Ryan Swenson
“Portrait of a
Writer”
In Kent Haruf’s written piece he describes all sorts of
places where writers from past and present prefer to work in. Whether it be in
a basement, or leaning over a refrigerator, it is the writer’s preference that
helps them concentrate to get their works done. For me, when I write I
definitely prefer to be somewhere secluded from other people. I like silence
and to be alone with my thoughts when I am writing. I can have music on or
headphones in, as long as I’m the only one in my thoughts then I’m alright. If
the weather permits, I’d love to be able to write outside. I like the outdoors,
especially on a cool summer day with a slight breeze. Laying down in the soft
green grass with those conditions are when I am at peace with life. I love
hearing all of the sounds of nature and all the sights it has to offer. I also
love rainy days and being able to be right next to a window when I’m writing. I
like the sound of the rain as it hits the window. It soothes me and is relaxing
whenever I am stressing about finishing some type of work. The problem is I’ve
always lived somewhere where it is simply too cold for more than half the year
to be in that situation or any other type of nice, warm weather. So I often
find myself secluded in my bedroom, or now, in my dorm room. If my roommate is
present then I throw in the headphones or if he is gone sometimes I’ll just sit
and be quiet with my thoughts. I like to be in a calm state whenever I am about
to write any essay or paper. It helps me think clearly and not get distracted
by the other choices that college has to offer. When I’m in my zone is when I
seem to be able to write the best. If I ever get some sort of writer’s block, I
often can recognize it right away. From there, I often will take a break and
just not think about the topic or whatever it may be that I am working on. My
break could involve getting a snack or a drink, turning on the TV for a few
minutes, or even resting my eyes for a little. I just need to calm down and
really relax to be able to write smoothly and efficiently. After, I’ve done so
I can really get back into the swing of things by reading what I have written
and seeing where I can go from there or try and brainstorm new ideas that I
haven’t thought of yet which really gets the process going again.
Another aspect that really makes writing more interesting
to me is topics. In almost every class except one my junior year of high
school, I had to write about topics that I quite frankly didn’t give a s***
about. This made writing especially difficult for me because as is I don’t
already like writing that much, it didn’t help one little bit that I had to
write about boring topics or readings that I either didn’t gain any useful
knowledge from or just plain thought was a waste of my time. I really don’t
like being forced to write a certain length paper on something that I in the
first place despise. On top of that I really, really hate when on top of that
they make you have a certain structure, style, and/or format that they require
you to do in your paper. Like are you seriously making me write about a topic
that you chose, then make me write this topic in a way you want me to write it?
That always frustrated me because it always seemed that if I had an interesting
topic that I found interesting, then I could really create some interesting pieces
of writing. On top of that if I could write freely (Obviously have some
structure if I were to turn it in) instead of having to worry about every
little sentence and punctuation in my paper then writing would be a more enjoyable
and less frustrating. I feel like in writing there should be no set structure
like an introduction, body, conclusion, etc. I understand how that could help
others follow along with your writings, however, I think that writing in itself
should come from inspiration that you draw from topics you enjoy, and, with
that, the structure should come from what you feel is an appropriate way to
present your own work and not what others think of you. Teachers always would
tell other students and myself at the beginning of the year/semester that from
reading our papers they would recognize our style and type of writing, but I
would always put that into question when they were handing out a writing
assignment that they had a required format that you have to have in order to
get the grade you want to receive. Then to further that they make you include a
certain number of sources to cite and how many times you have to quote your sources.
So where does my own style come into this? It never made sense to me.
Now that I’m done with my rant I’d like to include what
makes me the writer I am today. For me I tend to draw my future works on
examples I’ve seen from the past. The information/advice that I’ve received in
the past, I will then use in future works. Then once I get critique from that
work, I try to constantly improve. But that’s an aspect of English that definitely
gets me angry. It seems like you can always improve and what you’re doing can
always be better. I suppose you can view that in a pessimistic view or an
optimistic view. The pessimistic is that you’re writing will never be the best
it can. However, the optimistic would be that with each piece that I write, my
writing is getting stronger. I’ve tended to be more of a pessimist of this
because as is English never tickled my fancy. But I suppose those two views can
be applicable to almost every aspect of life. Maybe I’m being difficult because
I always consider myself a math and science guy. If I get stuck on a problem in
math I’ll go over my work and look for mistakes but in English when I get stuck
in either papers or any work really I get angry and begin to question why it is
important or why I have to do what I do. It’s just that with math you know that
if you put an addition sign where a minus sign was, you can easily find and
change that then move on. English however, you could make an entire paper, then
realize that your organization might be a disaster, or you’re straying off
topic a lot towards the middle and the end, and now you need to start your
entire paper over. I do sound extremely lazy with those last few sentences, but
if you don’t have a love for a certain topic, subject, etc. then it does make
writing seem like the worst chore of all for me. I can’t stand pointlessly
writing about what an author means in chapter when it’s a boring piece to me in
the first place. If I could choose a book that I had a general interest for
then it’d be much better. Look at me, I was gonna talk about me as a writer and
again, I find myself in another paragraph of ranting.
(This was over 3 pages
double-spaced, I don’t know how to make this double-spaced on the blog)
Working from the end to the beginning here, Ryan. Yeah, I should've said at the start that there is no way I know of to make Blogger double space. I can tell when it's long enough though--it's okay.
ReplyDeleteRants are okay. It's a certain genre of writing, right? The rant? It tells me what you feel strongly about, and it all related to writing, so you're fine.
You know I was thinking while I was reading your writing that what is really dumb to me about requiring students to write an exact way like you describe is pointless unless you understand the context behind it. What I mean by that is this: At some point you will probably have to apply for a grant. It sounds really intimidating, but once you something about the genre of grant-writing, it is within reach. And there are very, very strict structures that you have to follow in order to even be considered as a competitor for the money. Letters to the editor usually follow a different sort of structure. A memo looks and sounds and does different things than a love-letter written home during war.
So, as a college writing instructor, my beef is not with teachers teaching structure, but it is with teaching structure as if there is only one way to write, only one context, and then not even explaining what the logic is behind that one way. So for us, we are working on summaries right now, right? As we talk about them in class, you'll notice that there is a certain structure to them. If not, how would anyone recognize them as a summary? How do you know a summary is that, and not a poem, or a novel? There are certain aspects of a text that we recognize as belonging to the kind of document we are creating. And so if we want our readers to recognize our writing as a summary, then we attempt to use those structures and that language. What is better about this than high school writing as you describe it, is that you get the reins. You, as the author, have the momentous task of entangling your ideas with other's ideas, then shaping them to fit a certain kind of mold.
I think of it in terms of USE: what are people supposed to use my writing for? I think of aerospace engineering. If my aircraft wing is constantly over-stressing and producing hairline fractures, then I need you to go back to the drawing board and make me a better wing. If you make me a wonderful tail, it may indeed be an incredibly beautiful, functional tail, but it is of no use for me, because my aircraft needs a wing to fly--its tail is fine. One thing I want you to take away from this class is the ability to see if the situation calls for a wing or a tail, and then what structure and finishing touches make the best wing or tail. Follow my drift? Structure is not bad--you have structure even if your purpose is to have no structure. You as the writer need to be the master of how to create a document to do the thing you need to get done. That takes more than one simple rule; it takes a writer--you!