“Shitty First Drafts” and “Perfectionism” summed up a lot of
the problems I face when I’m writing. I often expect to sit down, devote
several hours to a paper, and get a top-notch paper out of it. Even if I’m able
to crank out this seemingly good paper, I don’t even know if it’s good until
I’ve read it a couple times and make adjustments. So I guess I do a
first/second/maybe third draft without even realizing it. One of my favorite
lines was from from “Shitty First Drafts”: “Very few writers really know what
they are doing until they’ve done it”. Sometimes I write a paper, I think it’s
one of my best, and then my teacher doesn’t even know what my point was in my
paper. Other times, I’ll write what I think is complete and utter nonsense, and
I’ll do well. It’s really hard to tell what value your paper has, in terms of
content, because every reader is going to get something different out of it
based on their own experiences and thought processes. That’s why “Perfectionism”,
and this class, resonated with my really well. I often get so caught up on what
I think I should be writing about, and don’t think about what I want to be talking about.
Howdy Meg,
ReplyDeleteReally getting some great vibes from this post. I can definitely sympathize with a lot of the things you were writing about, especially towards the end. I think a huge dilemma many writers, including myself, face is the worry of other's thoughts. I have nearly given up the idea of "good writing" because everyone sees it differently. As you explain, you can write a totally kick-ass paper, which you are completely proud of, and get a C+ on it. Before getting a grade, you were really proud of your work, but after being criticized, you start to doubt yourself, as well as the ability to judge "good" writing. But who the hell has the "authority" to judge "good" writing?
I once wrote a paper for a Hamilton College Africana Studies course explaining how I thought without the Jim Crow Laws, perhaps the strong African American culture that exists in society today would not have been established. I titled this paper "Silver Linings", aiming to describe how Jim Crow was a terrible time in American history, but, why focus on the horrible things in the past, when you can realize how maybe there was a small positive effect it had? I, obviously, was not trying to justify Jim Crow at all, but I wanted to provide a different way of looking at the problem. Anyway, the teacher hated it. She gave grades based on how much we agreed with her. I was so angry. I bitterly rewrote the paper, citing all of the terrible events of Jim Crow that she raved about in class. I felt like a sell-out. The revised paper I wrote probably mirrored every other student's paper. But that is what you needed to do to get an A in the class. Cool. I thought the purpose of college was to challenge old ideas, and look at events from different angles. I am still kind of angry about that paper, if you could not tell.
Sorry for the long rant, but I really enjoyed your post!