Jeremiah Rufus

Rob Michalski

CTW I

06 December 2019

Tapping into Untapped Potential

What makes up a good critical reader? This question I asked myself throughout the

quarter in CTW I. To answer the question what makes up a good critical reader is the ability to

make a mark on the text. To make a mark on a text is to tailor it to what you understand not only

in text, but in general and the ways to do that is by reading with and against the grain. The idea

of reading against the grain of a text is simply to not take everything in the text that a reader is

reading as final. Finding ways to counter points in the text or simply question text are ways to to

read against the grain according to ​Reading the Lives of Other​, for instance, “against a writer’s

project, to ask questions they might come as a surprise, to look for the limits of the writer’s

vision…”(Bartholomae and Petrosky).To read against the grain according to Bartholomae and

Petrosky is simply challenging the author and making your mark more explicitly on the text.

Reading with the grain isn’t just allowing the text to make a mark on you, but is the method

incorporating your own thoughts and experiences with the text thus making your mark on the

text. For instance, in the introduction of ​Reading the Lives of Others​ the idea of putting your

own thoughts is presented, “generously, to work inside someone else’s systems, to see your

world in someone else’s terms” (Bartholomae and Petrosky). This idea of seeing someone’s

system work in a reader’s world is going along with the text but still is allowing a reader to make
 Rufus 2

a mark on the reading. With this new understanding of what makes a good critical reader, I

believe that I have improved since the beginning of CTW I in my reading as I developed my

skills in making my mark on texts through the idea of reading against and with the grain which

can be identified through the progression of my annotations and Critical Reading Logs.

The art of annotating a text is one that gives a reader free reign to make a mark on a text

as annotating is simply making notes. Although annotating can allow someone to make a mark

on a text it doesn't necessarily mean that the annotations made a mark on the text. For instance,

in the beginning of the quarter I lacked the ability of making a mark on my annotations as my

first assignment on annotations for ​Reading the Lives of Others,​ “​Hi Jeremiah! Some things I

suggest doing next time for your annotations is adding more of your own ideas and opinions you

have of the text or even connecting some points the text makes to real-life examples you have

encountered.” ​(TA). The TA really pointed out how I failed to make a mark on the text as I did

have any of my “own ideas” or “real-life examples”. The points were valid as in my annotations

for ​Reading the Lives of Others​ I simple underlined examples and key points of the text without

making any of my own by neither reading against or with the grain. Since my first annotation

assignment I have developed my annotating skills and did my best to make a mark on the text. I

did that by simply taking upon on the suggestions given by TA, for example, my annotations for

a later assignment, ​Delpit​, I received higher remarks, ​“Hi, Jeremiah. I really like how you

connect the ideas presented in the passage with your own experiences and also ask deeper

questions, as a result. I just suggest using this technique in more passages” (TA).​ The remarks of

the TA suggest that I left my mark on the text. The TA commented on how I connected points of

the text to my own experiences which is reading with the grain. The TA also commented on how
 Rufus 3

I asked deep questions which is a form of reading against the grain. This shows how I have

improved my critical reading skills since the beginning of the quarter as I didn’t read against nor

with the grain. The changes in my annotations were drastic from beginning to end, but my

critical reading skills weren’t as drastic when it came to my CRLs, but still showed progression.

Critical Reading Logs are logs that demonstrate the reader’s understanding of the text.

My CRLs in the beginning were mainly one-sided when it came to skills of making a mark on

the text. For instance, my CRL of Feire’s essay was strong in making remarks against the grain

of the text, “​Freire begins his statement with “The truth is” which is very much his own opinion,

but at the same time while reading the reader might feel simply go with the grain of text because

their lack of expertise of the subject”(CRL Feire). Freire’s essay was an informative one that was

about going against the teaching style of bank-depositing where students simply take whatever a

teacher says and reciprocates it with no questions asked. My comment in the CRL went against

the grain by stating that Freire’s essay will make the writer do the same while reading his essay

and ask no questions. Even though reading against the grain is an important part of making a

mark on a text, I failed to read with the grain through most of it by simply stating Freire’s points

and analyzing it without relating the points or ideas with my own life. To improve my CRLs I

included both skills of making a mark on text, for instance, my CRL on Robillard’s essay “This

idea that one must think about the past to craft a narrative in which you analyzed and interpreted

was very real for me when writing my college essay” (CRL Robillard). This is an example how I

related an idea of an author with a personal story as I mentioned my own experience when it

came to the importance of narrative that was presented in the essay. Including my own story is an

example of reading with the grain of the text, but I also included my own responses and thoughts
 Rufus 4

against the text. For instance, one of the points presented in the essay was how the past was

important for getting through situations in which I replied, “The why part of very eye opening to

me because most of my life has been about getting through certain situations and staying in the

present but never realized that what I did in that present will benefit the current present”(CRL

Robillard). My comment in the CRL went against the authors point which is reading against the

grain of the text. This showed I have improved in my critical reading skills as I read against the

grain and with the grain of text instead of one or the other to make a mark on the text.

What makes a good critical reader good is to make a mark on the text that one reads. To

make a mark a text a reader must read against or with the grain of the text. My annotations shows

how I have improved my critical reading skills as in the beginning my annotations lacked both

reading with and against the grain of a text as seen in my annotations for ​Reading the Lives of

Others.​ To including both reading with and against the grain of a text which can be seen through

my annotations for ​Delpit. ​Although my changes in my CRLs weren’t as big I still improved my

skills in critical reading by going from including one of the two aspects of making a mark on a

text to including both aspects.