Final Thoughts: What is Style

Well my composition class on writing  style and technology is coming to an end and I am left to ponder what it is I’ve learned.  Looking back at some of my recent posts I can see a few trends which trace my thoughts on style.  One is that style refers to an individual’s creative ability to cohesively write a text that is discernible to others. In my fist blog concerning this subject it was my assumption that style is a manifestation of the author; i.e. an author’s own creative use of language.  While style reflects the individual nuances of writers there is also the matter of where writers learned/picked up such nuances.  Many of us turn to style guides and manuals to give us pointers as to what is good style. But what really is good style?  If anything style exhibits one’s mastery of language, grammar, and the parts of speech; and a good style demonstrates how well an author can employ their parts of speech in a coherent manner.

Of all the style guides that I encountered during the course two very important aspects of good style have been coherency and clarity.  In my opinion a good style manual is not just going to list grammar rules to tell you how to reach good style.  A list of rules on the do’s and dont’s of style is going to read like a list of grammar rules.  Although style and grammar are inexorably linked through writing; they are not synonymous.  This is a distinction I have determined from reading different  style manuals.  In my opinion an effective and helpful style manual is not a list of do’s and dont’s. Instead a style manual should be led by examples that teach us how to polish and refine our language skills to communicate as effectively as possible.

Essentially I look at style in writing the same way as I would in any other genre of art. Style is creativity’s choice of expression.  Style is an author’s prowess to be inspired by language and communication in order to express whatever it is an author wishes to share with the world.  Essentially whether it is art, writing, music, are plain speech; style is the way an audience will remember what an author has conveyed through expression.  As a conclusion style is but the mode at which we choose to communicate. It is not style’s only concern to get us from point A to point B, rather it is the route we take and the resources that we choose in order to get us there.  (I am speaking from a communication and conveyance standpoint here)

Peer Review: A Recap on the Final Session

Okay, over the past couple of days I have been working with a few other writers as part of a peer review of the last project for the summer term. I must admit I am a little tentative to comment on this last peer review. Namely because in a group of three (including myself) I was only able to peer-review with one other person in my group. This is not because I neglected the third member of our group, but because this third member neglected to adhere to the posted deadlines. Our projects were due by 8/13 at midnight and our peer review session was scheduled from monday to wednesday of the same week.  I pose this question to you;  should I be penalized for not being able to comment on all the essays in my group because one of my group members posted their draft late?  I think not and I am sorry that I wasn’t able to do so, but alas all has passed.

The comments that I received in this last peer review session really helped me to improve my essay before submission. This is mostly because prior to our peer review I had posted a few guiding comments that I hoped my group members would comment on.  Posting such guiding comments was a suggestion that was made during our previous review session and I really feel that ever since it has been a big help.  Instead of using a star rating system I rather like saving a couple paragraphs at the end of my draft for specific feedback that I hoped to  receive.  Specific feedback is what we all aspire to get in a peer-review session and the best way that my class has achieved this is when we post guiding comments.

By responding to other classmate’s writing I have learned that not everybody writes the same as I do…big shocker I know, but seriously as I was reading other people’s drafts I started to get a sense of their thought processes which enabled new ways of approaching my own writing based on the perspectives and styles of other writers.  Overall, peer-review is a very handy process that should be utilized in every writing class/seminar.  I am thankful to have had the opportunities this year.

YouTube/Low-bridge videos: Are they good, bad? Are they writing?

I have been diving into this Youtube movie making project and it has got me thinking about low-bridge technology and its usefulness in education. I say they are a step forward that definatley help students to learn and be more familiar with multimedia literacies.  The biggest reason why I think they are good is because low-bridge videos are “hands-on” projects that put students in creative control of their work. Creativity is a cornerstone to education because it sparks a student’s interest in learning by peaking their imagination.  I believe that motivation is essential if students are to learn and low-bridge videos have that capacity.

The process of making low-bridge videos and the process of writing are not that different in my mind’s eye. Both processes include a beginning, middle, and end (brainstorming phase, creation phase, and editing phase). Although overall movie-making is probably more collaborative than writing. Movies can be made by one person alone, but collaboration helps in many ways. For instance, more perspectives on a  more project help to ensure that the public audience will get what your making. On the other hand writing is often very personal and additional viewpoints can askew the original intent of an author. In other words I think collaboration is essential to movies, whereas in writing it doesn’t always help.

Looking Back, Looking Forward

Okay, so I’ve been working on this video project for an English class on writing style and technology. My first impression is that there are very little parallels between the writing process and movie making. Movie making is a very collaborative process whereas writing is mainly individualized.  Although, in the context of my English class, writing has taken on a very collaborative approach.  For instance each project contained a peer review session where class mates and I have been able to share ideas and help each other.  My movie group carried on this tradition of brainstorming and coming up with ideas together as well as filming the movie as a group. We could have filmed our scenes individually and had somebody edit the footage together, but instead each member of my group had a say and a job for each scene.

