Determined Proposal

In delving into this project, I realize that I simply must write about the world of editing, particularly the world of editing fiction or creative nonfiction, the field I hope to go into (publishing). When I was in high school, people always asked me what I was going to college for, and I had no idea. Endless teachers and counselors--even those in my first two years of college--tried to help me come up with something, asking about my interests. When I told them my biggest hobby had always been reading, they suggested that I become a teacher or writer; both thoughts made me cringe. It wasn't until nearly my second year of college that I finally found what I want to do with my life. What better way to spend my time than helping to bring to fruition the masterpieces I have so enjoyed? That is why I must focus on the world of editing for this project; in truth, I know very little about getting into this field, how I will approach the editing world when I have my degree, the different fields there are in editing, etc. Writing about editing will be extremely beneficial to me and of course, very intriguing. For this project, I would like to interview an editor and possibly write an article about it, or, if the person I interview is comfortable with it, videotape the interview. Learning about editing from those who do it on a regular basis will probably present it in the best way. Now I just need to find an editor...

Pop-up Scholarship:A New Approach to Editing

Editing is a nasty job. It takes time, it takes precision, it takes scrutiny. There are many different types of editing, but the fact that editing is difficult and necessary holds true for all of them. Since I am pursuing a career in editing, I chose an article that has to do with writing, the building blocks of my future career. Naturally, in my field, writing is very important, and so is the insurance of the future of writing. In a computer-based world, there are no guarantees that writing as we know it--in books, newspapers, magazines, etc, essentially in print form--will even exist in a few short years. This makes me panic not only because I want to pursue a career in this field, but also because I think that getting rid of print would be such a loss to the entertainment arts as well as have a great effect on the literacy of our society. So, I chose to review for this assignment the article, "We Are All Writers Now" by Anne Trubek.
In the article, Trubek discusses scholars' relcutance and "profound scorn for the newest forms of social media." Countering the opinions of her own professional colleagues, Trubek points out that, "the rise of amateur writers means more people are writing and reading" and that "we are seeking out communities based on written words." In commenting on this article, I used both free-flowing thoughts and commentary on the content itsel, as well as editing it for style, prose and correctness of grammar, etc. This assignment allowed me to write down and take notes about the thought processes going through my head--just as they happened. What is so interesting is that these thoughts and ideas about what I was writing happen each time I read something, I have just never tried to channel these thoughts into an outlet as they were happening; the result is that I realized with a better clarity my opinions and ideas on the subject matter of the article after reading through my comments and notes.

In my comments I was both humorous and comical, critical and open-minded, as should be the way of any good editor, or at least, in my opinion. I did not try to keep an even tally of both humorous and serious comments; I simply wrote down whatever first came to mind. Some comments helped me to put some of my ideas in perspective, while others demonstrate my ability to multi-task (or that I secretly have ADD). For instance, my first comment asks whether or not it is necessary to use words that the average reader cannot understand, with arrows pointing to two words ("screeds" and "pundits") for the purpose of this article, while the second comment is just a line from a movie that popped into my head when I read Trubek's made-up compound word, "time-sucking." The first comment helped me to realize, after reading it again, that Trubek did not write this article for the people about whom she is writing, but rather to the scholars she is contradicting. Would I have caught that detail if I were editing this article regularly (just reading through it and trying to tack on comments when needed)? Not necessarily. Usually in editing, I think about comments before actually marking up someone else's work. But this almost seems like a whole new method for editing to me. By writing down what you think at that very moment, you find things you may not have otherwise, such as the validity of word choice.

Something else I caught myself doing was writing comments on what I liked and didn't like about certain phrases and ideas--like the average reader does. Rather than over-analyzing whether or not these phrases really worked, I simply wrote down what I thought about them right then (like "that's sad" or "love it!"). And, again, after perusing the article a second time, I realized that these phrases really did work--they appealed to me as a reader for whatever reason, and, therefore, the article itself was doing its job. This was the stream-of-consciousness writing coming out, and it worked very well for this assignment.
I didn't realize how much this kind of note-taking/stream-of-consciousness writing would help me with my own field until I did it. I thought it would be a fun approach to editing or critical commentary, but had no idea that it would open up some new possibilities for editing itself. The freedom to write anything on a piece of writing--good or bad, critical or humorous, relevant or irrelevant--brings out my inner editor at its very best.

I'm No Pulitzer Prize Winner, but..

