Filling in the Gaps

By Greyson Lehman

WRI 111: Writing Seminar

To read student-editor Carolina Conway’s comments on the writing moves found in this essay, click on or hover over the footnotes within the text.

I: Language

An exterior surface crack, like the kind in drywall that is easily coated with spackling compound to cover imperfections. ¹

Late on a Wednesday evening during my senior year of high school, I found myself sprawled on the floor of my bedroom, as was custom for a weeknight of homework. At this instance, I struggled to compose a loose critical analysis of the theme of recurrent madness in Shakespeare’s Hamlet while the thought of having my work graded the next day consumed me. At that point, I was thinking more about when my own madness would set in rather than how it had impacted the driving action of fictional murder in Middle Age Denmark. I parsed through text yet found no gratification in my collection of quotes as I continued to think about how to connect the prompt to ideas I let resonate while reading and reviewing. In the process, I developed a habit of accessorizing my language to disguise a vague analysis and meet a page requirement. I was not able to engage with the words I was writing. Constructing that essay felt like taking the thoughts and emotions invoked by reading the work and sending them through an assembly line to be adapted to a standardized prompt and ideal AP English Literature and Composition essay. ²

My overwrought language was a façade. A technique to obscure a less critical and profound putting into words how the text made me feel when I first read it. Connections between metaphors and character development had been lost in my translation. I felt a sort of confinement as a writer. My ideas, analyses, and word choice adapted to a formula and space established by routine, standardized structure, and instructor preference. These pressures, which modified my writing, limited my creativity, inner voice, and freedom of style. ³ What was there to edit if my writing addressed all aspects of the prompt, used textual evidence throughout, and stylistically, though academic and bland, earned a fair grade on the last essay I turned in? My perception of academic writing was changed, however, when constructing my first argumentative essay for this college writing course entitled “On Writing.” ⁴ I was empowered to utilize a newfound sense of exploration, inventiveness, and personal experience to appreciate an essay of my own and the texts of others as what rhetoric and writing studies professor Christine Haas describes as, “discourse acts — rather than bodies of facts and information” (154). With this new perspective, I felt I had acquired an adaptable and important set of skills in analyzing and interpreting meaning from works of writing, applicable to many settings and styles. I felt less of a need to use language to conceal a more genuine analysis that was unique to how I engaged with the text. I learned to become more precise in my analysis, eliminating extraneous detail and language to offer a more authentic evaluation of ideas and rhetoric. I was challenged to become more comfortable grappling with ideas, finding stylistic nuances, and thinking more critically when I interacted with pieces of writing. ⁵

II: Review

A deep cavity, like a stubborn pothole encountered on your route to work, emerging cyclically and requiring many layers to fill. ⁶

I reluctantly moved my chair to the other side of the classroom to present my “rough draft” for peer review while participating in my junior year high school English course, AP English Language and Composition. ⁷ My partner and I exchanged papers for a draft workshop before our final edits were due. I skimmed her prose, referencing a handout given to us to help generate feedback. My essay, however, was quickly returned, deficient of red ink with only an unnecessary comma addition made in the first paragraph. I began rereading my essay only to be interrupted by an announcement to the class. The teacher exclaimed that she would not be reviewing essays before the next day’s due date and urged us to ensure that the peer review process was thorough and constructive. I was pleased at the thought that at the least, the checklist for the essay had been completed, citations and all. After a few minor grammatical and structural changes to compensate for my rushed attempt to meet the requirements for that day’s completion grade, I felt ahead on my homework load for the night. Yet I still had so many questions about the technicalities of reviewing my own work and how to take constructive criticism and make it, well, constructive. I had built a wall of my own pride using bricks of perceived confidence and comfort to prevent myself from experiencing vulnerability and becoming adaptable to change when it came to peer editing and class workshop settings. As far as I was concerned, when the draft was completed, it was an accomplishment, not a body of ideas to go back and grapple with or further connect conceptually to. ⁸

