After talking with many of you, I feel like everybody is writing their first paper on Charles Baxter’s Full Of It. Maybe we should have asked around a bit before we started writing because I feel like this could complicate things. It may be a good thing, as we will be able to bounce ideas off of one another and further explore the text, but if twenty of us are writing the same exact thing, the bar will be set pretty high. Carol will have twenty papers to compare ours to and therefore, our grades may suffer. Each paper will study and explain the main points of the letter, meaning most of the paper’s substance will be the same. If somebody left out a point that another person brought up, point may be deducted
So my point in writing that first paragraph was to get my ideas flowing, as Baxter did when he started off by describing his surroundings of Lake Superior. It’s interesting, that even such an accomplished writer, still finds difficulty in starting. Do all writers, even those with a great deal of recognition, still lack confidence in their work? He cleverly lowers the reader’s expectations as if he is worried about disappointing them. If he feels the need to apologize to his audience, I’m not sure why he feels qualified to go on and explain the qualities necessary to be a writer. Yes, he does receive credibility when he explained the plight of being a young author, but regardless, the rest of the letter contradicts this credibility.
To address your first point, I agree in the sense that I definitely feel that a lot of people are going to write about Charlie Baxter’s piece Full of It. However I think it could be a good idea for many of us to write about this piece because not only is it very relatable to us, but also because we can all interpret his work extremely differently based on how credible we think he really is. Though he is a renowned writer, this piece definitely makes us think about what to actually believe in what he says. He makes us doubtful of whether we can believe him or not and it could be interesting to see which of us believe certain parts of his argument. In my opinion, I the fact that he makes us doubt him and think twice about what he is saying, makes him extremely credible. I think that good writers should get their audiences to think in new and unique ways, which is something Baxter definitely did with this particular piece.
ReplyDeleteI wrote about Baxter's piece as well. However, I took a different approach with my response. I had a lot of trouble writing and found myself using Baxter's advice while I was doing the assignment, so I tried to work with that. I couldn't relate directly to his advice to young aspiring writers, so I did have trouble creating an argument. It turned out I really was just writing and putting my thoughts on the page. I wonder if anyone else took the same or a similar approach instead of beginning with a concrete argument. While I still have to decide on and develop a thesis, his advice of finding yourself on the page gave me something to work with. Without that advice I probably would've just been extremely stuck, but instead of not writing anything I wrote what was true and what I was thinking so I have something to work with.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who didn’t write about Baxter’s Full of It, I’m a little confused about how we arrived at the assumption that the majority of our class was writing about his work. I totally agree with Nicole that his essay is very relatable, and therefore maybe easier to write about, but I think people found connections with the other pieces we read as well. To the point about Carol grading us harsher based on the fact that she’d have a lot of other papers to compare ours to, I don’t really think that it holds true. Yes, the summary of the author’s argument may be similar in each paper, but that was only a third of the assignment. I think if everyone actually did write about Baxter’s essay, then it would bring more focus onto the personal anecdotes and engagement with the piece. I don’t agree that it would be detrimental for our grades.
ReplyDeleteTo your point about whether writers lack confidence in their work even if they are established, I think that they do. I think most people who put work out into the public domain, whether it is art or writing or theater or anything else, feel a sense of self-consciousness. Art is subjective, and no matter how many good reviews a writer may get, there will always be a bad one. As much as I would like to hope that my self-consciousness surrounding my writing will gradually disperse with time, I know that it probably won’t. As long as people create, there will always be people to judge their creations. I don’t think that Baxter loses credibility by showing his insecurities around his writing, though. I think it makes him more real and relatable and honest. He wants the reader to know that even though he is what we would call an accomplished writer, he still feels the way us young writers feel: self-conscious and unsure. He just wants us to know that we’re not the only ones.
Although many people in our class are writing their papers on Baxter's "Full of It," I decided to write mine on David Foster Wallace's "Commencement Address." I definitely agree with Nicole that even though many of you may be writing your essays on the same piece of work, it will be very interesting for Carol to see how differently his essay can be analyzed and read. I can definitely relate to your point that introductions to essays or even poems can be a bit intimidating, daunting or just hard to start, so I often find myself summarizing what I want to discuss in the introduction, and then coming back to it once I have almost finished my paper (or just my first draft). It doesn't work for everyone, but it sometimes allows me to really get a grasp of what I actually want to say instead of forcing myself to just write out a few sentences hoping that they will relate to what I'm planning on analyzing throughout the essay. I find Baxter's essay very intriguing as well as interesting and I can't wait to read what you all have analyzed and picked out from his work.
ReplyDeleteI decided to write my paper on the David Foster Wallace commencement speech. At first I thought using Charlie Baxter's 'Full of It" would be easier to write, but David Foster Wallace's speech probe better ideas in my brian. Although many of you are writing your papers on Charlie Baxter's text, I still agree with Nicole and think that every person reads it differently and will therefore have a different paper.
ReplyDeleteA huge problem I had with writing this paper is trying not to be boring with my complicated thesis, and because of this I ended up writing really general sentences filled with fluff that go nowhere. Something that helped me get through this was writing out my thesis in itself and creating a linear outline for my paper. It helped me clearly see where my thesis is going and then see what parts of the text I can use to prove myself. If anyone is having the same issues, I hope that helps.