Summary: In each of the essays a known writer talks about: importances of writing seriously (King), show even skilled writers first drafts are "shitty" (Lammot.), seeing your story clearly. [focusing on the material of the paper, not your emotions,](Haruf.), how becoming a writer is hard [even skilled writers struggle to find acceptance/success.](Diaz.), restraining the urge to let your inner critic ruin perfectly fine work. (Goodman.), and finally to read your work, and revise it as necessary after. (Sontag.)
All of these writers have either encouraged others to continue trying to be a writer or sharing some information on what they find useful in improving the quality of the material.
My thoughts (reflection.): These essays provide tips, and insights from successful writers, and I think after reading these essays I can improve on my own writing about writing styled essay.
UtE: I think Steven Kings message of writing to important to be treated like a chore, and Lammot's focus on working past the "shitty first-drafts" encourage the reader (Including Tony, which may help him develop a passion, and discipline in writing.) to work at their writing, and put themselves into their work.
MM: Although the idea of revising after reading isn't new to me hearing it again is definitely useful to me. I learned the importance of separating your emotions from your writing. (at least anything that detracts from the project.) The most important lesson I can try to take from these essays is to calm my inner critic, and worry about critiquing my work after it's completely written. (so I don't lose track of what i'm writing in the first place.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Sunday, January 29, 2012
January 30th
Harris:
Summary: Harris focuses on the merit of revision through multiple-drafts, and the possible benefits that may come from this. Through the article he deconstructs the idea that a better paper will always come from revision. (specifically multi-draft.)
I personally don't feel multi-draft writing yields more success, and I will usually refine my views, and the ideas I'm presenting to get an overall finer product without completely re-writing the paper.
Responses: One-draft writer.
My final draft is built from the scaffolding of the original paper. I only edit, and add to the original ideas.
The disadvantage to this is that if i do not put in an appropriate amount of research I may stray from the more important ideas of the subject.
Ransom:
Summary: In this response to Berkenkotter's research of Murray, Domineq Ransom feels that the methods of evaluating a writer are inadequate because the gaps that are left in the "Think Aloud Protocol" because of fear of critique, and a lack of reflection from the subject. She instead suggests it would be more effective to evaluate your own writing process through notes in the margin, which allow you to reflect on the development of your view on the subject material.
The thing I liked most about this article was that it managed to assert its views, and compare them to previous studies while being succinct. ( I think a reader can deconstruct an idea without the step by step guidance of a writer.)
list: Study yourself (?)
I've not personally taken notes for the sake of exploration, and I tend to only write for an objective. The ideas for this objective oriented writing are developed long before pen comes to paper.
Summary: Harris focuses on the merit of revision through multiple-drafts, and the possible benefits that may come from this. Through the article he deconstructs the idea that a better paper will always come from revision. (specifically multi-draft.)
I personally don't feel multi-draft writing yields more success, and I will usually refine my views, and the ideas I'm presenting to get an overall finer product without completely re-writing the paper.
Responses: One-draft writer.
My final draft is built from the scaffolding of the original paper. I only edit, and add to the original ideas.
The disadvantage to this is that if i do not put in an appropriate amount of research I may stray from the more important ideas of the subject.
Ransom:
Summary: In this response to Berkenkotter's research of Murray, Domineq Ransom feels that the methods of evaluating a writer are inadequate because the gaps that are left in the "Think Aloud Protocol" because of fear of critique, and a lack of reflection from the subject. She instead suggests it would be more effective to evaluate your own writing process through notes in the margin, which allow you to reflect on the development of your view on the subject material.
The thing I liked most about this article was that it managed to assert its views, and compare them to previous studies while being succinct. ( I think a reader can deconstruct an idea without the step by step guidance of a writer.)
list: Study yourself (?)
I've not personally taken notes for the sake of exploration, and I tend to only write for an objective. The ideas for this objective oriented writing are developed long before pen comes to paper.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
january 27th
Barbara Tomlinson brings attention to metaphors students use while revising in an effort to allow a student to reflect on which of these metaphors they use in the process of revision.