I was not convinced I had experienced effective revision thus far in my writing career, but I knew that multiple drafts and revisions were critical to “good” essays. When you have not personally found success with certain practices, it is difficult to appreciate how they can impact your writing. Sure, there were essays I had reviewed by a parent or teacher on occasion before final submission, but I was not confident that I was capable of effectively revising on my own or applying feedback from others. Again, I felt a disconnect in my engagement with the text. If I was able to at least conjure up some ideas, do a little analysis, and present it all in a way that sounded decent, it seemed acceptable to turn in. I then tried author Anne Lamott’s technique of composing a “shitty first draft” (88), in which I gathered my ideas to merely get them down on paper first, before connecting them and elaborating on the topics that worked in a direction I liked. I was able to come to terms with the fact that my initial thoughts and style could be improved later. I was challenged to begin to think of writing as a process that involves answering questions and clarifying topics as I continued to write: a constant cycle of carefully crafting phrases or developing ideas based on critical thinking and connections made in the text. ⁹

Further clarity regarding how to write in an effective and recursive way came with our revision of multiple drafts. Every essay composed in this course involved multiple revisions, peer edits, and instructor feedback. I did not fully appreciate what layers of thought, attention, and development of ideas comes with multiple revisions. Engaging peer and instructor feedback also opened the door for the sharing of ideas and strengthening of analysis. Supplementary to this, we read abstracts and studies conducted by authors and writing professionals who outlined the importance of this discussion and revision. One such abstract by Nancy Sommers, which examines the differences in writing practice by professionals and college students, states “experienced writers see their revision process as a recursive process — a process with significant recurring activities — with different levels of attention and different agenda for each cycle” (154). ¹⁰

III: Inspiration

Imperceptible space, like the distance between you and the person on the other side of the subway that is hard to fill in details about as you each go about your own routine.

On a return trip home from college, it was the kind of day you wish could happen about 360 days of the year. The warm sun and crisp atmosphere provided me with a certain clarity and nostalgia that was both gratifying and thought-provoking. As I paced down Watts Street, the sight of worn and dignified residences reminded me of the comfort of home and urged me to slow down to consider the seemingly complex ordinariness of the day: interactions with dogs being walked, a sharing of soft smiles with fellow pedestrians, and the quality of just being. ¹⁰These pleasant phrases balance the essay’s complex musings on writing. Perhaps this is when I am most relaxed and feel capable of wrestling with my inner thoughts and reflecting on the practices and pressures of “the everyday”. As I passed over uneven sidewalks surrounded by the quiet lives of others, I found it easy to reflect on memories of my childhood in this place where my walk to church and school could be retraced. My perspective on the places most familiar to me felt different this time, and I was able to think about the people and places of my formative years that helped me develop and widen my understanding of the written and living world. ¹¹ Years have passed and I still ponder why I feel so strongly about the political sign in the Bransons’ yard, or if the advice my father gave me about sticking to the values I was taught still holds true. I am overwhelmed by the many people, places, and experiences that have contributed to my education of the world before my eyes, even in the most familiar of places where their contribution is so easily taken for granted. These ideas and experiences, I learned, have served as catalysts for perspective development and provided me with means to engage in discourse.

To begin this writing course, I was asked to reflect on the individuals and institutions that have impacted my writing and reading skills. ¹² In a predictable and formulaic fashion, I shared my academic and home background. These familiar places undoubtedly laid a firm foundation for how I viewed writing, engaged with text, and found an appreciation for these skills. However, I neglected to consider the unique ideas and outlook of my everyday experiences and my own environment that have influenced the ways I critically engage with the world around me. The structure I like in my day, the intentionality with which I foster my friendships, the formality I associate with my academics. My writing is not only impacted by the rules I have been given in school, it is an extension of my personality and has been built upon and adapted with new experiences and relationships.

