Know Thyself a.k.a. Journal #8

Both chapter 14 and 24 of Zinnser's book tie directly into my Creative Writing: Nonfiction class this semester. I've written a family memoir and a personal essay and the other forms of nonfiction require me to really dig deep into myself and my memories to write. I have written about things of which I am passionate or have effected me greatly. However, my grades have not been great. Why? Not bad grammer and I'm pretty strict on my use of punctuation. No, my biggest downfall is something else. Something that even my teacher can't put a finger on. I think it is that I don't know myself well enough to say anything.

Zinnser talks about students often feeling like they need permission. I don't. I don't think I need to write what the teacher wants in order to get high marks. I often write what I find out through reading or research even though not all of my papers are research papers. I don't need permission, I need to know something about myself. Am I alone in feeling like I'm a stranger to myself? Is everyone else walking around with a firm grasp on who they are? If that's true, I don't know what I will do.

I know that I've written about this before; the question of how I can write about myself when I don't know myself. I write about it so much because I think it is a real problem for me. I approach writing from a very rigid step-by-step method which sometimes has passion. I don't think I have anything good to say. If I do, when I write it I am so emotional about it that it takes a million drafts to make it clear to other readers. It is importantt to note here that I often don't have the time to do a million drafts and so I receive a lot of remarks from teachers regarding clarity or more detail.

I guess my writing goal is tied very much to this notion of self-discovery. When I finally find myself, which I hope is soon, I will write you and let you know what I find out.

Thrills of the Stage a.k.a. Journal #7

I really enjoyed the series piece by Lane DeGregory. Currently, I am involved in a play on the FPU campus and I was so enthralled with this young girl's story of making it to Broadway. I do not have such high dreams as Michelle but it was like a fairy tale, and what girl wouldn't love to see her name in lights?

Once I realized that the article was actually a series of short stories about Michelle's journey onto the professional stage, I was intrigued. This piece really read like a fiction novel, not something to be read in a newspaper. I thought that the subject matter was handled well in that it broke up the emotion into workable pieces for the reader. What could have been a totally overwhelming article became a saga of highs and lows.

It's hard to think about this piece being only one article. So much detail and character would have been lost. By the time Michelle gets on stage, the reader is right there sharing in her triumph. What if DeGregory had only one chance to get the whole story across? I think readers would have missed the whole plight of struggling actors and the tolls taken on their families.

I really enjoyed the series piece by Lane DeGregory. Currently, I am involved in a play on the FPU campus and I was so enthralled with this young girl's story of making it to Broadway. I do not have such high dreams as Michelle but it was like a fairy tale, and what girl wouldn't love to see her name in lights?

Once I realized that the article was actually a series of short stories about Michelle's journey onto the professional stage, I was intrigued. This piece really read like a fiction novel, not something to be read in a newspaper. I thought that the subject matter was handled well in that it broke up the emotion into workable pieces for the reader. What could have been a totally overwhelming article, became a saga of highs and lows.

It's hard to think about this piece being only one article. So much detail and character would have been lost. By the time Michelle gets on stage, the reader is right there sharing in her triumph. What if DeGregory had only one chance to get the whole story across? I think readers would have missed the whole plight of struggling actors and the tolls taken on their families.

When I was reading DeGregory’s piece on Michelle and Karla, I started thinking about Zinnser and what his response would have been to this series. I think his principles of simplicity, style and voice are definitely a strong part of why I was attracted to the story.

As I was finishing up this reading in the FPU Coffee Shop, I remember looking up with tears in my eyes trying to get my friends to understand how wonderful it was to be part of the moment when Michelle finished her first Broadway performance. For the most part, my friends laughed at how emotional I got over a newspaper article. "But," I thought to myself, "that's the power of words. This is real."

Have You Seen my Voice? a.k.a. Journal #6

Here we go again. I feel like Zinnser has already addressed the notion of voice in writing in a previous chapter. Yet chapter 20 is all about finding your own voice in writing. He says, "My commodity as a writer, whatever I'm writing about, is me. And your commodity is you. Don't alter your voice to fit your subject. Develop one voice that readers will recognize when they hear it" (231).

How can I avoid changing my voice to fit the subject when I do not know how my voice sounds? This idea of voice is closely tied to style in my mind and I am not sure that Zinnser is succesful in clarifying between the two definitions. He wants writers to put forth the effort to remain true to their unique voices but does not offer a distinct defintion to start from.

