I believe that I will write this blog entry along the way as I read the article.
First off, I am very fond of the statement made saying that an expert on literature doesn't need to be an expert at writing. Because same.
I understand his disinterest in why we have high school English classes and how we write papers, simply copying old white men who have been dead for centuries. But also, the way he explains it doesn't make it seem like a good argument to me. Is it because I dig history and find that trying to walk in footsteps that themselves were copying the classics is kinda dope? Probably.
The way Graham writes makes me think one of us is using commas the wrong way. either he doesn't use them as much as he should, or I'm tossing them out like bombs in a Blitzkrieg.
This b has typos in his own dadgum article. Maybe that's why he wrote it in the first place? Just another aspect of high school papers he didn't like was editing.
"Questions aren't enough. An essay has to come up with answers." Bitch, where? The way this phrase was worded, it makes me feel as though the essay itself creates multiple answers along it's course. For what I can remember, all the essays I've written had a single answer and were drawn out to answer one question. Gosh, I hope I am reading this man wrong, because he seems very wishy-washy.
Mister Graham. How do rivers "backtrack"? Pretty sure if they run into a wall, they overflow and spread out. Either do your research or get a thesaurus.
I do not like this man or his attempts at explaining what the various types of "essays" are.
No comments:
Post a Comment