When I began school this semester, I made some assumptions about my classes; based on previous experience, I figured I would not like either of my writing classes. As it turns out, I was wrong--as I usually am, and have actually enjoyed my two writing classes, much to my surprise (I don't consider myself capable of writing intriguing, substantial works beyond a purely academic piece). In my Personal Essay class, we work on what our teacher refers to as creative nonfiction. For some reason, I can't recall ever having read any personal essays or memoirs, the sungenres of creative nonfiction, and the idea of nonfiction being creative seemed kind of contradictory to me: how can the truth be creative? The truth is messy, dramatic and often boring. But when I read some of the sample memoirs in our book, Writing True, I was gone; the truth, written creatively, is so interesting. This is important because I have always thought that everyone has a story to tell, and I love listening to people's stories. Furthermore, I have always wanted to write the story of my family, but every time I have tried to write a true story in a creative writing setting, my instructor has told me that the truthful details in my stories were bogging them down. I had no idea there was a whole genre of writing specific to telling one's own story. When I thought about writing my own memoir or personal essay, though, I never thought I could write one that would be anywhere near as vivid and emotional and intriguing as the ones I had read in my book.
The piece I chose to submit for the National Day on Writing is a memoir that I wrote for this class. The assignment was to write about a memory from before I turned eighteen. I chose the memory from the day my mom told me and my sisters that she was divorcing my stepdad. The funny thing is that I haven't really done any writing about my life--not like this. Aside from the stories that I tried to write about my family in my creative class which were unsuccessful, I haven't ever done any personal, very therapeutic writing. Personal essays are all about what the writer learns from the writing experience: a recognition or epiphany. Oddly enough, though I haven't done any writing about my life in the past, the idea of the memoir just clicked. I have never writtten anything that actually helped me come to a realization about my life like this memoir did, but I guess that's what personal essays are all about.
I don't consider myself a great writer. I am not gifted like those people who are meant to use their words to impact others. But when my classmates read the memoir in our peer review group, it actually brought tears to one girl's eyes and rendered the others speechless. I looked at them, completely unaware that my own experience could have any effect on someone else; sure, the memoir was a nice outlet for me, but I didn't know that it could actually affect someone else so powerfully (for better or worse). That's probably the biggest reason I chose this piece to submit: it really was a great outlet for me. But also because, for the first time that I have ever witnessed firsthand, my writing--and by further extension, my own story--actually made an impact on someone.
I may never become a writer full time. I will never write a novel that will win a great literary prize, but I can now see the value of writing for myself, of writing just for the therapy of it. Just like the students in the movie I watched for my last Observation, Freedom Writers, I have discovered the sheer value of personal writing. Even more than that, I realize that sharing your story with someone else is just as important. There's a kind of security in knowing that someone else knows where you've been. Even if all of your audience hasn't had the same experiences, and doesn't know what you're talking about, it's helpful to have people reading your work who can relate to you simply through your words. When you make eye contact with the girl who is crying because she hasn't been there, but through your writing she felt the emotion of which you were speaking, that's when you know your writing was successful. That's what this piece did for me, more than anything else. It let me believe, if only temporarily, that I can write successfully, that I can write interesting, creative, powerful stuff. This memoir is far from perfect, I wouldn't even call it excellent. But it's the first piece of writing I have ever written (aside from academic essays) of which I can call myself truly proud.

Aspects of Creative Writing

Last term, I was convinced by my academic advisor to take a creative writing course. I was very opposed to the idea, insisting that I was "not a creative writer" and therefore could not possibly benefit from the class, even though I have always secretly wanted to write a novel someday, but never thought I had the talent to do it. Much to my chagrin, I took the class after her prompting and learned that I can write creatively. The instructor of that class said something that has stuck with me since: "Good writing is five percent talent, and ninety-five percent hard work."
As the author of the article, "Getting Started Writing Science Fiction" points out, you don't have to be an expert in writing craft to get started writing...and thats all it takes; practice makes perfect. I liked this author's idea of getting started: "open up a word processor and put words together to form sentences,and sentences to form paragraphs." He is absolutely right, most of us are terrible writers at first, but the more we practice, the better we become.
I think that this idea would be coupled well with the main theme of the article I found, "How to Write A Novel Using the Snowflake Method." For people who like the idea of writing creatively, but don't know how, or don't believe they have the talent, (like me) this method is perfect. It is especially useful to me because I am such an organized person, and making something that I look at as intimidating and often messy (the craziness of not knowing where to begin a story, how to develop it, or what to do next with it) much more attainable and less frightening. I guess I am more "right brain" in most respects, and therefore a ten-step method to writing a novel seems much more practical than just plunging right in and getting stuck partway through.
I also really appreciate this author's emphasis on the importance of character development. This was often my problem in that first Creative Writing class I took. My instructor would mention some view that he, as a reader, got from my character, and would ask if this is how I wanted to portray the character. I usually realized that I was giving more of my attention to what was happening in the story than who it was happening to--not a good thing to do. After all, characters are "a driving force that propels your work forward and captures the imagination and the attention of your reader," according to the author of the article, "Ideas in Creative Writing--Characterization."
In short, creative writing is difficult to master--all aspects of it. But if you can persever long enough to do so, the payoff, whether material, social emotional or any other kind, will be very great.