Personally I didn't take in much value from the 'metaphorical' approach to writing. I do sometimes approach my paper as if it were a pile of raw ore, with unneeded bits of junk and inconsistencies, but most of the time problems are too varied to apply this way of thinking.
1. It's my belief that Tomlinson values an interview more as evidence of discourse, and not as evidence of composing practices because composing practices aren't fully exhibited in conversation, as they are in writing.
2.Tomlinson asserts that writing can be seen, and can't be seen as a metaphor because writing cannot be looked at as something else, because this takes away the individuals form of writing, and makes it easy for a student to base their writings solely on comparisons.
3.I like to take the "refining ore approach in writing. Mostly because I have my beliefs on the subject, but my voice isn't fully tuning to its purpose, and it's just a matter of me finding that tune.
4.I feel it's too difficult to have a paper that's too inflexible to change, and there aren't many topics tailored to such a precise ordering of thoughts.
5. I don't think my metaphorical view on my revision process makes too much impact because I take different approaches to different papers, which may not have room for certain familiar metaphors.
Personally I didn't take in much value from the 'metaphorical' approach to writing. I do sometimes approach my paper as if it were a pile of raw ore, with unneeded bits of junk and inconsistencies, but most of the time problems are too varied to apply this way of thinking.
1. It's my belief that Tomlinson values an interview more as evidence of discourse, and not as evidence of composing practices because composing practices aren't fully exhibited in conversation, as they are in writing.
2.Tomlinson asserts that writing can be seen, and can't be seen as a metaphor because writing cannot be looked at as something else, because this takes away the individuals form of writing, and makes it easy for a student to base their writings solely on comparisons.
3.I like to take the "refining ore approach in writing. Mostly because I have my beliefs on the subject, but my voice isn't fully tuning to its purpose, and it's just a matter of me finding that tune.
4.I feel it's too difficult to have a paper that's too inflexible to change, and there aren't many topics tailored to such a precise ordering of thoughts.
5. I don't think my metaphorical view on my revision process makes too much impact because I take different approaches to different papers, which may not have room for certain familiar metaphors.
paper1 final.
Without any specific observations left on my paper I found it challenging to find things to change, as I've not had a chance to read on the subject more, my perspective is unchanged. My main efforts were in simplifying some of the sentences I thought were unnecessarily complex.
Bradley Schneider
Originality
A common assumption of many people is that a talented writer is someone who can form original ideas without derivation or inspiration from society; alone. However, with added perspective, I feel that the definition of originality: “The capacity to act or think independently”, makes it impossible to be original, because a large portion of the individual’s identity can be attributed to society. So if originality is to be expected of a writer it would be unreasonable to adhere to such an inaccessible definition of the word “original.”, moreover the weight of a writer’s creativity shouldn’t be tied to the impact of his writing, but rather by his ability to marry the familiar with the unfamiliar, as better said by R.G. Martin “Originality, as I am advocating it here, is not mere verbal volatility-it it(is?) a putting together of the familiar into the unfamiliar in some kind of defensible way, some way that makes as much sense as the materials from which it was constructed.” , which I feel adequately provides a basis of understanding creative work. I feel the fallacious way in which we understand originality may have adverse effects on those whose educational progress (In respect to creativity.) is centered around this old way of thinking.
