Back when I lived with R, she sort of listened to my voice at one point and found out that I was a writer (or liked to play a writer on tv, anyway). She rushed to her room at one exchange and pulled out a set of typed pages. "This is a paper that I wrote when I first started college," she said. "My professor said it was one of the best he ever read, and he used to write for The New York Times."
I guess the operative phrase there would have been "used to"--I found the paper incoherent and riddled with grammar and spelling errors. And this was the seventh draft from a woman three years older than I am. When I left Hotel R earlier this year she was taking a literature class to fulfill her electives (please remember that R is studying to be a nurse--and also remember to take EXTREMELY good care of yourself if you live in the City, to avoid being her patient someday), and her professor there thought she was a fantastic writer as well.
Wait, though, it gets better...
I was reading SF Gate this past week and there was a story about a Muni passenger who was trying to catch a subway. He almost missed the train--his hand was caught in the closed door, and the publication stated that he was "drug" until someone pulled the emergency brake.
He was what?
Drug?
If you're toting around a badge like Chronicle or Times, shouldn't you also tote some pretty impeccable English around with you?
Bear with me a little longer.
I've been privy to DK's class notes on-line, and I am most grateful for it. Not only am I grateful for it, but I completely support his grading system for his level 400 paper-writers. By a level 400 class you should not only have a solid stance on your take of the subject but you should be able to effectively communicate in it. Since DK is a history professor he gives his students empathy on not being English majors. (I used to be an English major and a history minor--their writing styles aren't exactly similar, but grammar's grammar whether it's named "rose" or any other name.) Kudos to him for that as well, and kudos for his last statement...that his students can't go below a B for firmly grasping a subject, but will gain an A for grasping it and communicating the understanding well.
There's applause from this good ol' girl for that.
It's not about being a grammar snob. My friends of former years always told me they didn't write me letters because they could picture me with a red pen in my hand correcting their writing. This told me one of two things--that they thought I had a stronger love of the trees than I did for the forest, and that they wanted to be better writers themselves and thought it all rested in perfect grammar.
IT DOESN'T, DAMMIT.
I make LOTS of grammar and spelling mistakes, and more and more of them the greater the distance I travel from my college days. I split a lot of infinitives and I am still unclear on "further" and "farther" distinction and I dangle a modifier occasionally. My tenses tend to change at the whim of the storms of my mind and I ride them out without loss of faith. A grammar snob wouldn't take that ride. Grammar snobs are like people who won't camp in the woods because they might have to shit in a dirt hole. Grammar snobs are people who camp in the woods at a lodge with H-B-O, for Christ's sake. That's not camping. That's staying at a hotel.
That's not telling me a story. Don't hide behind Times or Chronicle as a badge. Don't give me a perfectly clean collection of words to be seen as the "best" writer.
I am SO smiling right now.
SO smiling write now.
See, you can't get an A just being a master of the subject. The piece should be clean, though. Not pretentious. CLEAN. Fuck the rules once you know them.
The artists who know them and fuck them fill the pages with heart. It may not be right the first time. But keep going. Keep writing. I'm thrilled to keep reading. And I don't carry a red pen in my saddle bag. I keep it at home to improve my own crap.
And if my stuff ever ends up in the Times, Chronicle, or New Yorker, I'll smile, but I won't badge it. With the Chronicle's "drug" and the Times's lazy writer, the names no longer shake pretention out to me.
As the Boss would say, "You just keep writing."
Selah, and sing on.
8 comments:
Thanks for the shout-out! :)
BTW, i think i am proof that one can actually become a worse writer with practice. I tell myself that having to unlearn the dissertation training-cum-brainwashing was always going to be a rough process because most people developed their voice before they were 35, let alone tried to start over on one. But I dont really believe it. I really should have unlearned and rebuilt by now. I think I will just have to accept my writing as a workman would accept the crippling and hobbling from machinery that crunched up his limbs. You gotta move on. Know what I mean?
Or, maybe being a good writer is like being good-looking. It's something that just is a lucky break that one should be thankful for. So me grading student papers on their writing skill is really like a really ugly person who likes to criticize models.
