blog 1

My overall impression of the article was that it was good, despite the fact that it went in an unexpected series of directions.

I thought it started strong with its discussion of numerical research and narrative research. I liked that section specially because, as someone who is not very strong in math, I could relate to what the author was saying. However, I did disagree, as did others, that the degree of math aversion is not quite as strong as Johanek described. Especially in the context of research. Firstly, I am not sure how much numerical research English and Lit people deal with; secondly,  I feel that many people outside the English field would prefer numerical data, as the biggest problem with English is "there is no right answer" (which can be distressing to science and math people who deal with absolutes on a daily basis). We all know at least one person (my guess is more, though) that find writing too hard and would rather do anything else. They have a writing aversion. It depends on the person I think. Personally, I think that having numbers is helpful and often times helps put a study into perspective for me.

I thought the section on feminism was interesting, although I didn't find myself agreeing with as much as I did in the previous section. Although I am not an expert nor do I even retain a novice's understanding of feminism, to me the writing just seemed to affirm certain stereotypes of women and that to me seems like what feminism is trying to avoid. The example that comes to mind for this is the idea that "stories" are more substantial than "statistics."

In part three, I especially liked the bit about making the narrative about the researcher, not the research to create more diversity within the research field. Not only do I think that is great because it is the researcher who asks these very important and unique questions that need answering, but also because research papers are generally pretty boring to read. And why are research papers boring to read? because they all have to sound professional and factual and polished. And writing that way- stripping the individual of their voice - makes everything sound the same. Who wants to read the same thing over and over again? I have long thought that writing should focus on the writer. It is the writer who brings things to life, it only makes sense to throw our attention to them. Especially in research.