Revising with Williams...

As I read the blog assignment and saw that we were using the EMU Catalog, I immediately remembered some material offered by Williams. "From time to time, some of us have to write for an audience able to understand the simplest of prose. Or more often, we have to write on a matter so complex that even a competent reader will understand it only if we take special care to make it clear," (57).

As I browsed through the Catalog website I ended on a short paragraph under the Extended Programs.

Below is the passage I chose to revise:

Through Eastern’s Extended Programs units, it is now possible for individual adult students, businesses, government and social agencies to access the tremendous resources of one of Michigan’s leading universities. Using alternative formats and teaching technologies, we deliver education, applied research, training and consultation services. Ongoing research initiatives and collaborations ensure that our programs respond to changing needs in a changing environment.

Below is the passage as I revised it:

Individual adult students, businesses, government, and social agencies are able to access the resources of Eastern Michigan University through the Extended Programs units. EMU delivers education, applied research, training and consultation services by using alternative formats and teaching technologies. EMU ensures that programs respond to changing needs in the environment through ongoing research initiatives and collaborations.

I think that the slight movements of words and the elimination of unnecessary and/or repetitive words are the small things that Williams would say help with clarity, cohesion, and emphasis. I am not saying I agree with all of William's critique, but I do feel that it does this section of text good.
In the first sentence, I feel that although "Extended Programs" is the subject of the sentence, placing it at the end of the sentence creates more emphasis on what you want the reader to walk away remembering.
The second and third sentence both follow a very common "formula" for how a basic sentence looks. "Subject"+"Action(s)"+"How the action was completed"=SENTENCE! These formula was only completed upon revision of the section of text I chose to revise.

The original text can be found at: http://catalog.emich.edu/content.php?catoid=1&navoid=34.

Strunk and White

I should start by letting you know that I have the Third Edition of Strunk and White.

My first impressions of this book, was that I couldn't believe I paid money for it. On the book shelf at my apartment I already have two or three other books that are about formatting and grammatical particulars. Strunk and White even say, "This book has been concerned with what is correct, or acceptable, in the use of English,"(66). This is an upper-level English course, I already know those things. I was very disappointed.

The element, or section, of the book that helped me the most, I suppose was, "An Approach to Style" as I felt this was the only section that could be considered new material for me. I have always had an appreciation for the idea that an author can be detected by his style alone. I agree that Faulkner and Hemingway sound very different and there is no grammatical or formatting difference to cause this as Strunk and White discuss on page 68. However, I have never seen my own writing having a style all to it's own.
For me though, this has always been okay. I never needed to have my own style. I am not trying to become famous. I am not trying to be distinguishable from the greats by how my writing sounds when read aloud, or even silently for that matter. My writings aren't that good.

Within this section the one that stuck out with me the most was #11, "Do not explain too much." I am someone who, because of my stream of consciousness writing, some times writes things that when read by someone out of context they don't understand. This is why revision is such an important step for me. I am firm believer in explaining things as far as you can because very often readers are not reading what they read daily. They are reading something out of context for there life-that is why they are reading it. Perhaps to escape from their daily life or perhaps to just experience something knew while keeping the risk minimal.
This section was more so referring to dialogue, but I feel that is transferable to many different types of writings. "It is seldom advisable to tell all...Let the conversation itself disclose the speaker's manner or condition," (75). These ideas can be transfered to almost any kind of writing.

The material I found most unhelpful would be found in the "Elementary Rules of Usage" and the "Words and Expressions Commonly Misused". To start with the "Rules", immediately I was put off by the word "elementary"-in a 300-level online writing course the word elementary should not be used to describe anything. I think most people in this course would feel there writing is beyond an "elementary" level. I, as a writer, don't need a reminder about how to form the plural of a word, how to properly write the date, or how to write a series out.
Also, as stated before, since I already own a few books with this material in it, this list of "Words and Expressions Commonly Misused" was nothing but repetitive for me. This was about 26 pages of words that just ends. There are a few comments at the beginning about how writers who mess these words up are careless and not to blame the writers style for using these words. "The Elements of Style" and this whole section has nothing to do with style, but rather laziness and the writer who is in need of another editor.