You know what I think is honesty? Toni Morrison talking about voice. The very last page of chapter 20 has a long quote from Morrison about how she feels about her own writing voice. In the last lines of her quote she says, "It had a certain style. It was inevitable. I couldn't describe it, but I could produce it"(240).

As an English major I feel that a lot of what I write and get graded on happens on accident. All this time I have spent in college and I do not think I have learned anything new that I have directly applied to my writing. Do not get me wrong, I have learned many new techniques and approaches to writing, I just do not apply them in the heat of the moment.

I think many students, not just fellow English majors, would agree with me here if they were honest. Like Morrison, I cannot describe what and why I write what I do. It just happens. More often than not I get a stellar grade as well. Teachers leave comments on stylistic choices or unique insights I brought to the literature and I think to myself, "Sure, that sounds like an excellent reason for me to have written that."

So, in the position I currently find myself, is it possible to write with my voice, not sacrificing its uniqueness for subject matter? Even now as I write this post I am asking myself if this piece has a voice. I feel, in some ways, like a blind person. Others see the beauty in what I write. Teachers say that even in a typed paper, they know when a piece of writing is mine. Yet I do not see what they see. In my mind, this makes me a counterfeit.

A counterfeit writer.

The Idea of Writing Reality a.k.a. Journal #5

"Ultimately every writer must follow the path that feels most comfortable. For most people learning to write, that path is nonfiction. It enables them to write about what they know or can observe or can find out. This is especially true of young people and students" (Zinnser 99).

For the most part I agree with Zinnser. (I know, shocking isn't it?)

I do think that writers must figure out what works for them; writing doesn't have to be some systematic process that produces a universal style. However, I'm not sure I can accept that whatever is "most comfortable" is the way writers should go. For me, I think writing is a process that needs to be able to push and stumble and climb through uncomfortable styles and forms. Sometimes working through the unfamiliar sharpens you as a writer.

I feel like Zinnser is oversimplifying the art of Nonfiction writing. As a student taking a Nonfiction class this semester, I have come to realize that not everything comes out great in the subject of nonfiction. Writing about the world, the human condition, etc. is extremely hard to do if the goal is to write it well. Anyone could put down an opinion or idea but it doesn't make it worthy of publication.

Nonfiction is great in that it does allow people to write about things they know rather than trying to impersonate an interest in some lofty concept. The problem here is that people often mistake their "knowing" of something as the end all observation. Nonfiction is not a fancy name for journal entry, people.

I have grown to love Nonfiction and I feel that it is actually as difficult to write as fiction. I also don't like how Zinnser equates the style of nonfiction with the simplicity of college students or "young people". Why is it especially well suited for us? Are older people incapable of writing about what they know? Or are students and young people so feeble minded that they must start out with what they know before attempting to try on the discourse of the educated?

Think on that Zinnser!

What I Want to be When I Grow Up a.k.a. Journal #4

I couldn't stop crying, it was totally embarrasing. Who cries over homework? Apparently that's me. Reading Jim Sheeler's piece on the Marine's who notify families of deceased military men and women was deeply emotional for me. That's what I want to be when I grow up. If writing is something that remains in my future, I want to write with the clarity, precision and emotion of Jim Sheeler.

When 9/11 happened, I really didn't understand what all of the hype was about. When I think about my reaction now, I shudder with disgust. Although I didn't understand the significance of who or why I still could have shown some compassion for the people killed in that moment of impact with the towers. As the war has progressed and support has decreased I have been on the fence, I admit this freely. Sheeler's piece however, put a different face on the war in Iraq.

I felt like I was there in the room with the families. The most chilling moments were when he was writing about the pregnant wife and her screams that passangers missed. I thought to myself, "This is so much bigger than I ever let myself believe." I have always been opposed to the armed forces and the need for them in the first place. I remember once in high school getting a call from someone in the military trying to recruit me. I ended up giving him a thirty minute lecture about how what he did for a living was wrong and I would never be caught supporting murder in the name of democracy. I never understood how naive I was until I read this article.

Sheeler's article conveyed so many things all at one time. Facts, emotion, the human element. How can you write with that much passion about devastation? Reading this article made me rethink how I view the men and women who fight for my rights and freedoms. Not to sound cliche, but I'm proud to be an American although I know this country's not perfect.

I would like to meet Jim one day and ask him all kinds of things about what his year long investigation taught him, how it changed him. Simply reading it for the purposes of our class, I was changed. That's what journalism is all about I think. I want to be a part of something like that one day.

The Confessions of an Extremely Verbose Individual a.k.a. Journal #3

"Don't dialogue with someone you can talk to. Don't interface with anybody."

