"Writing Process of Famous Author"

Doctor Seuss (my most favorite author) has the most interesting and distinguished writing process of any author I have read into. His use of rhyme maintains a constant and clear flow of sentences. Example:

I do not like
green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.
Would you like them in a house?
Would you like them with a mouse?

As a child, those were my favorite verses. The rhyme scheme kept me entertained as well as the sentences growing more and more by the line. The way Doctor Seuss wrote his books stood out because I do not recall reading any other book that followed the same pattern of rhyme scheme or hold any characters as different and interesting as Doctor Seuss did. Doctor Seuss's writings also had hidden meanings in them. If you read his books enough, you will see that "The Sneetches" was about racial equality, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" was about materialism and consumerism of Christmas Season, "The Butter Battle Book" was about the arms race, and "Horton Hears a Who" was about anti-isolationism. Doctor Seuss even once stated that Yertle the turtle was Adolf Hitler.

Doctor Seuss's writings weren't always perfect to him. Unlike most any writer, Doctor Seuss would accept money for his writing after he was finished instead of before he finished. He would throw out about 95% of his work until he decided on a theme for the book he would be writing; he was a true perfectionist.

From his first writings to his last, Doctor Seuss was and will always be one of the greatest writers the world has ever seen. He is the interesting and most famous author to me, and will always be.

"Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitive Analysis of Writer's Block" (WaW 533-46) QDJ 1, 2, &4

Q1) Create a List of all the rules that, according to Rose, interfere with "the blockers" writing. What rules, if any, do you find yourself forced to follow that seem to get in the way of your writing?
A) "What exactly is the audience seeking that reads the beginning (the beginning is everything)", "If sentences aren't grammatically correct, they aren't useful", "You must always make three or more points in an essay", "Rage for order (linear writing)", "Writing must present an array of images, ideas, ironies gleaned from the literature under examination", "if the assignment matches your expectations, you have done a good job of analyzing the professor's intentions", "I won't go on until I get that first paragraph down", "One achieves "flow" in one's writing through the use of adequate transitions", and "One achieves substance to one's writing through the use of evidence" are all the rules that Rose states that interfere with "the blockers." Rules I find myself getting tangled in would be, "If sentences aren't grammatically correct, they aren't useful" and "Rage for order (linear writing)".

Q2) Describe the difference between the rules that blockers in Rose's study were following and those that non-blockers were following. What accounts for the difference?
A) The difference between "blockers" and "non-blockers" are the pure fact that non-blockers use flexible rules and blockers use strict rules when they write. The difference is Algorithms and Heuristics.

Q4) Based in Rose's study and descriptions if writers and their rules, write a "rule" explaining what makes a rule good for writers, and what makes a rule bad for writers. You'll get bonus points if you can tell whether your rule is an algorithm or a heuristic.
A) A good rule for readers is to stay grammatically correct throughout their writings (Algorithm), but a bad rule to follow by is rejecting a rule that conflicts with your writing (heuristic).

"Revision of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Readers" QDJ 1,3,5 &7

Q1) Sommers says that the language students use to describe revision is about vocabulary, suggesting that they "understand the revision process as a rewording activity" (para. 9). How is that different from the way she argues that revision should be understood?

A) Sommers argues that revision is not just a post-writing process, but a process that occurs throughout writing that changes a writings fabric that should occur through the entirety of writing. A writer would define revision as reviewing, or marking out. An experienced writer would define revision as rewriting. Sommers would define revision as a "never-ending" process that should occur with every writing.

Q3) In her introduction and in analyzing students' descriptions of revision, Sommers focuses quite a lot on the difference between speech and writing. In your words, what is she saying that the difference is between the two, and why is the difference relevant to how we understand revision?

A)  Sommers is saying that the difference between the two are that in speech, revision is an after thought  because the spoken word cannot be revised, and with writing, revision is a never-ending process. The difference is relevant with how we understand revision because the after thought of a revised word in speech ties to writing by hindering revision. Speech hinders writing.

Q5) What do you think Sommers means when she says that for experienced writers, revision is based on a non-linear theory in which a sense of the whole writing both precedes and grows out of an examination of the parts? What does she mean by the "Whole Writing"? What does it mean for the writing process to be non-linear (not a straight line of progress from beginning to end)? And why do you think that experienced writers see writing as non-linear but student writers tend to see writing as linear (pre-write - write - edit)?

