This relates to Haltmans ideology by finding value and historical interpretations from everyday objects and in the article it said "students will find value principally in learning from the models that these reading offer of how such interpretation can be carried out".

in light of halt-man's text, and in light of the research prospectus i believe that the reader should have a clear sense of what cause that particular interpretation.

I've caught myself doing this before but i didn't realize what the problem was until i read this essay. The, its about a object theme of this article, helped me realize description plays a key part not only in describing a object, but creating ideas from that object.

I believe this Is a problem because students don't actually realize what they are doing until the teacher reviewstheir papers.

In light of the halt-man text, he explained that description is the best access to experiencing a object, because description can the register the way a object may function for a particular person.

Basically it is a physical object that can be touched,named, and described.

I believe student's don't realize what they are lacking in certain skills unless they've been introduced to those skills. And the fact that certain skills are missing from 40 years ago, shows the difference of expectations from 40 years ago to now. So i believe these different expectations are causing teachers to skip the fundamentals, which has made things harder for some students.

I believe this is a way of getting readers and writers more interested in their work. For example, if you wanted to talk about poverty, you would talk about boarded up houses, the man that was sitting on the corner, etc. The use of a object is meant to help create physical connections to that object.

This goes back to haltman's text where he tells the reader to not look for what the object signifies, but how it signifies. I believe both these authors are looking for a gerundial meaning in their work

in light of the halt man text, i believe that some of the small of the features of a object can be important, and conscious analyzation of the features can make make a difference in the meaning that is interpreted from the object.

This metadata is interesting because it is surely to draw a reader in because someone who read's this will wonder have they been truly writing correctly, and read it to check to see if they have been writing correct

I for the first time in a while am actually happy about my work and am taking even more pride in the way it is turning out. In using a physical and concrete website as well I am able to showcase my work and have shown my parents and a couple close friends my work. My meaning has been clear, precise, and descriptive. I can finally "see what I am talking about." I can capture an abstract idea and analyze a feeling and emotion from a physical object such as a quilt panel and found that it is easier than just focusing not the abstract idea. This is the main idea of the Maguire text and what he wishes teachers to incorporate and I believe that every lit class should be this way. If we incorporated the ideas of Haltman,Fowler,Maguire,and Orwell into every writing it would make them great.

I have suffered from the literary disease many times when I get stuck in my writing and have to reach a word count. My writing starts off to be originally clear but the meaning gets blurred over time due to the fact that I have run out of things to say because I am not being concrete or descriptive in my writing. In rading the Haltman text and seeing all the many ways to combat this disease I will have to continuously re-read it to improve my writing when I get stuck,

This quote by George Orwell perfectly helps give supporting evidence to the thesis of this text. It not only gives a expert opinion, but masterfully puts the thesis into words. A concrete object requires you to describe something that can be explained through senses and can be very descriptive; however when describing an abstract idea, or something in your head it is so much harder to gather the thoughts in your head and put them down into a comprehendible writing. This entire quote could also be the thesis of the Haltman text, if you make a conscious effort to focus on being descriptive on an object your vocabulary will be precise and clear and make your writing very comprehensible.

I have often done this in my own personal writing and it is interesting to see if from a professional perspective.The Haltman work and Maguire both mention how to work on and help to make this mush into magic. I have also learned over this first unit that being more descriptive leads to more information and more detail and not mush like we have been led to believe. Mrs. A has repeatedly said this during class and Haltma and Maguire have enforced that idea too. As i Have been doing my research I have found this to be true, the more you go in depth in your research and your writing the more there is to talk about. I believe in one's writing there needs to be a deeper pursuit of your subject and I believe that it does help by giving a concrete topic.

I really like this point that Maguire made, I feel that it is a lot harder for students to learn based upon someone's ideas and what is going on in their head. If you can see and smell and touch something it is much easier to obtain your own ideas and your own interpretations and lead to more original and unique writings. I am seeing why we are doing the AIDS quilt as our first project. Something that is concrete reality. To continue with my previous post it is of utmost importance that you first focus on a concrete idea and from that you can gleam the "more abstract, conceptual,or even metaphysical aspects of that culture that they quite literally embody," as Haltman says.

This is very similar to the Primary text in that it reinforces the title of not writing with ideas but with objects. Haltman had a very conscious and specific desire for one to be more descriptive and vivid in the description of concrete items. This type of writing makes it easier for readers to picture and allows them to relate to and imagine one's writing. I have been using this kind of writing in my primary source description and it has helped my writing. These texts are very parallel in their main ideas.

