Writing Philosophy
Over the year throughout this course, my writing has improved
immensely. Our first rhetorical analysis to Paret’s piece was incredibly
difficult, and looking back at it now, it is almost difficult for me to read. My
writing style has changed significantly since that first foray into ap prompts,
and my approach has become more seasoned, and with practice, has become
exponentially better. I can look at the AP exam that I took on May
10th, and know that I did work worthy of a 5. Rhetorical analysis was
a hard skill to learn, but over the year, through our extensive seminars on
prompts, it became do able and conquerable. “Words need never be frozen; words can
become a storm center of meanings, sounds, and associations, radiating out
indefinitely like ripples in a pool”.
This quote precisely describes what I needed to learn to write a
rhetorical analysis, I had to grasp the power of what words I was using, in
order to grasp the purpose and intention of the style an author was using in a given
piece of work.
The next writing style that we learned was technically 2
different types, synthesis and argument. Synthesis read very much like a
document based question for an AP History course, so I took to that quickly.
Argument, however, was harder than I had expected it to be. This manifested
itself in my research paper, where I had a hard time in not finding evidence,
but deciding which evidence out of a plethora of sources to use. Furthermore, as
evidenced by the practice prompt we completed in the beginning of the year, the
way in which I worded my argument lacked finesse and definitive style.
Thankfully, this was eventually remedied through the practice of sentence
templates and the learning of both the Rogerian and Toulmann style of outlines.
Initially, I leaned towards the Toulmann style, as like debate, it was more of a
clear-cut, my argument is superior style. However, towards the AP exam, I
started to become rather fond of Rogerian, as I started using that outline in my
practice outlines during class, and in the argument essay prompt for Thomas
Paine. I am very proud of that essay, and believe that is the best argument
paper that I have written, as the 8 it was scored helps prove.
Looking at my papers throughout the year, I still notice
definite strengths and weaknesses within my writing. My biggest strength is my
voice within a paper, even at the start of the year, I was able to communicate
and transcend a voice unique to me. However, as I stated earlier, I lacked
finesse. My biggest weakness is hard to pin down, as there are a few that still
knaw at my perfectionist insides. A weakness can be described by the quote,
““People often lack any voice at all in their writing because they stop so often
in the act of writing a sentence and worry and change their minds about which
works to use.” My biggest weakness as a writer would be trying too hard. That in
itself does not seem to be that much of a weakness, however, it becomes one in
the way that it has sometimes manifested itself in my work. In the creative
writing exercises we did in class, I would try so hard to make it so descriptive
and vivid and interesting, that one of them ended up not even making sense. Or
in my college essay, where I tried so hard to make the introduction interesting,
with a blend of the strange and the familiar, that its tone ended up completely
separate from the rest of the piece.
Henry Matisse once said, “ from the first shock of the
contemplation of a face depends the principal sensation which guides me
constantly throughout the entire execution of a portrait.” Writing is a process,
and it requires a driving force to motivate one’s self to its completion,
whether that force be intrinsic or extrinsic motivational tools. However, a
reader can tell when a writer is writing for superficial means verses having a
true thought to say. One of the most prominent indicators of such is the use of
so-called “fluff” in a work.
Richard K. Redfern warns against this “jargon” by warning that it creates
a vague picture in the reader’s mind that it could be used in any plain article,
and that it would not have any uniqueness to the writer in question. He then
pushes the reader to create their own “jargon” and to work to include it into
their writing style. This is a struggle that I have had through the year, as
sometimes, it is very easy to confuse “fluff” with intelligence and an immense
amount of points to make.
Robert Duncan stated that “My revisions are my new works, each poem a
revision of what has gone before in-sight. Re-vision.” I agree with his analysis
that revisions are new works partly because I believe that all works are based
off of a “Re-vision”, a part of one’s self that the writer replays over and over
in their head for inspiration or solace. This becomes evident to me due to
stories such as Jimmy Santiago Baca’s. He detailed his life in prison, and
explained the power that writing gave him, as he was finally able to express all
of the multitudes of emotion that he had experienced since he was a young child.
A writer draws on past experiences, whether knowingly or not, in all of their
works. Baca drew on his past and whether I knew it or not, I drew on mine. A
primary example of this would be my college essay, which had an extreme basis on
my past. However, some of my best work has been influenced by feelings I did not
know existed. I was unaware of how frustrated I truly was with the criminal
justice system, until I began to read my research paper on it, where I was able
to feel the exact moments that I was frustrated, and to me, that ended up
becoming way more effective than my college essay ever could be.
One does not need an English class, in my opinion, to understand the true
importance of words and communication, that is something, I believe, that is
learned out of the classroom. However, what this class in particular does, is
help one communicate effectively and to the point in order to further one’s
agendas and prevent miscommunications. Bergen Evans in his discussion on the
importance of words, even said that “much of history’s great disasters have been
caused by misunderstandings.” While there can never be a perfect world, free of
misunderstandings, by learning how to improve one’s writing and thinking skills,
one can prepare for the challenges of life, and for the making of one’s own
history and future. I, for one, do believe that I have become better equipped
with writing skills for the future, than I was at the start of the year, which
fills me with immense pride and a sense of accomplishment.
immensely. Our first rhetorical analysis to Paret’s piece was incredibly
difficult, and looking back at it now, it is almost difficult for me to read. My
writing style has changed significantly since that first foray into ap prompts,
and my approach has become more seasoned, and with practice, has become
exponentially better. I can look at the AP exam that I took on May
10th, and know that I did work worthy of a 5. Rhetorical analysis was
a hard skill to learn, but over the year, through our extensive seminars on
prompts, it became do able and conquerable. “Words need never be frozen; words can
become a storm center of meanings, sounds, and associations, radiating out
indefinitely like ripples in a pool”.
