My work to date

Up to this point I feel like I'm a little lacking in the research part of the project, which means I'm probably doing just the right amount. I tend to overestimate what needs to be done, and end up getting more than enough because of my lack of certainty. I've done some sit ins at two Starbucks thus far. I hope to do one more this weekend to give me a good opening description of a cup of coffee at Starbucks (the action, not just the drink). I've got one sizable book to read (Howard Shultz' autobiography) and two smaller ones. I have a few online journals, but I'm not sure what they're going to amount to. I'm interested in finding some blogs online that deal with baristas and people who cannot get enough (or get too much) Starbucks. I'm not sure if this will give me resources or just a few good leads, but this will hopefully be comparable to interviews. In other words, some first hand sources that may not be full of facts but will be full of opinion. As far as writing goes, I'm off to a normal start, which means a really rough draft. I've preliminarily decided how I'd like to set up my paper, but the pieces are not necessarily in place. I have a rough idea of format, but I'm not sure which facts best support that format. I feel like I have a thesis, or if not one I keep, certainly one I can work with. I felt like I hit a rut by picking such a broad culture, because it almost seems like they're selling peoples' culture back to them, but I think there is something interesting in that. As far as questions that I'd pose in peer discussion; I think the biggest thing I'd want to know is if the paper is coherent and can hold attention for that amount of time. I find that when I write longer papers, I can be a bit redundant, so the best way to catch that is to have someone else read it.

Argument styles

The arguments of each piece I found to be a bit tricky to identify. It was sometimes also hard to identify specifically what they might have been arguing, but I feel like this question was a bit easier, since I could at least be close to correct.
The first article was the Truck Stop as Community and Culture. This piece seemed to claim that truckers have a human side. The author seemed to address that trucking is a job and a way of life that creates cynicism in its participants, but if one is willing to invest the energy, the human side of the truckers can be found. The truck stop was identified as the focal point of truckers lives, where they were able to meet with fellow truckers and to escape from the rest of the world. The author seemed to be using a Rogerian style of argument, because he seemed to be laying the common ground between truckers and the rest of the world. I feel like his goal was to make people realize that truckers deal with problems akin to those that everyone else deals with.
The next article we read was Dark Webs Goth Subcultures in Cyberspace. This was a bit more clear on its claim since the author explicitly stated it. The premise was that the Internet goth subculture accomplished the same tasks that social gathering places did in the past. He compared online activities and information passing to what occurred before the internet in clubs, record stores, etc. Again, the style was a bit more difficult to determine, but I think Clasical is what best fits this argument. The reason that I pick classical is because the author has a very clear thesis. I felt that with such a clear thesis there was no room left for likelihood, but rather, the author's goal seemed to be certainty.
The third piece was Transmissions from Trans Camp. It was harder with this piece to identify the claim. The author made a valiant attempt to objectively provide information, since she seemed to be writing for the press. I'm not sure if she was specifically arguing for recognition of trans-gender individuals among lesbian cultures, or among society as a whole. I'd choose society as a whole since the audience was presumably a paper or magazine available to all, rather than just to one group. Although, as an afterthought, it may have been directed at gay and lesbian subcultures since such a topic might have been handled with more sensitivity if directed at the general population. In terms of the style of argument, I think that this falls between Toulmin and Rogerian. I pick the inbetween because the author establishes common ground, but seems to be making a strong point without room for compromise.
The last piece addressed by this blog is the House for the Homeless. The author here seemed to be giving a description more than an argument. At times I felt like she was championing hard work and escape from homeless situations being a personal choice. In the next moment she seemed to be calling for support for the homeless. It wasn't until the conclusion that it was made more clear that she was calling on the homeless to believe in themselves. Her style of choice would almost certainly be Toulmin since she seemed to argue that her family and other families like hers were able to create lives for themselves even if it wasn't what they wanted, they took what they could get. I think it fits the style because, again, it firmly argues a point, but it leaves a little room for other opinions.