Greene’s argument actually made me want to do research on SOMETHING. The way he supports his position or “frame” makes doing research seem like something more than a boring addition to writing a paper: he makes it seem like an exciting part of becoming more engaged. Before Grant-Davie, I have never considered writing as a type of conversation or dialogue. Greene solidified this by further explaining and simplifying this opinion. I used to consider writing as more of a type of lecture, because you don’t get a response. This view of mine was completely ignorant, because you are always receiving responses, even though they may not always be direct. I knew that blogging evokes response, but until I read Andrew Sullivan’s “Why I Blog” I never considered it a valid form of writing. I like how Greene uses Burke’s comparison of a research “argument” to a conversation in a parlor that is started well before you enter and continues long after you leave. That made everything piece together and it makes a research paper seem more interesting, because I am someone who enjoys talking about different issues. It makes writing seem more enjoyable now that I know it’s not a one sided argument but an ongoing conversation.