On Writing for an Audience

First off, I would like to give a shout out to all the members of this first group for finding such substantial readings; I hope I can finds something on my own topic that is of equal worth. Secondly, I would like to say that I really found the readings to be beneficial. The first one, "Writing Tips for Children" is something that I have never really considered before. I would like to write a novel someday, but I have never really considered writing for children and so have never given much regard to the art of fiction for children. But after reading those tips, it seems like writing for children would be very difficult, like writing for a newspaper. There are so many rules and guidelines to stick to in order to write successfully for children. For instance, the author of this article suggests that you be specific--don't just say "flower," say what kind of flower, also, name your characters and cut out unnecessary words that get lost in the jumble. Isn't this exactly what we all have been trying to do, unsuccessfully, with Twitter these last few weeks? I know that this group's theme was about writing for specific audiences, but I think that as writers, these tips for writing for children could help us out just in general, everday writing.
I also really liked the article "Responding to Content." This article made me realize that writing for an audience pertains to all kinds of writing, not just writing that is academic. This is something I have never considered before, probably because I had never considered my audience until I got into college. But the author makes a good point when he or she says, "Whenever people read a piece of writing, they respond to it . . . and it is the content that they usually respond to." This is something that we need to consider whenever we are writing, even if what we are writing is intended only for ourselves. How will your reader respond? What will your reader take from this piece? The various ways that this article offers to help consider this and to successfully conquer this problem were also helpful. I like that the author encourages her fellow instructors/teachers/scholars to question or talk to studenst about their writing, to write sticky notes on their papers. There is nothing I can stand less than getting a paper back with a resounding grade in colored ink and completely unmarked otherwise, or to be in a peer editing group who offers nothing more than, "Wow, that was good. I liked it." Writers must consider their audience, but readers (or at least those reading the works of writers in the revision process) have a responsibility also to make sure that the writer knows what is working and what is not working.

Loss of Plagiarism Innocence

Let me just say that I appreciate that the order in which Dr. Schirmer gave us the articles for this week's readings seemed to have a theme, at least for me. I went from confusion over the first article (a work of plagiarism) to sheer awe at the next (the statistics of the scientists' survey), to even further awe at the next (a blog about what true plagiarism looks like) to understanding and answered questions for the last article (a clear outline of what plagiarism really is, and how it should be handled by teachers, students, and administrators). I say this because, when I read "The Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagiarism," I somehow missed the fact that was staring me in the face, that this was the famed plagiarized piece we were told we would be reading. As I read the article, I was getting great ideas about quotes and points of the essay that I would use in my blog, and loved the fact that this was the first piece I read because it seemed so useful...and then I read the "key." Has anyone ever seen the episode of Two and a Half Men where Charlie is teaching Jake to lie, and Jake says in understanding, "Oh!" and then "I think I just lost my innocence." This is exactly how I felt when reading this key. After that, I was appalled that someone could plagiarize so well; I thought that teachers just used the idea of plagiarism to scare us all into writing our own works. Which is why it was even more surprising when I read "What Plagiarism Looks Like." I had no idea that people--highly esteemed people, at that--could actually pull off such a scheme, or would even try to pull off such a scheme.
My confusion and naivete about plagiarism was only enhanced when I read, "Scientists explain why they plagiarize." I guess whenever I think of plagiarism, I have always thought of it in two ways: one, the kind in which the student does not know he or she is plagiarizing and so is forgiven, or two, the kind in which an immature, pressed-for-time, or downright lazy student plagiarized and so was expelled from his or her school. Honestly, this article opened my eyes; plagiarism has some serious repercussions that I never imagined, like changing the data of projects, and therefore changing the way in which medical procedures are performed. The fact that someone would copy or reuse such vital information astounds me by its level of immorality.
Throughout all this, I have to ask myself, have I plagiarized before? The first article, though it is just the works of a bunch of authors strung together to make an outstanding essay, makes a good point, that is, that in nearly all works of art some level of what we know as plagiarism is involved. No, we do not all copy someone else's work and use their exact words without giving them due credit, but we do borrow each other's ideas and repeat themes and ideas over and over again in our own works. Essentially, I must face the fact that we are all plagiarists, whether we like it or not.