Previously accepted views on originality, as I’ve stated, create problems in the course of education of language, and writing; in particular, plagiarism. To explain how plagiarism arises out of the currently dominant view of originality I feel it necessary to share an example of such an assignment that encourages plagiarism presented by R. G. Martin, in which he/she says: “The assignment to write 1000 or 5000 words "on" Robert Frost or T. S. Eliot is itself a "plagiarized" assignment (i.e., one totally devoid of originality), and it invites the same in return. The second cure (to designate the copied material as inferior) thus requires the teacher to give enough thought to the assignment so that it cannot be met by copying. I suspect that the only unplagiarized topics are questions which have not been asked or answered before, at least with-in the students' experience. "Robert Frost" is a plagiarized topic, on which thousands have written. A paper that is simply "about" Frost is usually a mere collection of publicly available facts-in the sense in which, as a rule, encyclopedia-entries are themselves epitomes of plagiarism (what we don't want in an encyclopedia is originality!).” it is this style of education that creates the dependence on memorization or regurgitation, which, in itself is a “subtle act of plagiarism.” I’m not aware of any comprehensive approach to fix this problem; nonetheless I feel it is a problem worth acknowledging.
Within the classroom a typical teacher (I can say most of mine fell into this sort.) will respond to instances of apparent plagiarism in the same way they would for a student cheating. The problem with this is that bad paraphrasing, and otherwise unconscious instances of plagiarism could result in discipline for the student. This is unfair since the student’s curriculum strongly encourages the recycling of ideas to make a point (As said in paragraph #2), rather than spending the time to write questions which require thought, and creativity [paraphrased from R.G. Martin]. Martin goes on to compare situations in mathematics where it is rare to find the repetition identicle questions. (example: [attributed to Martin]: 5x=92) Another example of a problem in high-school curriculum for writing is the teacher’s attempt to prepare a student for standardized tests in using multiple-choice questions, of which none of the work (aside from a vague partial of the material the student has memorized.) is the student’s. If it is the goal of a teacher/school to facilitate creativity in his/her class then the extra work used into asking unique questions would be required. (An example of a question demanding a unique answer for writing (presented by Martin, corresponding to the previous citation.): “Does Robert Frost’s poetry carry out his Maxim that a poem ‘begins in delight and ends in wisdom’?”) With the higher education requirements of a teacher, and the responsibility they are placed with in educating a generation of non-drones, it isn’t unreasonable to expect thoughtful effort in their course work.
The issues with the currently accepted construct on originality poses a problem to both the writing communities and the development of creative writing at a lower educational level. The obsession with putting titles of ownership on ideas may itself contribute to a misunderstanding. People so quickly proclaim “their ideas” without acknowledging that they are at most building on that idea by asserting their perspective. While people may have their own original and unique views on ideas, the ideas themselves are not new (within the lifetime of the person.) Although it’s impossible to be certain there are any unknown primal thoughts, it is not unreasonable to postulate that within the constraints of human thought, and language, there are few remaining if any, and to assert otherwise is to stifle the progress to knowing these primal things. For progress to be made within our educational system I feel it would be beneficial to divert from our currently accepted understanding of originality. For the sake of creativity, and, as a result, societal development, our education systems must encourage attainable originality.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
january 25th
1.Murray is described as doing an abundance of "revision" internally; I also make the conceptual revisions while thinking about what i'm writing.
2.The audience of Murray, over the long expanse of time he's written, has been reflected towards himself. I've not written (atleast not dedicatedly) long enough to write to anyone other than the assigner of a paper. Or to myself if i'm writting some kind of note or journal.
3.Berkenkotter learned that planning and revision have areas which can overlap when writing a paper.
AEI: By in large i'm a procrastinator, and as such most of the thought and revision in my writing is composed off paper. Editing tends to go neglected.
MM: Well if I did learn one thing it was that i spend far too little time, and thought into writing a paper. 176 logged hours of tape attributed to a single work dwarfs the total amount of time in all of my highschool writing.
2.The audience of Murray, over the long expanse of time he's written, has been reflected towards himself. I've not written (atleast not dedicatedly) long enough to write to anyone other than the assigner of a paper. Or to myself if i'm writting some kind of note or journal.
3.Berkenkotter learned that planning and revision have areas which can overlap when writing a paper.
AEI: By in large i'm a procrastinator, and as such most of the thought and revision in my writing is composed off paper. Editing tends to go neglected.