As far as the previous readings from this course which I think will be potentially useful, Dennis Baron’s article From Pencils to Pixels will be a source I refer back to. This is because Baron’s article was about the technology of writing and I think the principals that are covered in the article also reverberate for other media technologies, such as movies.  What we learned about ancient style will definitaley have an influence on what I write for my reflective paper on the movie making process as well. This is because by learning about ancient style I have seen how such influences have reached writing technology nowadays.

Peer Review Recap #3

Okay, In terms of this session of peer review things were a little shaky as opposed to the previous sessions. There were a few hang-ups in my group which caused the entire session to not be as helpful. What I have liked about
Peer Review in this class is being able to revise with a group of people. Being a part of a group adds more perspectives to our projects and I think that range of perspective is what really makes our review sessions so pertinent.  This time around, due to absences of other groups members, I was only able to receive feedback from one other person. Of course, that is not to say my partner’s feedback wasn’t useful, it was actually very constructive. The only thing is that I had some specific questions that I really would’ve liked to get others opinions on so that I could come to a conclusion based on a consensus of ideas.

What I liked about this review session was asking for what specific help I thought my project needed. By posting these points along with my rough draft I felt that my questions helped facilitate or lead the review of my project. Basically, setting up those points beforehand allowed me to get the most of my partner’s comments.  Of all the ways we have participated with peer review thus far adding specific points for feedback I think has been the best innovation.

In some of my classmate’s blogs I noticed others commenting on getting feedback that didn’t seem very helpful. Some people find it the very helpful to have their work proof-read and such, but I didn’t view our review sessions like that. I actually tried to veer away from being nit-picky in order to not be too critical with my feedback. Personally, I felt these sessions went a lot better when review groups discussed ideas about style and message as opposed to grammar because that way an author can actually get a feel for how his/her work is being received by an audience.

What Others Are Saying About Style

I have been reading other classmates’ blogs about Strunk & White and Williams’ style guides and I would like to take notice of what Emily V. said in her blog.

Foremost I was very stricken by Emily’s comment about her own writing in general, “I just don’t necessarily use correct style or grammar all the time. However, I don’t think it takes away from the content of my writing.” Not to nit-pick or anything, but in my honest opinion style is always a matter of opinion. That is to say, as opposed to grammar, I don’t really think there is a “correct” way to exhibit style – its all originality and individuality to me.

Emily commented on Williams’ style guide as being not as helpful as Strunk and White. I found this to be quite the opposite in terms of improving the quality of one’s writing. Eventhough Wiliams’ book was more indepth I think that helped to flesh out Williams’ points on cohesive and clearer writing.  Also, when I had certain questions, Williams’ book tended to have more answers because of his elaborate prose and lengthy examples. Strunk and White was too cut & dry for me to come up with definitive solutions. I know this is exactly why Emily thought Strunk and White to be more useful, but I found it more difficult to fit my writing to the rules of  Strunk and White as opposed to the suggestions provided by Williams.

it seemed like after reading Emily’s blog that a big concern for her is Grammar. According to Emily the grammar parts of both style guides were the most helpful to her. I am of the opposite perspective but I would attribute that to the possibility of our different writing backgrounds. My father is an English teacher and so he was like a walking-talking grammar guide who really shaped my notions on grammar. That is why I feel like I have somewhat internalized grammar rules so that I usually don’t need to refer to a style guide for grammar assistance. What I think makes a style guide more useful is when it is concerned with word choice and arrangement in order to make writing clearer and more cohesive. Generally I don’t lump style and grammar together, I believe they compliment each other in terms of writing, but I don’t consider them completely synonymous.

Overall Emily’s blog makes a lot of definitive points on both style guides. After reading her blog and assessing my own thoughts on style and grammar I am beginning to wonder; are there any writing style guides which don’t have opinions on grammar? It seems unlikely but not impossible, right?

Comparing Strunk & White with Williams

There are two books on style which can prove to be very helpful for writers looking to improve their abilities. One book is called The Elements of Style by Strunk and White, while the other is called Style:Towards Clarity and Grace by Joseph Williams.  After reading through both of the books  I have determined that the Strunk and White’s book would be most helpful for those who feel they are novice writers whereas Williams’ book would be better received by a writer who already has an advanced grasp. The two books had some similar points, but mostly I found their approaches toward achieving better writing  were quite different.

I had noted in a previous blog my initial impressions of Strunk and Williams, and in that blog I wrote about their book being set up as a giant list of rules. I actually found this format to be very disagreeable because such a rigid set of rules gives the impression that for a writer there is little room to be an individual with style.  I am of the opinion that every writer will have developed attributes and characteristics which distinct their writing from any others. I look at style as reflecting the very notion of human nature; everybody is different, or special in their own way. Strunk and White’s book was full of rules that wanted to place everybody’s style of writing on the same level and without room to differentiate I think then style becomes learning about grammar instead.

In Williams’ book it was clearly stated at the very beginning that the suggestions prescribed are to be taken as guidelines to help shape writing instead of rules that always must be followed. Williams’ books was much more in depth than Strunk and White’s and drew on the help of many diagrams and examples. The writing diagram that was dispersed over the first five chapters is incredibly clever as a tool for shaping writing style. It is easy to understand and makes perfect logistic sense as each part is explained and built upon in every chapter.  I liked this approach to style because it allows writers to take a piece of their writing and revise according to the tips and suggestions Williams provides. Williams doesn’t necessarily prescribe rules , just guidelines to help a writer be more clear and cohesive.