Thoughts on "Stranger Than Fiction"

After watching the first half of Stranger Than Fiction, I am not sure I am qualified to make a full assumption about its portrayal of writing and writers just yet, but here are my thoughts on it so far. First of all, I am not sure that the writer/narrator is an actual portrayal of writers. She seems more like the stereotyp that people hold about writers: the drinking, smoking, keep-to-themselves, slightly insane type of writers that America seems to think typical. Aside from a few well-known names in fiction (like Hemingway and Poe), I cannot think of any writers who are actually chronic drinkers and crazy people. Maybe they are, maybe I am just sadly mistaken, but it seems to me that if the majority of writers were all drinking/smoking/crazy people, then it would be a well-known fact.
One part that I did think was accurate about the movie was the portrayal of writer's block, and the agony of not knowing where to go with a story. Though I do not claim to be a writer, I have written stories before for classes and know how hard it is when you simply cannot finish them. I don't know how often writers sit and try to visualize a story playing out, as the writer in the movie does, but then again, I am not writing a novel! Is this typical? I would like to know, because maybe it is something that we, as writers, should try in order to truly get inside the characters' heads (maybe not in order to figure out the way that they will die, but in order to figure out the characters themselves).

I also wonder if writers, whether all or some, are pompous and rude like the one in the movie. I have never met an esteemed author, so I can't really make an assumption about this. Writers, like people, are all different, I am guessing, and therefore, it seems that some could be like the one in the movie (big-headed due to their fame) and some could be like just average people who don't treat their assistants like scum. :) Essentially, I do not know whether or not this movie is an accurate portrayal of writers and writing; I think it is too early to tell. I am hoping the writer has an epiphany and finishes the novel and starts treating people with some respect!

On Saving Books

After reading the article, "How the E-Book Will Change How We Read and Write," I don't know where to begin. I am not sure how to write this blog without sounding like a whiny little girl. Let me begin by explaining a little bit: over the summer, I decided to start a website which I planned to turn into an organization. The website is now up, though it is a work in progress, and here is the address if anyone reading this would like to visit it: www.savingbooks.weebly.com. Last spring semester, I had a teacher who said in my Lit. class one night, "You know, books are becoming less and less important in today's world with everything that is going on online. Pretty soon books as we know them will be obsolete." It really got me thinking, and I thought at the time that a decrease in physical books would lead to a decrease in reading which would in turn lead to a decrease in literacy. After reading this article, though, I think that I made some pretty naive assumptions about this. While I still don't like the idea of getting rid of physical books altogether, after reading everything in class that I have read these last two weeks and participating in the discussions and even blogging for the first time and seeing its usefulness, I have to admit that literacy is probably not in any imminent danger. What is in danger though, is the way we perceive and receive books. At first, I thought the author of this article was against the idea of putting all books online, as I am. But as I read on, I realized that he was focusing on how things will be different; observations, rather than negative assumptions. I like all the different points Johnson makes about the subject (indeed, he seems to address every possible angle of the issue, and I was completely impressed). Also, when he talks about the competition that books will have, and the way he just clicked from one book to another in a split second, later saying that our reading of books will soon be the same as our reading of magazines and newspapers: "a little bit here, a little bit there," I can't help but wonder what will become of books when all of them are online. Yes, they will be more readily available to us, since the internet is more available than books or bookstores anymore. Yes, it will be more convenient to read little bits of books rather than to sit down with the whole novel. But is that what we as writers (and editors) really want? Don't we want our audience's full attention? That's another point that Johnson brings up: the fact that moving books online will remove the private relationship between author and reader. But isn't that what we want? People who read books are looking for alone time, they are looking for time to spend just living out someone or something else's reality for just a bit. When you ar reading someone's personal work, that is the only way to get it. With everything else that is on the internet that will be competing with books, how do we know that books will not just slowly disappear?

