Yesterday, I started to the first part of my rough draft for the QE essay. Before starting, I read over the prompt about three times. I then looked at the questions and I proceeded to slowly and carefully pick the one that I liked the best. I've noticed before that I am usually very adamant on the prompt that I pick, when given a choice. However, this time I was stuck between two: What are the obstacles to creativity, and how can they be overcome? and How can creativity be used to improve the human condition? Since I couldn't quite choose at first, I wrote out both questions in my notebook. I then attempted to answer both questions. I figured whichever question I got the most answers from would be the one that I'd use in my essay. Once I jotted down my few answers to each question, I realized I had the same amount for each. Argh. I looked again at both questions, and I considered how similar they were. Actually, I could probably just incorporate one question into the other throughout the essay. Huh, that sounds pretty nice. So, I chose the second question and I figure I can relate it to the first. I realize that my brain works very clearly and methodically when it wants to. Also, I've discovered that I am a terrible decision maker. I really do wish I was better at it, but I seem to have gotten even worse over the years. It takes me way too long to make a decision, and once I make it, I usually go another route entirely. I second guess myself, because I fear making the wrong decision. I'm a slow, slow worker, and I really wish I could change that.
After I chose my question, I brainstormed my "warm up act." I searched my iTunes music library and looked deep in my brain for inspiration, where I found nothing. I looked just to the right of my desk, where I keep my most beloved books, and I considered their plots and themes. I realized then that one of those many books would be the perfect "warm up act." I was surprised at how quickly I found inspiration for the first paragraph of my essay and at how long it took me to choose the right question for it. I already know that I'm terrible at decisions, but I didn't realize that I'm easily and swiftly inspired by many things.
For the next paragraph, I had to elaborate on the question and explain its relativity and importance. This was a bit of a failure for me. It took me too long, and I couldn't find the right words. I strive to be a good writer, but often my words come out sounding weird and cheesy. I also realize that I get nervous when writing out the big picture. It's as if the question I'm trying to answer is beyond me, and I'm too timid to try and answer it. I'm embarrassed by what I might say, and I don't like being that way. In the future, I hope to be able to have a little more confidence in my writing, so that I don't sit in front of the computer for too long, pondering, trying to make decisions and failing miserably.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Friday, September 17, 2010
Best of Week: How to be Creative when Writing
The most substantial ideas from class this week came from Andrea Barrett's Sea of Information. I was abruptly overwhelmed by the truth of her words and the impact that they had on me. She graced us with many ideas to consider when writing, and also demonstrated that writing is never perfect the first time, and that it's okay to mess up repeatedly before finding the right words.
First, she did lots and lots of research. I like how she found background information on the subjects that she wrote about. Barrett made an excellent analogy that really spoke to me, "Research, no matter how compelling, may give me the bones of a fiction but never the breath and the blood" (16). She nails down the facts, which is vital when writing. However, she isn't solely focused on them. Instead, she uses the facts more as a framework or backbone to the actual piece. Really, imagination, creativity, and personality provide the true feelings and emotions that writers hope to evoke from readers. These three things lure in the reader by making the story come alive. No longer does it sound factual (although the facts are all there), it sounds like an actual story that people want to read about. For me, this is excellent incite. I realize now that creativity and personality are necessary when writing, and that it's okay to use my imagination to aid me in creating the best work possible.
Barrett also shared with us that she messes up a lot when she writes. Her first draft is never perfect. In fact, she said that her original story almost completely changed over the course of a year. In a way, I'm relieved! I'm happy to know that really great writers have trouble writing, too. I now know that writing takes time, and it's okay to go back and rewrite a couple of times, maybe even more.
Why does writing take so long? Well, sometimes we just can't find the right words. However, there are other reasons, too. For example, inspiration for writing comes from everywhere. Literally. So, just when I think I've created the perfect paragraph, a new idea forms in my mind, and I'm forced to start all over again. But I know now that that's okay. It's the imagination at work, and that's a great tool when writing. So, it's normal to be a slow, indecisive writer, because in the end,
you've created the best work that your mind can put out there.
I know that Barrett's insight on writing creatively will help me with every story, essay, poem, blog, etc. that I ever write again. Her knowledge about writing is very vast, and because of that she has helped me realize just exactly what I need to be a decent writer.
First, she did lots and lots of research. I like how she found background information on the subjects that she wrote about. Barrett made an excellent analogy that really spoke to me, "Research, no matter how compelling, may give me the bones of a fiction but never the breath and the blood" (16). She nails down the facts, which is vital when writing. However, she isn't solely focused on them. Instead, she uses the facts more as a framework or backbone to the actual piece. Really, imagination, creativity, and personality provide the true feelings and emotions that writers hope to evoke from readers. These three things lure in the reader by making the story come alive. No longer does it sound factual (although the facts are all there), it sounds like an actual story that people want to read about. For me, this is excellent incite. I realize now that creativity and personality are necessary when writing, and that it's okay to use my imagination to aid me in creating the best work possible.
Barrett also shared with us that she messes up a lot when she writes. Her first draft is never perfect. In fact, she said that her original story almost completely changed over the course of a year. In a way, I'm relieved! I'm happy to know that really great writers have trouble writing, too. I now know that writing takes time, and it's okay to go back and rewrite a couple of times, maybe even more.
