Well, ill first start out by picking out the parts of the assigned reading that I did not agree with. On page 8 of Convergences it mentions that most writers think the composition of their work is more important than anything else. I don’t think that makes sense because no matter how well its put together if what the writer is saying isn’t interesting or doesn’t make sense than the piece of writing is no good. The writer’s message needs to be engaging. If the composition is poor, but the message is clearly presented that is a different story. Also, on page 9 it talks about how an outline is a key factor in writing. I don’t think they should have put that in the book because like we talked about on Wednesday, not everyone makes outlines and everyones writing process is different.
I liked when the book was talking about messages vs. themes. I think that the majority of people mistake the two words. When someone reads an essay or article and want to get the main idea they’ll usually just look for the theme, and rest on that. They won’t dig deeper into the work. Writing and reading writing are very complex. Its not always just about what you see on the surface . To truly understand writing you need to pick it apart, it has many layers and to truly understand you have to analyze each layer. I thought the whole “Marry Me” section was very effective to help understand the differences in the message, method, and medium.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Most books advocate outlines. Outlines can be useful, but the conventional Roman Numeral structure is not something that works for everyone.
ReplyDeleteYou write:
"no matter how well its put together if what the writer is saying isn’t interesting or doesn’t make sense than the piece of writing is no good."
Composition affects the way the message is received, though. You're right in that, ultimately, one should have something interesting to say, but it certainly helps to say it in a more engaging fashion.