Confusion and Partial Acceptance

First of all, I would like to say how impressed I am with all the information/articles/blogs that have been provided on this subject (of Facebook, Twitter, Blogging, etc.). Until now, I somehow thought that all of this was just taken in stride by the world, and that no one really thought about it much, or at least not enough to write full articles and have discussions and debates over it. Anyway, I was really intrigued by the blog post, "We Are All Writers Now." Actually, "intrigued" is not the right word; confused is more how I am feeling. In explanation, I have been so against all of this hype with Facebook and Twitter and so forth. This is probably due to the fact that the majority of posts and status updates that I read are in text talk or at least leave out any kind of punctuation and abandons the need for correct spelling. This not only annoys me because I am an English major, posts can be hard to understand without any kind of grammar or spelling rules in tact.
Back to the article, though, I really thought that Trubek made a good point. She brings up the point that "with more than 200 m people on Facebook and even more with home internet access, we are all writing more than we would have ten years ago." I had not really considered this fact; I was blinded by the details (the terrible lack of grammar and spelling skills). She is absolutely right. When I stop and think about how much I write, aside from everything required of me as an English major, it is quite a bit. If I cut out all the emails, status updates and online posts, the amount of writing I do in a day would be very minimal, indeed. I, too, am a writer now. :)
Trubek also points out that Facebook sometimes provides good exercises for writers, such as the "25 Things About Me" stint that was apparently popular a while ago. Other than, yet again, an English class, I can't think of any other time I have taken part in such an exercise. So while I am not admitting yet that I fully embrace this idea, I have finally begun to see how it could be useful (Mr. Schirmer, you can pat yourself on the back).
However, I still think that if people continue to use text talk to post online or for their status updates or in text messages, we will have some serious problems on our hands. As I mentioned previously, it can be really confusing to read a post that is completely devoid of grammar rules. Just remember, those rules were established for reasons!

A Slight Reformation

I have to say, after reading all of these documents about Twitter and Facebook and such, that I am, if not reformed, at least teetering on my previous beliefs. The one that stood out the most to me was "How the Other Half Writes: In Defense of Twitter." I was initially set against the use of Twitter (it seemed to be a pointless and slightly vain waste of time to me). But after reading Geoff Manaugh's blog, I have started to see it in a new light. Manaugh's comparison of Twitter to a pen really seemed to make sense to me. Not everyone is comfortable sharing their immediate thoughts with others, or may not have anyone to share them with--that's what Twitter does for them. Also, much like online classes, people who are uncomfortable speaking out in class or at work,etc., may speak out (expressing their opinions,etc.) just as much as the more outgoing people on Twitter or Facebook. It provides a kind of confidence, the security to say whatever one wants on cyberspace because it is less scary than saying it out loud. Back to Manaugh, he is also right when he says that it is no one else's business what other people are saying online. If you don't like it, ignore it, don't do it yourself. This is something I have to tell myself after hearing other people's comments in class and reading this blog. My favorite quote from this blog: "Heraclitus would have had a f****** Twitter feed!" Nothing shows how hyped up someone is about a topic more than an outrageous example coupled with a cuss word.

Also, I appreciated the two conflicting blogs, "Blogging Essential for a Good Career," and "Twitter, Flickr, Faceboook Make Blogs Look So 2004." When I read them, I thought they both made valid points and I think two things can be taken away from these two blogs: 1) that technology is ever-changing and the better we keep up with it and adapt to it, the better off we all will be (yes, I know, I am at least slightly reformed after our class discussions), and 2) that no matter what you are saying online, or where you are appearing online, you should always do so with caution. Present yourself online as you want the world to view you. My rule is that if I wouldn't want my mom to read what I am writing online, then I shouldn't be writing it. To some, this method may seem old-fashioned and very restricting, but it's up to you how you want to be viewed to the world online.

In essence, this first week has been a technological learning experience for me. Forcing myself to be open-minded and to try to experience something new and see where it takes me has been tough; I'm one of those cautious people who doesn't like change. However, while I am not promising to "tweet" my life away or to blog daily, I am willing to give social networking a chance.

Hello All

Just wanted to sign in and let everyone know... I made it! I have officially created my blog :0