This is just one of many amazing quotes in chapter three of Zinnser's book. I feel like this chapter could be the anthem of college students everywhere who suffer through the overly complicated textbooks they are forced to read. Just simplify! Speak in real language if you want me to learn something gosh darn it! Back to the point. I find that I am guilty of this complicated language by simply being a college student. In order to get a high grade in my English classes, I have to demonstrate a vast vocabulary that allows me to "explore the text fully". Why can't I just just talk about what I noticed in an intellectual way? I often don't feel smart enough to be writing a paper on a certain text. I bluff my way to the grade I think I deserve. And where did I learn these bluffing phrases? The media, other students, and even the teachers themselves. From reading this chapter I wonder if some of my professors even know what they are talking about at the core of their ideas.

I love how Zinnser creates images of his opinions for the reader. For example, he talks about people trying to figure out their writing style. He writes, "There is no style store; style is organic to the person doing the writing, as much a part of him as his hair, or, if he is bald, his lack of it." I picture myself in SaveMart, buying various groceries and then suddenly realizing that I have an article due soon! I had better hurry over to the style aisle (that rhymes!) and pick out some style so it isn't boring, I think to myself. I rush around the store frantically only to realize that I can't buy style. Now, I understand that Zinnser is trying to poke fun in this quote, but seriously I feel like sometimes I could just go out into the world somewhere and find my unique style. Him telling me that my idea is nonsensical takes a little wind out of my sails.

What if I don't know what's "organic" to me? I understand the hair concept but there are other things about myself that remain a mystery. How am I supposed to get in touch with the "organic" style within me when I still have no idea how vast the concept of "who I am" is? Peers of mine often tell me that they know my style of writing. I have had several teachers tell me that even if I didn't put my name on a paper, they would know it was mine. How is it that I wouldn't know? Zinnser says, "Some will go so badly that you'll despair of ever writing again." He is talking about how writing may not always go well. Will it ever go well if I'm constantly searching for my style? What if I write something that is filled with a unique style only to realize I don't remember how I accomplished it?

These are the deranged confessions of someone who writes with unneccesary words and without style (most of the time).

Charged with: Committing an Act of Literature a.k.a Journal #2

On this charge I am guilty! Once again I feel as if Zinnser has crept into my brain and revealed my shameful writing habits. Each time I sit down to write something, whether it be an essay or short story or blog, I find myself trying to write something brilliant the first time. Even now, with the “delete” key only inches away from my fingers, I have contemplated my words before typing what I want to say.

What is an act of literature? It sounds so formal. Literature holds several connotations in my mind and each of them suggest that I am not capable of producing “literature.” Literature is for the person who thinks profoundly and has great things to say. I do not think of myself as profound and I definitely cannot find anything “great” to say. What Zinnser writes in chapters one and two challenge me to think better of myself as an author. Even though I have yet to be published, I do write and therefore can write profoundly if I am aware of myself and my surroundings.

I liked how chapter one discussed the variety of writing styles. I often find myself subscribing to that cliché idea of a writer. Actually, what comes to mind is the character portrayed by Diane Lane in Under the Tuscan Sun. She seems to effortlessly absorb the colorfulness of life and then spill it out onto paper in a witty yet thoughtful way. However, Zinnser discusses how writing is actually a job and must be worked at for some writers. I might just be one such writer. Too bad too, I kind of liked the idea that whatever I wrote would be sheer genius, loved by all.

I also connected with what chapter two had to say. Actually I feel as though I have read this piece in another class. Perhaps it was my Compositional Theory class last semester—that professor was very keen on keeping things simple. I digress. My favorite quote from that chapter is: “Every word that serves no function, every long word that could be a short word, every adverb that carries the same meaning that’s already in the verb, every passive construction that leaves the reader unsure of who is doing what—these are the thousand and one adulterants that weaken the strength of the sentence. And they usually occur in proportion to education and rank” (7). It is hard to miss how Zinnser feels about wordiness with word choices such as “adulterant.” I am guilty on this count too I suppose. As an English major I think it must be impossible to avoid wordiness. It is our job to explain a passage to death or at least until the professor is satisfied that we, the students, have exhausted every possible interpretation of the text.

For journalism and nonfiction, however, the story is different. I am enjoying this difference even though it means I must learn a new way to persuade, describe, and explain. Who knows, maybe I will get off for good behavior if I can go back through my work and slash away those adulterant words that might try and suffocate what I am really trying to say. Put away those handcuffs sheriff.