As Deborah Brandt, writing scholar and professor emerita of English at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, aptly puts it, “the concepts of sponsors helps to explain the range of human relationships and ideological pressures that turn up at the scenes of literary learning — from benign sharing between adults and youths, to euphemized coercions in schools and workplaces, the most notorious impositions and deprivations by church and state” (249). Brandt’s explanation of the range of relationships and pressures which sponsor our writing urged me to think more broadly and in new ways how my writing abilities have been impacted through the people and experiences unique to my life. It also led to more questions about how communication, both written and oral, helps us to navigate the credibility we each bring from prior experience and also how we elicit emotion by relaying this experience. This is a valuable realization in both the analytical and compositional aspects of writing. Sponsors help to consider biases and blind spots we have subconsciously developed in our own perspectives, highlight unique personal experiences that bolster writing integrity, and provide a foundation in understanding your own writing customs. Appreciating the sponsors of my own writing also afforded me the opportunity for open inner dialogue about my relation to writing as lived experience by helping me relate my individual history and personality to the way I engage with text and formulate ideas in writing. Our lived experience constitutes the gap between writing and understanding the bigger question of where we each come from and how we communicate perspective to fill the interspace between us all.

By reflecting on my literary practices and pressures in this course, including academic techniques taught to me and insight acquired by others and my own experiences, I have learned the importance of a thorough composition and editing process that aids in conveying important concepts in a more precise way. This has included accepting that writing is not perfect and that it requires a recursive technique of sustained engagement and critical analysis. I will continue to widen my perspective of the world and document the emotions and outside engagement with the people and places I interact with. Questions will remain and gaps will shorten and lengthen. But from now on, I will use a rhetorical, constructively critical lens to nurture the principles of effective writing and elicit greater meaning. ¹³

Works Cited

Brandt, Deborah. “Sponsors of Literacy.” Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Fourth Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2020. Print

Haas, Christina, and Flower, Linda. “Rhetorical Reading Strategies and the Construction of Meaning.” Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Fourth Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2020. Print

Lamott, Anne. “Shitty First Drafts.” Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Fourth Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2020. Print

Sommers, Nancy. “Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers.” Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Fourth Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2020. Print

A Word from Greyson

Until this course, I had not been tasked with reflecting on the literary practices and pressures which have shaped my identity as a writer as well as how I engage with text. Buried within formula and structure of previous writing and literature courses, I felt a sort of confinement regarding how ideas were to be presented and how text was to be organized, particularly for academic writing. Nevertheless, I fostered an appreciation for the creativity and expression that writing allows readers and authors to communicate and experience. With this freedom of expression and ability to communicate lived experience, I discovered a balance between the importance of foundational writing principles and finding a unique voice. The principles explored in this class, including a recursive editing process and crafting precise prose, aided in effectively communicating ideas and further engaging broader concepts about the world around us through text.

This essay does not provide tools to be a better writer, but explores previous critiques and questions I have wrestled with regarding my own writing that have served as “gaps” to my ability to effectively communicate ideas textually. Additionally, I wanted to expand on the idea that writing for classes, though maybe more structured, still provides a platform in which individual voice and stylistic choices can be expressed in meaningful ways. I am keen on the ways in which writing allows us to think critically and experience a greater sense of interconnectedness by relating ideas. Though this essay was reflective on writing practices and pressures, I wanted to acknowledge those Deborah Brandt refers to as “sponsors” who help explain how writing has been impacted by the people and experiences unique to the author.

Dr. Boyle’s WRI 111 course “On Writing” allowed me to investigate and retrace the experiences unique to my life that have informed my writing composition and analysis. We constructed reflective, rhetorical, and argumentative essays, all of which included recursive editing processes and thorough analysis. I feel as though there are still many techniques I can expand on in order to improve my writing, but this course and assignment empowered me to use a rhetorical, constructively critical lens to nurture the principles of effective writing and elicit greater meaning from my own work and the works of others.

From Professor Anne Boyle

Commentary

Greyson’s essay was not only wonderfully creative and intelligent, but also engaging. Written as a critical reflection on his writing processes, Greyson’s text demonstrates how he writes to understand and construct knowledge, and how deftly he is able to communicate that knowledge to his readers. He integrates sources from writing studies theorists seamlessly into his text. The very structure of the essay engages us as it seems to take us on a strange and intriguing journey. At the beautifully written, but enigmatic italicized passages that introduce each section, we stop and wonder what kind of guidepost he has left for us. As we progress through the unitalicized sections, Greyson’s well-varied sentence structure propels us to read almost without stop. It is, however, his voice, formal yet humane, that touches his audience, prompting them to return for a second or third reading, each new reading, “filling in the gaps” we first encountered.