One topic that I noticed both books made reference to was the use of negatives and affirmatives. Both books suggested that an affirmative statement is more convincing than a negative one, but the difference of how the books recounted this information illustrates why I prefer the Williams book over Strunk and White. Williams waits until the end of his book to mention affirmatives and negatives; when he does so the reader is given a statement in the affirmative and the negative and Williams asks the reader to choose which version sounds more convincing. This method allows the reader to implicate and apply what they may or may not know about affirmatives and negatives and also provides a little bit of practice as well. Strunk and White mention that as a rule an affirmative statement is always superior to a negative one, but throughout the rest of their book there are a number of rules written in the negative – this representation seems counterproductive don’t you think?

Revising With Williams

I was looking through the EMU online catalog of offered classes and came across one that could use some improvement. I applied a few diagnostic rules that I learned from Williams book on style (Style: Toward Clarity and Grace) and I would like to share with you what I came up with.

Here is the original blurb about a methods course on media usage in education.

EDMD 345 – Media for the Classroom Teacher

---

A methods course in which students will produce instructional materials in their teaching area and demonstrate the use of these materials in the classroom environment. The selection, utilization, and evaluation of teaching materials. Various types of media production and utilization equipment.

Okay, now here is my revision of the three sentence course description;

This class will be a methods course where students create classroom teaching materials used for instruction. The teaching materials will be specific to students’ own content areas and will be selected, utilized and evaluated according to various types of media production and other utilization equipment.

As you can see I shortened the description into two sentences but that is not the main reason why it is improved. For one thing,  I applied Williams’ First Two Principles of Clear Writing supplied in chapter 2 of his book and created characters, or subjects for the blurb. The three main characters I came up with were the class itself, the students, and the teaching materials.  For the first sentence I applied the first principle of Cohesion in chapter 3 of Williams book by deciding what information could already be known or assumed by the reader. I figured that they would know what the term methods course means, but the new information is what would be required of the student for this particular course and that is why I stressed that point at the end of the sentence.

I decided to combine sentences 2 and 3 from the original description because I noticed the extended use of nominalizations. Williams points out that nominalizations can assist prose (if they are used to sum up actions which were already mentioned) but this was not the case with the course description. Instead I changed the nominalizations back to verbs in order to give action to the subject of teaching materials as per the advice given by Williams in chapter 2.

Finally as a topic I think my revision maintains the intended purpose of the original. Both are supposed to be course descriptions and I just happen to think my revisions allow for more of a description.

Peer Review Recap on YouTube Commercials

Okay, in general I thought this peer review process exceeded our last attempt.  I think this can be attributed to the rating system that was implemented this time around. In my opinion the ratings helped us to give more elaborate responses (at least when I was writing them) because I wanted to explain my comments based on the four criteria in the ratings. This caused me to focus more on picking out what I thought was exemplary or needed improvement in my classmate’s essays and so my responses became longer and I think more helpful too. Although if someone wasn’t as inclined to explain themselves as much as I do then perhaps the rating system could be looked at as an abbreviated way to peer-review; then it would be a pitfall for the process if a person where to only give a rating of stars and omits any substantial feedback.

The second part of this peer-review was kind of fun too, I had a fellow housemate first watch the ads and then he read through my essay. I was most concerned with how much he was going to comprehend in terms of a theme as opposed to the details of my analysis.  After he read my essay the first question was why; why was I writing this essay, what for?  I asked him what he thought the purpose was and his response was that ancient rhetoric rules still apply to things we encounter today. I told him that I wanted to look for something more than that with my essay and after a bit of discussion we came to a pretty awesome conclusion that I will incorporate.  Other points my housemate suggested were similar to some responses that classmates give; in regards to moving up my thesis and introduction of tv ads from the 3rd and 4th paragraph to the first or second. I agree with this rearrangement and am currently working at my revisions. I also think it is wise to only talk about one commercial. Even though my draft includes two commercials, the point of that was to see which analysis became more useful for my means.

Strunk & White, My 1st Impressions

If you’ve ever taken a college level English class then you may have come a cross a notable little booklet entitle The Elements of Style by William Strunk and E.B. White. This book is widely used as a reference to the acceptable rules of grammar and it is very easy to be surprised by what’s inside the book.  In my first impressions I was a little bit reluctant to take the author’s words for granted, especially on a few rules of grammar and style.  But ultimately this book is very constructive and could help make anyone a more confident writer. The way I look at this books is I take it with a grain of salt. Not the rules on grammar, since those are cut pretty clear, instead the rules on style seem to be based on personal preference of the authors. Their advice is superb but at the same time the chapters on style are not without the assertion that style is based on identity – that which is personal and unique to us all. So, its more like guidelines instead of rules; which makes me feel a lot better about me having broken a few over the years in my writing.