MM: Well if I did learn one thing it was that i spend far too little time, and thought into writing a paper. 176 logged hours of tape attributed to a single work dwarfs the total amount of time in all of my highschool writing.
Friday, January 20, 2012
paper 1 (attempted repost.)
Cover page:
Bradley Schneider
English 151: paper #1.
J. Whicker
My objective for this paper was to challenge the construct of originality, and the problems that it’s commonly accepted form gives rise to. The flow of my paper is someone unsmooth, and I would appreciate pointers in how to fix that.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Allen
Allen feels that no writer, or atleast few writers, are inately gifted as a "good writer", and that a succesful writer has to trudge out their work like anyone else. For me I'm only able to write freely (not necessarily skillfully.) when motivated by a time constaint (procrastinating.), and without some force compelling me to continue writing I loose focus, effected by "writer's block". So i feel my experiances do reflect the experiances of Allen, even though I attribute importance to other influences/inhibiters.
Murray
GRR: I was taught to write in a way that was inpersonal, and it was discouraged to present information from the first person.
1.'I think Murray is trying to argue against the construct which discourages writing in the first person.
3. Murray disects himself to enforce the idea that reading is autobiographal, and he also doesn't seem to argumentative.
4. If I'm to progress in my "autobiographies" I would surely need to improve or atleast change as a writer.
5. The texts don't directly display aspects of your life, but rather, an informed person (informed about the writer's history.) can draw connections between how a person writes, and what they've experianced.
MM: If you look at writing as an active autobiography then you can appreciate growth as a writer, and give significance to writing where it didn't have it before. (outside of class.)
Dawkins
GRR:
a. My sister's treehouse, which is made out of wood scraps, and cardboard, made a great place to play with her friends.
b. The cardboard and scrap wood treehouse of my sister made a great place for her to hangout with her friends.
c. My sister and her friends played in the treehouse made of scrap wood and cardboard.
2.Teaching 'this' method of punctuation is easier, and has greater rhetorical effect (affect.?).
3. Higher marks, such as the period, can be used to increase the emphasis on a sentance. Adding to the rhetorical effect.
5.I know don't hold punctuation to be as absolute.
6.I usually think of punctuation as an annoying secondary step of writing, and it becomes customary to focus less on punctuation until i've finished establishing the context material.
MM:If instead of reading this, I had been simply told that i was expected to use writing rhetorically, I probably wouldn't consider changing my methods, and would continue to value grammatical significance over the rhetorical.
Murray
GRR: I was taught to write in a way that was inpersonal, and it was discouraged to present information from the first person.
1.'I think Murray is trying to argue against the construct which discourages writing in the first person.
3. Murray disects himself to enforce the idea that reading is autobiographal, and he also doesn't seem to argumentative.
4. If I'm to progress in my "autobiographies" I would surely need to improve or atleast change as a writer.
5. The texts don't directly display aspects of your life, but rather, an informed person (informed about the writer's history.) can draw connections between how a person writes, and what they've experianced.
MM: If you look at writing as an active autobiography then you can appreciate growth as a writer, and give significance to writing where it didn't have it before. (outside of class.)
Dawkins
GRR:
a. My sister's treehouse, which is made out of wood scraps, and cardboard, made a great place to play with her friends.
b. The cardboard and scrap wood treehouse of my sister made a great place for her to hangout with her friends.
c. My sister and her friends played in the treehouse made of scrap wood and cardboard.
2.Teaching 'this' method of punctuation is easier, and has greater rhetorical effect (affect.?).
3. Higher marks, such as the period, can be used to increase the emphasis on a sentance. Adding to the rhetorical effect.
5.I know don't hold punctuation to be as absolute.
6.I usually think of punctuation as an annoying secondary step of writing, and it becomes customary to focus less on punctuation until i've finished establishing the context material.
MM:If instead of reading this, I had been simply told that i was expected to use writing rhetorically, I probably wouldn't consider changing my methods, and would continue to value grammatical significance over the rhetorical.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)