Commented Writing Theory Essay

8/13/2019 Commented Writing Theory Essay

1/7

Jake Bowen

Prof Padgett

ENGL 1101

11/17/2013

Discovering Good Writing

Writing has been around for most of human history. It can be dated all the way back to

the hieroglyphics that Egyptians used. You could even say that cave paintings were forms of

writing because they generally told stories. Even though writing has been around for such a long

time it is still debated what good writing is. This is mainly because every reader is different so

they have different preferences on what they like to read and what they consider good writing.

For me personally , I believe that as long as the writing "flows" then it is good writing.

For most of my academic career I actually did not know what the difference between

good writing and bad writing was. Originally I thought that as long as the proper grammar rules

were followed, then it was good writing. That did not, however, explain how writers such as

Shakespeare, who's writing made no sense to me, were considered great writers. His writing didnot follow proper grammar rules so it completely threw off my whole theory behind good

writing. In some instances he even made up words, yet he is still one of the greatest writers of all

times. How could someone be one of the greatest writers of all time if they made up words in

their writing? That completely blew my mind.

It took me till my senior year of high school before I discovered what good writing

actually was. All my years of English classes slowly built up to this discovery but it finally

clicked for me after reading Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. I chose to read this

book for one of the assignments in my 12th grade English class. Before reading it I saw the

Comment [AP1]: Okay, good title :)

Comment [AP2]: This seems like anthing to say.

Comment [AP3]: So this is it then? Fwriting is good writing? I assume you wilthoroughly define what flow means to yo

Comment [AP4]: So youre attributinhis success to flow?


2/7

movie and loved it so that is why I chose that book. Surprisingly I actually liked the book a lot

more than the movie! I have never liked reading very much but when I started that book I

couldn't stop until I was done. That book completely changed my whole view on reading and

writing.

The difference between One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and previous books I have read

was the way it was written. This book was written through the perspective of Chief Bromden,

who was a schizophrenic at a mental hospital. The book basically broke every law that I thought

writing had but I still considered it great writing and this was a first for me. It had terrible

grammar at some parts, other parts would skip around and talk about random things, and finally

it didn't exactly write the facts. I always thought that a writer s job was to document things

literally not figuratively. This book was written in such a way that you weren't supposed to take

every detail as literal because Chief Bromden was a schizophrenic so details were exaggerated to

a point that made it seem unbelievable. This is obvious in this quote from chapter two,

When the fog clears to where I can see, I'm sitting in the day room. They didn't take me

to the Shock Shop this time. I remember they took me out of the shaving room andlocked me in Seclusion. I don't remember if I got breakfast or not. Probably not. I can callto mind some mornings locked in Seclusion the black boys keep bringing seconds ofeverything-supposed to be for me, but they eat it instead-till all three of them get

breakfast while I lie there on that pee-stinking mattress, watching them wipe up egg withtoast. I can smell the grease and hear them chew the toast. Other mornings they bring mecold mush and force me to eat it without it even being salted. (Kesey 10)

The fog he is talking about is mentioned throughout the entire book but it is not physically there.

Chief just imagines it but I think it was used as a way to describe the times where he kind of

zones out or nods off. It is also apparent in this paragraph that he makes the place seem

completely awful when in reality it's probably not that bad. Things are just exaggerated so much

but it makes the book, in my opinion, even better.

Comment [AP5]: Great, youre settinreally interesting conversation here.

Comment [AP6]: Not sure what youby this. What writers? What genres of wrare you referring to?

Comment [AP7]: So Im trying to finconnection to your thesis.


3/7

I then began my search for a new definition of good writing since One Flew Over the

Cuckoo's Nest proved my last one wrong. It was at this point that my 12th grade teacher had me

read Shitty First Drafts by Anne Lamott. In this story, Lamott talks about the writing process

and how you should always write a really bad first draft by just writing whatever first comes to

mind. She shows this in the paragraph ,

The first draft is the child's draft, where you let it all pour out and then let it rompall over the place, knowing that no one is going to see it and that you can shape itlater. You just let this childlike part of you channel whatever voices and visionscome through and onto the page. If one of the characters wants to say, "Well, so

what, Mr. Poopy Pants?," you let her. No one is going to see it. If the kid wants toget into really sentimental, weepy, emotional territory, you let him. Just get it alldown on paper because there may be something great in those six crazy pages thatyou would never have gotten to by more rational, grown-up means. There may besomething in the very last line of the very last paragraph on page six that you justlove, that is so beautiful or wild that you now know what you're supposed to bewriting about, more or less, or in what direction you might go -- but there was noway to get to this without first getting through the first five and a half pages. (Lamott 1)

At first I thought this was a terrible idea because I didn't think that you would accomplish the

tasks of the paper. The more I thought about it, though, the more it made sense to me and the

more it helped me develop my own theory on good writing. It helped me discover that by

writing whatever comes to mind, ideas are generated that usually would not have been thought of

before. This is when I came to the huge realization that writing was not just about completing

the task. Writing is a form of expression that is not actually limited by numerous rules. Writing

is freedom, not a restricted act. This, however, made me desire even more to define what good

writing was as opposed to bad writing.