Why does writing take so long? Well, sometimes we just can't find the right words. However, there are other reasons, too. For example, inspiration for writing comes from everywhere. Literally. So, just when I think I've created the perfect paragraph, a new idea forms in my mind, and I'm forced to start all over again. But I know now that that's okay. It's the imagination at work, and that's a great tool when writing. So, it's normal to be a slow, indecisive writer, because in the end,
you've created the best work that your mind can put out there.
I know that Barrett's insight on writing creatively will help me with every story, essay, poem, blog, etc. that I ever write again. Her knowledge about writing is very vast, and because of that she has helped me realize just exactly what I need to be a decent writer.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Connection: Richard Feynman and Felix Hoenikker
When I started reading Alan Alda's essay and he started describing Richard Feynman, I realized that he reminded me exactly of Felix Hoenikker. Hoenikker is a fictional character from a book that I read entitled Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut.
There are many similarities between the two of them. For example, they're both phsyicists that aid in the development of the atomic bomb. Also, they follow their curiosity and have fun while they do so. When Feynman spends months trying to decipher why a plate wobbles as it spins, it's just like the time that Hoenikker develops a fascination for turtles, and it becomes his obsession. Neither of them lose their sense of curiosity or adolescence, constantly experimenting with new things and exploring new ideas. Comparing the two is almost like comparing the same person.
The two scientists inform one another by demonstrating a lack of normality in one area. Hoenikker, unlike Feynman, is unable to present himself as a normal guy. Hoenikker was always a little weird. He's very quiet and not great at relating to other people. However, Alda describes in his essay that Feynman was capable of being just another man, though his mind was so much more extensive than most's.
These two closesly related men provide insight on the minds of brilliant people. I think it is so important to know that these two extremely intelligent men can come off as lunatics, at times. I know that sounds harsh, but I mean it in a positive way. Our perception of smart people is not that of someone who plays with toys and acts on impulse. However, these two incredibly ingenius men happen to do both of these things. Therefore, I think that these men teach a very important lesson, which is that sometimes our perception is off, and often people are not who they seem to be.
There are many similarities between the two of them. For example, they're both phsyicists that aid in the development of the atomic bomb. Also, they follow their curiosity and have fun while they do so. When Feynman spends months trying to decipher why a plate wobbles as it spins, it's just like the time that Hoenikker develops a fascination for turtles, and it becomes his obsession. Neither of them lose their sense of curiosity or adolescence, constantly experimenting with new things and exploring new ideas. Comparing the two is almost like comparing the same person.
The two scientists inform one another by demonstrating a lack of normality in one area. Hoenikker, unlike Feynman, is unable to present himself as a normal guy. Hoenikker was always a little weird. He's very quiet and not great at relating to other people. However, Alda describes in his essay that Feynman was capable of being just another man, though his mind was so much more extensive than most's.
These two closesly related men provide insight on the minds of brilliant people. I think it is so important to know that these two extremely intelligent men can come off as lunatics, at times. I know that sounds harsh, but I mean it in a positive way. Our perception of smart people is not that of someone who plays with toys and acts on impulse. However, these two incredibly ingenius men happen to do both of these things. Therefore, I think that these men teach a very important lesson, which is that sometimes our perception is off, and often people are not who they seem to be.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Carry It Forward: The Angels
Last week in class, we read and analyzed "The Angels" by John Updike. Updike's poem speaks to me in a variety of ways. I am truly fascinated with its meaning and by the truth of his words.
Upon taking the poem home and analyzin
g it alone, I only took from it that it was an ode to past composers, artists, and writers. Although this is partly correct, there is so much more that the poem has to offer!
When we discussed the poem in class, I realized its true meaning. We pointed out Updike's usage of phrases like "plane of silent compromise" compared to "realm above." The Angels, being the composers, artists, and writers, are part of the "realm above us. However, we dwell on the dull "plane of silent compromise." Updike reveals that their work is hidden everywhere, we only must look for it.
Updike brings up an ugly truth: Sometimes, life can be dull and boring and downright uninteresting. However, there is a solution to bringing the color back into one's life. The Angels: Mozart, Matisse, Shakespeare, etc. are one's salvation in times of a black and white life. One must pay attention to the art that is clearly all around them. When life gets to be too dull, too tired, one can always enhance it with a dose of music, art, or literature.So, now that I've been enlightened with this excellent belief, I'm all too excited to use it in my day-to-day life. As hard as it is to believe, my life does get very boring at times. I mean, homework, studying, filling out college applications, working... eh, not always fun. In fact, sometimes I get so bored that I turn into a terrible person. I become agitated and don't know how to relax. However, now that I read "The Angels" I'll make an effort to devote more of my time to music, art, and reading. I can see now how this will effect me.
I know from past experiences that these three things have the ability to effect my mood and therefore my outlook on life. I know that listening to a great song or looking at a colorful drawing in times of utter boredom will uplift my mood.
From now on, I'm going to try to color my life with more books, music, and artwork so that I'm able to live more thoroughly and happily.
g it alone, I only took from it that it was an ode to past composers, artists, and writers. Although this is partly correct, there is so much more that the poem has to offer!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)