Reading 1: “Only Geniuses Can Be Writers” by Dustin Edwards and Enrique Paz
Reading 2: “Some People are Just Born Good Writers” by Jill Parrott
Choice: I chose to read Parrott’s essay because it sounded like it would compliment the other essay well, while also providing another perspective about writers, so that I could get a richer understanding of the misconceptions about genius writers.
Summary: Both of these essays see writing as something social, and they both challenge the misconception that good writers are born. In “Only Geniuses Can Be Writers” Edwards and Paz assert that the belief in genius writers is actually detrimental to student writers because it gives the impression that writing is a skill a person either possesses or fails to possess. Edwards and Paz emphasise this point by explaining that when students view good writers as born geniuses they fail to perceive writing as a process at which they can improve. In “Some People are Just Born Good Writers” Jill Parrott states that focusing on the product rather than on the process is a mistake. She emphasises the importance of metacognition in writing by expressing that good writers are those who practice writing often while constantly reflecting on their own writing process.
Overall reflection: Both of these essays made me confront the misconceptions that I held about authors, believing that they did find writing easy and that everything they write is original. I love the idea Edwards and Paz present by saying,“Instead, these writers were certainly very much like ourselves—nervous, frustrated, harried, and tired, looking for help at 1:38 a.m. while trying to meet a deadline” (66). I love this quote because it reminded me of the song “Hard to Be the Bard” and how shocking I found this song and it’s presumptions about Shakespeare's struggles to be because I never thought of Shakespeare struggling. I love the idea that the best way to improve writing is by focusing on the process rather than the product, and I think that this is another thing we have been practicing in our writer’s notebooks in 324. Parrott’s idea of practice improving art is so important to me as a future teacher because I really do want students to realize that they can improve at writing and that improvement is often the consequence of failing, and not only is that okay, but it’s encouraged. Like Parrott says, too often, “The practices needed to become adept at writing are criminalized, and inexperienced authors are often punished for being inexperienced” (72), and this is definitely something I would like to strive to correct in my classroom. Just as we were given the freedom to create a shitty first draft and take writing risks in our exploratory essay in this class, I want to teach my students that part of becoming a good writer is by making mistakes and trying new things.
Challenge: While I agree with one of the main points of “Only Geniuses Can Be Writers” regarding the importance of writers believing that they can improve, something about this essay bothered me. Why can’t we recognize genius when genius is discovered? Why shouldn’t it be normal that some are better writers than others? All students have different talents and while, of course, I believe it’s important that students learn to become better writers and learn to enjoy writing, I think it’s actually counterproductive to convince students that there are no writing geniuses or original ideas. Edwards and Paz argue that viewing writing as a collaboration of ideas, “[...] isn’t predicated on values of isolation, inward inspiration, or originality; rather, it sees values in sharing, explicit influence, and renewal” (68), and while I also see value in viewing writing as a social activity, I don’t like thinking about writing as a remix of other people’s ideas. I understand that this essay is trying to make writing seem more relatable, but writing is an art form that different people should be encouraged to approach in different ways.
コメント