Alsaedi 1 Mossab Alsaedi Professor Haas Writing 37 March 11, 2014 Writing 37 Reflection Writing 37 is a lower division intensive

writing course. This quarter, our theme was detective and mystery genre. Focusing on that genre, we mainly looked closely on the works of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and his series of Sherlock Holmes novels. We also were put in groups and each group had to focus on a modern-day interpretation of the Sherlock Holmes novels. Our main focus was analysis and rhetoric. Our assignments varied from reading novels and writing analytical essays to presentations and online grammar modules. Analysis definitely turned out to be different from what I though it was. My understanding of analysis was mere understanding of the writer's purpose. I never knew that analysis was the breaking down of a passage into smaller parts and going in depth into the writer's purpose and examining the tools the writer used in the text or the producer or director used when filming or shooting a scene. Analysis also includes closely following what the writer would leave for the reader to believe or think about while reading a text, or in another case, watching the scene to feel from the background music or the lighting in a scene. After reading Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's The Sign of the Four and The Hound of the Baskervilles, we were assigned to write an essay about a mystery genre convention that is found in most of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's novels and choose a specific text to analyze. I chose the mystery genre convention of the sidekick, John Watson, and how he is used in the novels to show how Holmes observes and deduces abnormally and that Watson is inferior to Holmes. It also

Alsaedi 2 shows how the sidekick is naive and oblivious. From the structure that the writer followed in writing and from thinking in what a reader would think while reading the passage, it could be inferred that the writer had put Watson there for the role of showing how Holmes is smarter than the usual. The reader first thinks that Watson and Holmes are equally smart, then has more confidence in Watson, but then gets surprised form Holmes's observation and conclusion, and eventually feels more confident about Holmes's superiority to Watson when Watson explicitly expresses his astonishment. I also used some scenes from The Hound of the Baskervilles in the same essay. This also supports Watson's inferiority and Holmes's abnormality in deducing and observing. I was in a group with two of my colleagues whom I would describe as ambitious and enthusiastic. Although we had difficulties finding perfect times to meet and work on our projects, we learnt a lot from each other and developed a strong sense of teamwork. Working in groups made me practice several habits of mind. Working with my colleagues in the modern-day text group made me more persistent and open when suggesting ideas and receiving suggestions and comments. I also became more engaged in what we were assigned to do knowing that I have their support. Our group was focusing on the TV series Sherlock, which aired in 2010. As soon as we were asked to pick a show, I immediately chose Sherlock. Sherlock is a modern-day interpretation of the Sherlock Holmes novels, which closely follows the novels but is different and updated to appeal to the audience of the 21st century. We wrote an essay about the modern-day text focusing on a mystery genre convention that was found in the Sherlock Holmes novels and that was also found in the modern-day interpretation of the novels and that was updated in order for the audience to relate to the stories in 2010. I chose the novel The Hound of the Baskervilles and the

Alsaedi 3 episode "The Hounds of Baskerville" and chose the mystery genre convention of seeking clues and evidence. In the novel, Watson sought clues and evidence by going to the moor in Devonshire and living in Baskerville Hall, which is an ancient hall. However, in the episode, Holmes and Watson both go to Devonshire by car and investigate Baskerville, which is a vast, gated area in which experiments are conducted on animals and genetic alterations and done. In the novel, Watson communicated with Holmes by writing letters and using the telegram. In the episode, Watson and Holmes both use text messages and cell phones. I personally believe that my first essay, which was about the sidekick convention, is stronger and more in depth than the second one. Its argument is more valid and the evidence supports it. It seems like the ideas in the essay connect with each other without causing confusion. However, some readers might think that my argument is invalid, but that is how I use the essay to persuade them. The second essay is a bit weaker and needs more work. I chose the paragraph in which I showed how the mystery conventions were updated and modernized. I believe that that paragraph clearly shows how things were different back in the late 1800s. The class, as a whole, participated in the RIP seminar with another writing class. We gave a presentation about what we learnt and we acted out a murder mystery scene for them to solve. Our presentation covered different topics, such as The Victorian Era, Arthur Conan Doyle, Mystery Genre Conventions, and Modern-Day Texts. I was a part of the presenters who got to stand and present parts of the presentation. I presented about Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and about his education in the University of Edinburgh. I also presented about the TV series Sherlock and how it is closely related to the novels but heavily modernized. I was playing the role of John Watson in the murder mystery scene. The murder mystery was about the mascot, who is the son of the cheerleading coach, who dies due to the jealousy of his sister. What I personally liked

Alsaedi 4 about our presentation was that it was straightforward, it was well organized, and it was fast paced. However, our presentation had some flaws, such as the long lines in the scene's script, the big number of red herrings in the skit, and the clear clues, which should have ben more vague in order for the audience to think more. The other class did a good job as well. I liked how they showed videos about different horror categories, used tense and scary music at the end during the performance, and used the UCI Mesa Court scary story as an example of an urban legend. Their presentation also had flaws, such as having five different presentations, giving out papers to the audience, which I thought was distracting, and taking a long time to get up and access their presentations. The RIP seminar in general taught me how to be patient and how to be collaborative with my peers. It also taught me how to be flexible and curious about what the other class had to say about what they have learnt. It also was a way of testing my responsibility and engagement in presenting my parts in an organized way and not letting my peers down. And for the murder mystery scene, I learnt how to be creative and give ideas about the skit and how it should go. These also benefit me in the long run. Some of the assignments were online grammar modules. Although I am an international student, I would describe myself as a native speaker, for I have been speaking English for about fourteen years. Some of the grammar modules were easy to complete either because they were topics that I have learnt in school or because they were ones that depended on how it sounded or on one's intuition, such as Parallelism and Quotations. Some of the modules were easy yet I needed more practice in, such as Dashes and Colons. Some of the modules were new topics and took a long time to complete, such as Coordination and Subordination, Identify Claims and Evidence, and Dangling and Misplaced Modifiers.

Alsaedi 5 Eventually, the journey to the end of the quarter was a long one. We have covered a lot of different things in the course. We read novels, analyzed them, watched episodes, wrote essays, gave presentations and acted out a murder mystery scene. I have learnt valuable lessons that would benefit me in the future educationally and professionally. The RIP seminar proved to me that I do not have stage fright and that I am becoming better in public speaking. The analytical essays that I have written taught me how to be a writer and a reader at the same time and think of what t he reader would think while reading what the writer had written and their purpose. Not only while reading but also while watching movies or TV shows. Knowing that the lights and the sounds affect the perception of the viewer makes it all clear. The whole course is like a lesson that taught me metacognition and made me think more about where I am as a writer and how to implement what I have learnt in the future. It is like a new door opened in front of me.