For kim woods: 5 page- Rhetorical Analysis (Reckoning) Essay

A REVIEW OF DAVID SHIELDS’ ARTICLE OF “I THINK THROUGH WHAT YOU THINK”

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

· Background

Joseph, S., & Rickett, C. (2014). David Shields’ way of making: Creative manoeuvre or HDR nightmare?. Creative Manoeuvres: Writing, Making, Being, 127.

This article was written by joseph and Ricket and was published in the year 2014. The two researchers reiterate David Shields’s idea of I can think through what you think as the best reason why contemporary writing will never be better than other works of art. The research article was written mainly to explain and amplify Shield’s idea, which states why many other people claim copyright legalism and how they strictly forbid any measure of plagiarism. Many people in the contemporary world are concerned only about plagiarism even some small bit of it thinking that there exitsts originality of things.

David shields do not totally allow plagiarism but is trying to explain how the ideas written by other people can be used to create new inventions. He argues that there has never something as a new and philosophies and theories have always been there within the people who may not have had the time to explore them. Even scientific theories and discoveries have always been invented base on the past written literature. He goes on to explain that even the invention of wring which is historically known to have emerged from Mesopotamia was still not very fresh since it had dwelled among the people who have been communicating using other oral forms. Moreover the writing that developed in Egypt is said to have been copied from Mesopotamia and thus it was not originally first hand. Precisely, David Shield argues that instead of lawyers instituting regulations so much about copyrighting and plagiarism, everyone should know that new inventions are created from past observations.

Great.

· Exhibit

Epstein, A. (2012). “Uncreative writing and the art of appropriation. The Routledge Companion to Experimental Literature, 310.

This research article was written by Epstein and was published in 2012. It also speaks of the role of uncreative writing in the increasing level of plagiarism. It reiterates the words of David shield and affirms that plagiarism has been there and many ideas thought to be new and upcoming has always been within the society. From this article [unclear], David shield condemns direct plagiarism of ideas but he advises people arrange old ideas so as to come up with new inventions. He also states that writers should not manipulate the original data to make their own new items instead they should study them and arrange to come up with new items.

· Argument

Harris, J. (2015). 12 Authorizing Plagiarism. Authorship Contested: Cultural Challenges to the Authentic, Autonomous Author, 192:

This research paper was written by Harris in 2015 with a main attempt to bring in the contestations of many other researchers against David shield’s arguments that somehow supports plagiarism though not completely. They condemn plagiarism and thus support strict regularities to be instituted against any form of plagiarism that goes beyond 10%. In response to this, David Shield does not turn down their claims but also claims that 10% is a big limit to plagiarism and should be increased [is this really Shield’s claim, or a claim that he presents as an exhibit from another source?]. He concludes by enlightening them that no new thing can be identified without the study of past recorded literature thereby they should be concerned about using the already researched work to come up with new items. [how is this argument distinct from Shields’s? Make that more clear]

· Methodology

Lethem, J. (2008). The ecstasy of influence: A plagiarism mosaic. Sound unbound: Sampling digital music and culture, 25-52:

This research paper defines the importance of utilizing secondary sources as a source for creating one’s personal discoveries. The case of plagiarism is a reflection of what happens in the contemporary world where people manipulate original data from recorded sources to write their own tales and documents [I’m interested but confused]. This is a wrong way because it degrades the credibility and value of the original sources thus distorting the information recorded [according to whom?]. To control these writers should apply the idea proposed by David Shield of arranging the data from other researchers in a determined order so as to get the new item or discovery instead of altering the primary source of the data. This will help to keep such information for future reference to be used in other research studies. [so how are you using Lethem’s method?]

Very good.

Check/check-plus