This quote precisely describes what I needed to learn to write a
rhetorical analysis, I had to grasp the power of what words I was using, in
order to grasp the purpose and intention of the style an author was using in a given
piece of work.
The next writing style that we learned was technically 2
different types, synthesis and argument. Synthesis read very much like a
document based question for an AP History course, so I took to that quickly.
Argument, however, was harder than I had expected it to be. This manifested
itself in my research paper, where I had a hard time in not finding evidence,
but deciding which evidence out of a plethora of sources to use. Furthermore, as
evidenced by the practice prompt we completed in the beginning of the year, the
way in which I worded my argument lacked finesse and definitive style.
Thankfully, this was eventually remedied through the practice of sentence
templates and the learning of both the Rogerian and Toulmann style of outlines.
Initially, I leaned towards the Toulmann style, as like debate, it was more of a
clear-cut, my argument is superior style. However, towards the AP exam, I
started to become rather fond of Rogerian, as I started using that outline in my
practice outlines during class, and in the argument essay prompt for Thomas
Paine. I am very proud of that essay, and believe that is the best argument
paper that I have written, as the 8 it was scored helps prove.
Looking at my papers throughout the year, I still notice
definite strengths and weaknesses within my writing. My biggest strength is my
voice within a paper, even at the start of the year, I was able to communicate
and transcend a voice unique to me. However, as I stated earlier, I lacked
finesse. My biggest weakness is hard to pin down, as there are a few that still
knaw at my perfectionist insides. A weakness can be described by the quote,
““People often lack any voice at all in their writing because they stop so often
in the act of writing a sentence and worry and change their minds about which
works to use.” My biggest weakness as a writer would be trying too hard. That in
itself does not seem to be that much of a weakness, however, it becomes one in
the way that it has sometimes manifested itself in my work. In the creative
writing exercises we did in class, I would try so hard to make it so descriptive
and vivid and interesting, that one of them ended up not even making sense. Or
in my college essay, where I tried so hard to make the introduction interesting,
with a blend of the strange and the familiar, that its tone ended up completely
separate from the rest of the piece.
Henry Matisse once said, “ from the first shock of the
contemplation of a face depends the principal sensation which guides me
constantly throughout the entire execution of a portrait.” Writing is a process,
and it requires a driving force to motivate one’s self to its completion,
whether that force be intrinsic or extrinsic motivational tools. However, a
reader can tell when a writer is writing for superficial means verses having a
true thought to say. One of the most prominent indicators of such is the use of
so-called “fluff” in a work.
Richard K. Redfern warns against this “jargon” by warning that it creates
a vague picture in the reader’s mind that it could be used in any plain article,
and that it would not have any uniqueness to the writer in question. He then
pushes the reader to create their own “jargon” and to work to include it into
their writing style. This is a struggle that I have had through the year, as
sometimes, it is very easy to confuse “fluff” with intelligence and an immense
amount of points to make.
Robert Duncan stated that “My revisions are my new works, each poem a
revision of what has gone before in-sight. Re-vision.” I agree with his analysis
that revisions are new works partly because I believe that all works are based
off of a “Re-vision”, a part of one’s self that the writer replays over and over
in their head for inspiration or solace. This becomes evident to me due to
stories such as Jimmy Santiago Baca’s. He detailed his life in prison, and
explained the power that writing gave him, as he was finally able to express all
of the multitudes of emotion that he had experienced since he was a young child.
A writer draws on past experiences, whether knowingly or not, in all of their
works. Baca drew on his past and whether I knew it or not, I drew on mine. A
primary example of this would be my college essay, which had an extreme basis on
my past. However, some of my best work has been influenced by feelings I did not
know existed. I was unaware of how frustrated I truly was with the criminal
justice system, until I began to read my research paper on it, where I was able
to feel the exact moments that I was frustrated, and to me, that ended up
becoming way more effective than my college essay ever could be.
One does not need an English class, in my opinion, to understand the true
importance of words and communication, that is something, I believe, that is
learned out of the classroom. However, what this class in particular does, is
help one communicate effectively and to the point in order to further one’s
agendas and prevent miscommunications. Bergen Evans in his discussion on the
importance of words, even said that “much of history’s great disasters have been
caused by misunderstandings.” While there can never be a perfect world, free of
misunderstandings, by learning how to improve one’s writing and thinking skills,
one can prepare for the challenges of life, and for the making of one’s own
history and future. I, for one, do believe that I have become better equipped
with writing skills for the future, than I was at the start of the year, which
fills me with immense pride and a sense of accomplishment.