I began to think about what all the great writers have in common with each other. At first

glance it seems like they have absolutely nothing in common. Some had excellent grammar and

word choice, where as others had very poor grammar but were still considered great writers. If

Comment [AP8]: but where do you dthe line between following rules and breathem.


4/7

that was the case then why wouldn't every piece of writing be considered great writing? It is

because good writing is actually measured in how well the writing "flows". By "flow" I mean

the level at which the words go together to tell the story that the author is trying to express. Even

though some of the good writers do not follow the rules of writing, they still assemble the writing

in such a way that you can clearly see what they are trying to say. Bad writers are not good at

expressing their message and therefore, it is common to not understand what the writer is trying

to say in bad writing.

This conclusion on good writing did not explain everything though. It does not explain

why some people don't like good writing. If it is good then shouldn't everyone like it? This

question went unanswered until this year actually. It wasn't until I read Stephen King's, On

Writing , that I realized everyone is unique and likes different things. This is exactly why some

people like the works of some great writers but not other ones. It is not the content that makes

them great writers, it is how they express the content. This is shown in the excerpt ,

Some writers have enormous vocabularies; these are folks whod know if there really is

such a thing as an insalubrious dithyramb or a cozening raconteur, people who havent missed a multiple- choice answer in Wilfred Funks It Pays to Increase Your Word Powerin oh, thirty years or so [] Other writers use smaller, simpler vocabularies. Examples ofthis hardly seem necessary, but Ill offer a couple of my favorites, just the s ame: (King115-116)

These are quotes taken from two different pages but they went together so I combined them.

Together they show how King believes that every writer has their own style and that is what

makes them good. He said how some writers have large vocabularies and others have small ones

but they can still be good writers just because every writer is unique. That is why writers such as

Shakespeare can break numerous grammar rules and even make up words yet still be one of the

best writers of all time.

Comment [AP9]: good, I like that yodefining your terms here, but I wonder if could have come much earlier.

Comment [AP10]: this phrase is justambiguous as the term your trying to defi

Comment [AP11]: Okay, so what is connection to your thesis?

Comment [AP12]: Or what you thingood writing.

Comment [AP13]: So before, did yothat every like and dislike the same things


5/7

Furthermore, just because a piece of writing has little to no freedom to it does not mean

that it is bad writing. Many times there are instances that restrict the freedom of writing such as

memo's or email's to your bosses. If you used a lot poor grammar and added a lot of your own

personal writing style into the memo or email then that would be bad writing. This is because

the more formal something has to be, the less freedom you have as a writer. Grammar and the

other rules of writing are only there to contribute to the credibility of a writer. When something

is formal or needs to be credible then there is almost no freedom in writing style. A scientific

report is another example of this. In a scientific report, it is very important to sound credible so

proper grammar is mandatory. This will make it seem like the writing is boring and not good but

that is not always true. As long as the writing flows well then it will be considered good writing

even if there is little or no personal voice.

Flow is the number one fundamental behind all writing. It affects the reader s ability to

interpret the writing and, more importantly, helps them judge whether or not they like it. As long

as the writing does a good job demonstrating its message then it is good writing. In many cases,

when people try to dress up their writing with fancy words then it makes the message unclear. It

is better to just write from the heart and use your own style because when writing is genuine then

it tends to be more interesting. Writing is a way to free yourself from all the restrictions that

society set for you. Writing can take you pretty much anywhere you want to go.

Jake,

I think you do a good job covering various aspects of what you value in writing. I also like that

you seem to have established a thesis in your introduction that is easy it identify. I do think that,

while you have a clear thesis, this paper could use some focus. All of your paragraphs should be

Comment [AP14]: Good. So youre tabout he limitations of genre.

Comment [AP15]: Im still not sure you mean by this.

Comment [AP16]: This seems off to


6/7

actively arguing for one central thesis, making use of various examples and discussion topics to

support that one singular thesis. This essay seems to be running wandering though various

loosely connecting topics as opposed to engaging in a specific thesis. Also I think a more clear

definition of what you mean by flow would be in order, but while I think I understand what

you re trying to say by flow, I think this one and only requisite for good writing seems a little

too narrow. Again, the conversations you do have are interesting and are great ideas, but I need

more focus, a single, clear message you want your reader to walk away with.


7/7

Work Cited

Kesey, Ken. One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest. 40th Anniversary Edition. New York, New York: Penguin Books, 2002

Lamott, Anne. "Shitty First Drafts. Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. Ed. byPaul Eschholz, Alfred Rosa, and Virginia Clark. 9th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins,2005: 93-96.

King, Stephen. On Writing : A Memoir of the Craft . New York: Scribner, 2000. Print.

Commented Writing Theory Essay

Documents

Transcript of Commented Writing Theory Essay