although some may believe that this makes his letter have a strong voice, I think that his words get lost in his critics articulations.

     All in all, I believe that writers should be more aware of the “conversation(s)” in their papers, but I don't think that they should make too much of a deal out of it, to the point where is overwhelms the paper and blocks out the writer's voice.