Assignment

Narrative and Critical Reflection on Your Own Literacy Practices and/or Pressures

You have generated a great deal of writing in this class and you have read articles, reflections, and arguments. Your last paper will allow you to use the passages in your own writing and in your reading that have inspired and helped you the most. The final paper is a radical revision of your first, but instead of just a narrative reflection of a literacy experience you have had (an experience with reading and/or writing), you will use our readings to turn that narration into a critical analysis of your writing and, possibly, reading practices.

Here are some steps you can use at the invention phase of drafting your paper:

First, read over all the writing you have done this semester and choose passages you think are important to you or that show your writing strengths and challenges or that taught you something about your writing process. You might contrast a passage from a first and later draft. You can use a passage where you were not able to get your meeting across clearly and think about why you had this difficulty.
Next, mull over the syllabus and review our readings. What readings have been most memorable, important, or influential to you?
Consider how you would like to revise your first paper by constructing a well-transitioned, critical reflection of your literacy experiences. The experience you reflect upon may be radically different from the original because it will be informed by writing studies, your own writing experiences in this class, and the works of fellow students. At times, the original narrative might not even be central to the new critical narrative. Full documentation and a works cited page should be included. You need not annotate your works cited. 5-7 pages.

Editor Comments

1
Greyson opens the essay with offset figurative language, which grabs the reader’s attention and adds intrigue to the essay.
2
The comparison Greyson makes here expertly conveys the frustrations of formulaic writing.
3
The sentence structure created here by lists of three helps Greyson to contrast routinized writing techniques with the creative freedom he desires.
4
Here Greyson shifts the tone of the essay from frustrated to empowered as he reflects on what he’s learned in his most recent writing course.
5
Throughout this paragraph, Greyson is able to articulate what it means to develop a more sophisticated writing style.
6
Greyson uses the metaphor of a cavity to emphasize the gap between what he used to think about writing in high school and what he knows now.
7
The use of verbs and choppy sentence structure in this section keeps the essay moving and gives the reader a break from more elaborate reflection.
8
Here Greyson hints at the difference between writing that is praised and accepted by others and writing that is personally fulfilling.
9
The verbs used here emphasize Greyson’s newfound creativity.
10
Including ideas from other writers brings in supplementary perspectives and grounds Greyson’s reflection.[/mnf] Viewing bodies of writing as recursive and using an analytical eye when reading and writing helped to develop new meaning from my work and the works of others. This provided me with new depth and understanding of the editing process and improved my ability to make effective, thoughtful, and precise changes as I continued to compose. I felt I had been given a new set of eyes to connect with my writing in an analytical and critical way. This process of habitual review and attention while reading and editing provided me with a versatile skill. I felt more confident about engaging with my own work and the bodies of discourse presented by others.

III: Inspiration

Imperceptible space, like the distance between you and the person on the other side of the subway that is hard to fill in details about as you each go about your own routine.

On a return trip home from college, it was the kind of day you wish could happen about 360 days of the year. The warm sun and crisp atmosphere provided me with a certain clarity and nostalgia that was both gratifying and thought-provoking. As I paced down Watts Street, the sight of worn and dignified residences reminded me of the comfort of home and urged me to slow down to consider the seemingly complex ordinariness of the day: interactions with dogs being walked, a sharing of soft smiles with fellow pedestrians, and the quality of just being. ¹⁰These pleasant phrases balance the essay’s complex musings on writing.
11
Again Greyson highlights the gap between who he was in high school and who his now.
12
Here Greyson brings the essay back to its main focus and bridges his ideas about personal transition and development to his coursework.
13
Greyson demonstrates what he has learned about writing through this essay itself; he experiments with nontraditional sentence structure, creative language, and nuanced meaning.