What do you think of me linking to you over here from the MOJOprofessor blog? It might bring a lot of riffraff.... but still, it would be openness at work. Why should the classroom stay cloistered? They might like ur commentary.
On the other hand, it might be frustrating for you, the blog owner, to see a horde of students come by. :)
"a really ugly person who likes to criticize models..."
Did someone call?
Um, gentlemen? No false modestry from either of you, now...(big grin)...
DK, link to my blog to your heart's content. I actually thought about commenting on the "Paper" posts you had, but decided that would be a bit rude--like an auditor contributing. I consider myself lucky enough to be in the class to watch, without messing up the space/time continuum.
Probably mis-spelled continuum...A-hahahahaha...
Regarding your voice, DK, I have to fall back on the writings of my teacher, Ms. Goldberg, and ask you this: does your writing teach you something about yourself, and set you free when you do it? Or do you arrive to the keyboard with a sense of "Good God, a tabula rosa..." If your writing sets you free, and teaches you something about yourself, then the machinery hasn't crippled you. You're just operating a thresher while others are pushing a treadle on a Singer. Different humming, different noise.
All of this is In My Humble Opinion. I tend to be more forgiving as my Grammar professor was more of a curious explorer than a strict disciplinarian...
Jo, I like ur attitude. I do think I'm learning about myself with the writing. :)
You know, I'd be interested in a post from Mr. Concrete himself on his thoughts on blogging these days. Mike, I still remember your original "shhhhhh..... im a blogger" post!
Jo and Mike, you are both welcome to comment away over at mojoprofessor. Anybody is really. I think learning should be mostly transparent! I'll stamp down if any problems develop, so no need to worry. ;)
I love the idea of Tabula Raza or the clean slate. The reality is there is no clean slate. All writing and thought has some bias or subjective ideas. I will not tote my newspaper reading as perfection. Often one may read any of the numerous periodicals and detect flaws and imperfection and yet those articles have a point to spread. I found the statements and commentaries to lead me further into analyzing my own writing. I am one of those who had to re-learn my writing style for every professor.
There are moments where I do get lost in all the words. I am farther from the past writing and realizing that one style has come and gone several times. My hope is that I can find my way to more coherent and expressive writing. The thing about a blog is there is no right or wrong way but rather a stream of conscious thought, which can change from moment to moment.
I can definitely understand the comment you make about re-learning writing styles for every professor, although in my case I had one style for my history professors and one style for my lit professors.
I shall not comment on which one I preferred to write for--insert big grin here--but there was a definite formula, at least in Missouri. In lit classes you were supposed to get right to the message; no passive voice, no unneccessary descriptions. (I suspect Hem left his mark on a lot of these voices.) In history you were expected to write in the passive voice and explore all angles coherently. Yikes.
I don't know how much THIS note will help some of you, but mid-way through one of my semesters my junior year I was double-majoring in lit and history and got so frustrated with the writing dichotomy that I threw my hands up in the air and wrote all my papers the same, as though they were all for lit class. One of my history professors promptly slapped me with a plagerism charge. Lucky for me I had a sane history department head as one of my other profs that semester. He took one look at my writing and said, "Honestly, it looks like your writing, just crappier to ME." I bit my lip and thanked him for his observation, and I was cleared.
My lit profs never thought I plagerized and had me write letters of recommendation about THEM because they liked my style.
Trust your voice.
(That story was not to knock a history professor, DK.)
Regarding changes in what's appropriate grammatically speaking...that's why I liked my grammar prof so much. She was open to those changes. To give an example of change...when I started college you were to italicize book titles and quote short story titles. Now you quote all of them.
Good points! Pleasure to meet you and get your take on it. :)
P.S. - I should also mention that it was a history professor who kept me in college when I didn't think I could make it...
For the record, I actually have no faith in history profs to lose. My own experience and observation are responsible for such a sad state of affairs. I have deep doubts rather than any faith in the current approach to history :)
Post a Comment