A) I think Sommers means that writing for experienced writers is non-linear because they constantly analyze what they write about and make changes according to what they write. By "Whole Writing", I think she is talking about the writing piece from beginning to end. Non-linear writing means that the writing is not moving in just one way, it changes every so often. I think experienced writers  see more to their writing whereas most writers just write in a linear sequence to get their point through.

Q7)  Sommers's research, she says, makes her believe that student revision practices don't reflect a lack of engagement, "but rather that they do what they have been taught to do in a consistently narrow and predictable way." Where do you think students got the idea that they should see writing as transcribing and revising as changing words? Does this match what you have been taught about writing and revising? If not, what has been different in your experience?

A) Students probably got that in their grade school years when first learning to only change words. As a matter of fact, it does match what I have been taught. Going through the grade school years, I was taught to change words during revising as-well-as crossing out unnecessary phrases.

Review of Literacy Narrative

If I could change anything about my most recent paper, I would choose to change my writing outline. I feel that since I chose to write my paper under the topic of "My Momentous Writings," it is going to make the grading a bit harsher. However, I felt very inclined to write in this manner because it is easier for me to write about major points rather than all of my readings as a whole because the major points are my inspirations, and I can write on and on about them. I would also change the fact that I began the Literacy Narrative's opening body paragraph with a short story about my childhood. I could have just taken that out, but I left it because I imagined that it would grab the reader's attention and keep them reading. Since I did a short story for that paragraph, I feel that maybe I should have done the same thing to my other paragraphs to make the paper more entertaining to read. I should have included my readings even before I started school, because that is my origin of reading. Dr. Seuss was and is and will always be my greatest motivation because of his unhindered imagination. I feel that if I included my Dr. Seuss readings, my paper would have been much longer and would hold a more exciting yet meaningful beginning to my Literacy Narrative. The final thing I would change about my narrative that I would have changed would have been to change Romeo and Juliet with The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. That book has to be one of the most different books I have ever read. On the one hand, the book is very hard to read and understand completely. On the other hand, the book is written in a different style than most because of the use of "down south" language of the 1800's. All-in-all, the Literacy Narrative brought back many great memories, and made me appreciate reading more. There are a lot of changes I could have made to my writing, but I could not think of how I could better write it at the time.

"All Writing is Autobiography" & "Writing what Matters: A Student's Struggle to Bridge the Academic/Personal Divide"

"All Writing is Autobiography" (WaW 65-75) (Questions 2, 5 and 6)

Q2)  In what ways, according to Murray, is writing autobiography? Can you categorize the ways that Murray believes writing is autobiography?
A) According to Murray, the way we write is autobiographical. "...my autobiography exists in the examples of writing I use in this piece and in the text I weave around them."

Q5) Consider the implications of Murray's arguments: If he's right, how do his ideas change the way you think about writing? Would they encourage you to write any differently than you currently do?
A) If he is right, then I feel that any writing I ever make, non-fiction or fiction, will always be autobiographical. I would write more and more if that were the case. However, I disagree with Murray. His argument that all writing is autobiographical is interesting, but I think otherwise.

Q6) Consider the last few texts you have written, whether for school, work, or personal reasons. Consider the ways that these texts are -or are not- autobiography in the sense that Murray describes.
A) They were autobiography because they're accounts of my life.

"Writing what Matters: A Student's Struggle to Bridge the Academic/Personal Divide"
(WaW 199-205) (Questions 1, 2 and 3)

Q1) Strasser writes that "The devices of grammar and rhetoric remain superficial skills until a writer employs them to express important and powerful feelings, thoughts, and ideas" (para. 1) . Why? And do you agree?
A) The devices of grammar and rhetoric remain superficial because they can be false when examined closely, but with powerful feelings, thoughts, and feelings, they can be proven correct. I completely agree because I am one to examine things very very closely.