This was an important skill that Haltman and Prown talked about. The first step to any good writing is to ask questions and deduct in order to come up with a good analysis. I recently did this in my own project where I came up with a list of at least three research questions that led to me finding some very good sources and finding answers and pathways that I did not even expect. I wonder if the author expected to find what he was looking for or kept an open mind.

This statement is very similar to the thesis of the primary text. Haltman was very focused on transforming your ideas into physical and emotional descriptions of objects. I enjoy how the title grabs your attention by telling you the "secret" immediately instead of making you read to decipher what it is.

The title makes me ask what is the difference?, Why will it only be good and not great? The dictionary difference between a idea and object is: an idea is defined as a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action. An object is a person or thing to which a specified action or feeling is directed.

Based upon information alone I feel relates to Haltman and makes your writing better by sorting your suggestions and possibles courses of action into something specified and descriptive and elaborate. This answers my second question because if you do this your writing will be just "good".

"I'm obsessed with the importance of writing with objects, and know it works, but it's hard to get the idea across. It goes against the conventional teacher wisdom that says students have to handle abstract ideas, and what the heck does writing physically have to do with that?" While Haltman refers to working with material objects the proper historical grammatical language is required. Despite Maguire is obsessed with writing with objects he's not teaching the same methods for proper grammatical usage.

"How should one train students to give good, vivid examples in their writing? Should you tell them, Be more specific? I used to do that but I don't any more, because it's too vague, not operational." Haltman gave us methods on how write a proper depiction of an object with the correct process such as culturally, emotionally, physically, and creatively.

"When you think of a concrete object, you think wordlessly, and then, if you want to describe the thing you have been visualizing you probably hunt about until you find the exact words that seem to fit. When you think of something abstract, you are more inclined to use words from the start, and unless you make a conscious effort to prevent it, the existing dialect will come rushing in and do the job for you, at the expense of blurring or even changing your meaning." Maguire and Haltman both focus on one narrow point. Haltman focuses on the drawing and the linguistic. Meanwhile, Maguire focuses on the the same methods when describing a visual object.

"If the professional writers whom Fowler and Orwell addressed had to be warned away from over-abstraction, how much more do our students need that advice? Yet the writing textbooks on the whole say nothing about abstractitis, mentioning it at most only in passing. And instructors do not focus on over-abstraction, even though that's the major problem young writers have." Maguire states that even professional writes disapprove the idea of having too many ideas and specific objects and often teachers don't teach student's how to they because society trains the student's to follow. Korener disapprove their idea and argue that even objects can also perform what visual images can provide.

In Maguires article-"From a teacher's perspective, the lovely thing about this technique of writing with things you can drop on your foot is that both the skilled and the unskilled can do it." By having different techniques in writing aids the students to write with purpose and pay close attention to verbiage to achieve better writing skills.

Miguire "Ideas are what matter," Bernadette said confidently. "Getting them to define and handle ideas is what's important, not things." Halman explain that without usage ot the mind on thinking and creative ideas it would be almost impossible to write a creative player relating to Migure saying that ideas are the most important.

"Ideas are what matter," Bernadette said confidently. "Getting them to define and handle ideas is what's important, not things." - Maguire. In Haltmans text he expresses how it would be almost impossible to write without using your mind and creative imagination skills.

Maguire-"They don't understand why this bias toward the physical matters nor why it works" by writing with a biast perspective allows the reader one side of the story which isn't fair to the reader.

In Maguire article states "They don't understand why this bias toward the physical matters nor why it works." This will have an negative impact because it would affect how the reader obtain the information only seeing one side of the spectrum. This would only let the reader comprehend one side of the story.

WhiletoomuchKenneth Haltman informationcanbealmostasbadastoolittle,anythingleftoutofdescriptionislosttointerpretationforever. (pg 6/7)

The students in Maguire classroom didn't do enough research such as examples and information to know more about the subjects they were assigned to which explained detailed in Haltmans quote.The reason is because students ideas are jumbled and not clear and concise to a narrow focus on the subject.

Maguire state that "Today I give students a shortcut. I say, "Write physically. Write with physical objects. Put physical objects in your essay." This shows that its crucial to express and comprehend the significance of the object because even Maguire follows Haltman's ideology when composing ideas for writing.

By Maguire instructing his students to "Write physically. Write with physical objects. Put physical objects in your essay". When you identify a object it signifies much more meaning and helps you write with purpose when you have a object to show significance much similar to Haltman theory of writing an essay.

I beleive this text and the secondary The Secret to Good Writing: It's About Objects, Not Ideas, agree in a sense that the main text is looking for a individual to develop a deeper connection and meaning to a object for a better understanding, while the secondary text is developing a a deeper connection to ideas that are presented.