December 11, 2005
Revision, Revision, Revision...
What tedium. I can now see why I never tried to do heavy revision before. So far I have revised my entire literacy autobiography, and about half of my inquiry paper. The one thing I know is that I will be able to meet Kirsten’s requirement for radical revision. I decided to try and focus on a specific aspect of my pieces and not try not to write about so many things. What this means is I can say more about my topic and be clearer about it. Does this mean it will be better, who knows. Well, maybe Kirsten does…
Now I am wondering about my reflection, but I think it should be ok because I will have my big paper for history done by Monday, except for a little tweaking, and I’ll have time to work on it. I have to say though that Kirsten’s comments on my inquiry confused the hell out of me. Hopefully when I talk to her next week I should have a clearer picture.
How have you guys felt with Kirsten’s feedback? I still felt that the amount of revision is a little vague and what is good revision. When Rick completely changed his literacy autobiography, he received a lot of praise from Kirsten, but why should you have to completely a piece in order to get a good grade? What’s the point in the first draft in the first place? And who is to say that the first draft is less valuable? I don’t know either. I know that when I plan a paper carefully, that changing it so radically has no real place in my revision process, but I can see the value in revising a piece that lacks such planning.
at December 11, 2005 6:02 PM
I think the revision is tied in with the quality of the paper...at least that's how it's appeared with me. Still using myself as an example, I'm glad that we're being forced to revise stuff...I think it's made my papers stronger and it forces us to really read critically.
I don't think we're being forced to change just for the sake of change, but that we're trying to make our papers as "sharp" as can be. Again, this is just coming from my experience; I have no idea what comments everyone else has been getting and how they feel about that.
I think I share some of your frustration with the revision process. Personally I like to do things and be done with them and move on with my life. The whole process of revision does not really allow for this option though. It really seems like torture to rework my writing. I like writing in the moment. If I wrote something, there must have been a good reason for it. To just throw it away seems like a desecration of my writing. I am not pretending that my writing is perfect, but it is good enough for me. I like the spontaneity of it, but that is totally lost now.
From the perspective of a writing consultant though, I really like doing these revisions. I felt kind of like a poser going into this job. It didn't seem right to be helping people revise their work when I never did it myself. It is good to take a different perspective on the process. I don't think that I will adopt a strict policy of revising my work from now on, but I will definitely have a more open mind to it, and I can certainly see the benefit in it.
Adding comments that boost conversation and that tend not to repeat what had been said is very crucial. At the same effort, having a newer blog having a smaller community, I still always appreciate even just about the most simple comments such as "I really enjoyed it post", "thanks for covering this topic" etc...it is usually nice to be reassured that others appreciate what you're composing. This may be less acceptable vital bigger, more popular information sites.