"Inventing" A Writing Technology

This was a painstaking project...and from reading the other threads in the emu online website I am sure others would agree. And although I didn't like the concept of this project at the beginning, it opened my eyes to how dependent on technology we are.

As I created my writing technology used berries and wrote on cement (the sidewalk outside of my apartment building). It took a few tries, and it sucked. But now that I have done it and have also written (and posted) my essay, I feel that I have discovered new things about the relationship between writing and technology, and how that relationship is weighted toward technology.

I have some pictures that are not posted right now because I went out of town for Mother's Day weekend. The assignment is clearly completed because I have written my essay and been able to describe was I used to complete this project. I will post the pictures when I get back in town early next week.

Steve, I guess I have one piece of advice for you about this project. I really like and appreciate the concept for this project, however I would suggest giving the students more time to complete it. Or introducing the project more in advance than when it is due. Does that make sense? I like, looking back, that you didn't provide us with examples- I know I would have just copied the example you gave.

Manguel and Baron Articles

These two authors both begin to look at writing in a much more linear sense for me. Manguel looks at the development of what I would guess is the most common medium for writing today-the book. Baron looks at the development of writing from early stages-just pencils, all the way to the computer. I think for each of these authors the development of a certain aspect of the art form over time is a defining characteristic in the relationship it plays with us today.
Something that had never occurred to me before was that books were not always written, and published therefore, in a matter that made them easy to carry around with themselves. Manguel talks about how the shape a book was produced in has a direct effect on how it was meant to be read. Even today we still see this sort of thing I think. Imagine cozying up in bed with a good romance novel, then imagine yourself cozying up in bed with the latest edition of the OED. Not quite the same. This was a very historical look at the development of the physical book.
Baron, on the other hand talked more about the evolution of technology in writing that Manguel I think. The modern conveniences that we rely on to do any type of writing now are far different from the "technologies" relied on even 20 years ago. At work this past week, I had to ask someone else how to use a typewriter-that was a technology for writing that I never needed to know how to use. And as a matter of fact, now that I know how to use it for a requisition at work, I will probably only use it there. The idea that there is another reason for writing besides communication is just crazy to me. Even Baron states that "each new literacy technology begins with a restricted communication function..." (Baron 71). Think about it, why would we invent new things if they didn't create easier access to communication than the old?

What is style?

When referencing writing, style can mean various things. To me, however, one particular thing comes to mind. I have had numerous professors tell me that I write much like I speak. I am not sure if this is good or bad, but it is. It is my style. Styles can change. I can turn my "professor/university administrator" style on when needed, or off as the case may be.

I think each person's writing style is unique. This is not to say that there aren't conventions to what would be considered an appropriate style for certain situations. I mean just think, would you write and send the same exact e-mail to your boss/supervisor "criticizing" a decision that was made as opposed to your best friend what you are "venting" about the same situation? I think, and would hope, not. I mean granted it doesn't take much to switch styles, just a few flipped words or some less anger in that case, but nonetheless, a skill that is very much so needed.

This one situation, that would be addressed differently when writing to a different audience, is something that can-even within the same audience-vary incredibly. That varying part is the style.

Perhaps, like many great things in life, style is easier defined, not by what it is, but by what it is NOT.

• Style is not formatting.
  
• Style is not grammar.
  
• Style is not spelling or function.
  
• Style is not punctuation.
  

Style is the way you put words together. I feel like poetry is a good example of this. There are many poets who wrote about love, but it is vary apparent that an Emily Dickinson poem and a Robert Browning poem are not nearly the same.

Now, bear in mind as you ponder the above thoughts, that this is all said (or typed, rather) without looking at the required reading once, so I could be all wrong about this whole style thing.

But those are just my thoughts...

My first blog ever...

Hello all, although I am not sure who that is. This is my first blog ever. I am not sure how this goes, I think like a diary-very "stream of consciousness". So I guess I will tell you a little about my friends. They are amazing. The picture I added is of me and two of my bestest friends... Grayling and Sara. We are all super busy with jobs and school, but we try to hang out once in a while. This was one of our most recent excursions. We joke because we say we things with us are "always an adventure."
It is weird just writing about stuff like this. I think my personality would much rather have this in a conversation.