Blog 5

In this paper I plan to use meta-commentary as a tool to farther the clarity of my ideas. By arguing back and forth what I mean and what I do not mean, I not only succeed in covering space upon the page, but also avoid potential misinterpretations that might arise by ambiguous, scandalous statements. I think this type of writing device is very relevant when writing an evaluation; all the evaluation has to do with a personal opinion that the writer has taken form him or herself and placed it in an analytical way. In most cases, opinions are not something concrete; instead, one usually qualifies his or her own statement frequently. Without meditated meta-commentary it would be hard to filter out a definite conclusion, which would encompass all the factors addressed in the paper. Of course, this practice is mostly done unknowingly because one is often qualifying their own views in everyday conversation. Nevertheless, when one becomes aware of the use of this rhetoric strategy one can use it even more effectively. I plan to continue incorporating this in my future papers because meta-commentary is one of the most important tools a writer can use. Often times a writer is attacked for saying something, when their intentions with the message laid elsewhere. Because of the concrete nature of writing, it is hard to take something back and try to clarify the original meaning to an audience that read the unexplained version. Meta-commentary is a way to save your own credibility.