Q2) What seems to be at issue for Strasser is creating "personally meaningful writing" in response to school assignments. Is there actually anything in Stanley Fish's advocacy of a writing course that teaches reasoning which would seem to rule out such personally meaningful writing? In other words, is Strasser right to assume that Fish's insistence on writing in order to exercise one's grammar will actually lead to meaningless writing?
A) Strasser is wrong to assume that. Writing, any writing at all, to exercise one's grammar would be meaningful. Full of meaning. Anyone who would write just to exercise their grammar skills should be applauded.

Q3) In your experience, does school create a separation of mind, body, and spirit that Strasser quotes bell hooks as identifying (para. 4)?
A) To me, school causes no separation. School strengthens me academically and mentally. I enjoy school over most things.

My First Momentous Readings

Green Eggs and Ham by Doctor Seuss was the beginning of a beautiful start to my life readings, and potently affected my reading skills. The simple use of rhyming in the book interested me and made me wonder how it rhymed. Being three years old, all I can remember is my mother reading this book to me everyday because it was my most favorite. When she decided that I was old enough to read, she would tell me to read it. When I read it for my first time, it took me about an hour from cover-to-cover. Then I would read it about twice a day, memorizing the rhymes and eager to read it over and over again. I found myself reading faster and faster. It would take me about ten minutes to read the book after about a week of doing so. I then began to start reading books like Horton Hears a Who, The Lorax, and The Cat and the Hat. Since those books were long, they took me a lot longer to read. I read Doctor Seuss books all through Elementary School. In my second grade year of Elementary School, I was reading at a 6th grade level. I was then put in a class of about fifteen children (including myself) that was called, "Gifted Readers."  In that class, I read the books Holes, Serendipity, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, and Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. In my middle school years, I was put in another, "Gifted Readers," class. Only in there, my classmates and I would read books in class and take tests on them. From what I can remember, in my sixth grade class, I read Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, The Outsiders, and The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. After all the reading in my sixth grade year, I was was exhausted of reading. So I decided not to do it my seventh grade year. When my eighth grade year came, I realized how much I missed reading, so i decided to take the class again. In that class I read To Kill a Mockingbird, Tears of a Tiger, Romeo and Juliet, Metamorphosis, and halfway through The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. As for my high school years, I only read when I was given something to read as a class assignment because there was no, "Gifted Readers," class. So all-in-all, Reading is one of my hobbies. If I ever have a couple of free hours, I read. 

Joshua Herrera

Wednesday, September 3 2014

Victor Villanueva Bootstraps: From an Academic of Color (WaW 107-18)

1)The account shifts back and forth between the first person ("I") and the third person ("Victor," "he"). What effects does that shifting create? Does it break any rules you've been taught?

1) The shift creates a more dramatic writing scheme. From what I have been taught it breaks the rule of writing in 1^st person on an account of your own life. But in my personal opinion, Villanueva is a genius for his writing in, “Bootstraps: From an Academic of Color,” because not only does it add a dramatic change to his writing (going from 1^st to 3^rd person), but it also makes it easier to understand what he is writing about.

2) How does Villanueva define rhetoric? What else does he say that studying rhetoric helps you study?

2) Villanueva defines “rhetoric” as the conscious use of language, and includes everything that is conveyed through language. Villanueva states that, “So to study rhetoric becomes a way of studying humans.” So by reading this, Villanueva literally means that studying rhetoric helps you study humans. “Studying the ways in which peoples have accomplished all that has been accomplished beyond the instinctual.”

3) Have you ever tried observing and imitating the writing moves that other writers make, as Villanueva describes doing with his English teachers ("Professorial Discourse Analysis")? If so, what was your experience doing so? If not, what would you need to look for in order to do the kind of imitation Villanueva describes? 

3) Personally I have never once tried to imitate writing moves other writers make. The way Villanueva describes how he imitated others writing moves, I would look for patterns in others writings and use their patterns as my writing format for whatever it is I am writing.

4) In paragraph 6, Villanueva describes his college writing process as, "The night before a paper was due, he'd grab pen and pad, and stare. Clean the dishes. Stare. Watch an 'I Love Lucy' rerun. Stare. Then sometime in the night the words would come." (A few more sentences finish his description.) What elements of this process resemble your own? How is yours different? 

4) Elements that resemble mine are I stare into space and try to find the words to start writing. The only thing different is I take about five to ten minutes to figure out what it is I’m going to be writing.