Now, firstly, I must make a comment on the subject of scruples in writing. I very much believe that I am not the only reader who sometimes “jumps the gun” in making assumptions about writing due to the writer’s “credentials.” I first read the Murray article and was thoroughly impressed with the credentials that the introduction highlighted. I expected that I would glean an incalculable number of helpful tips to improve my writing through. I was sadly mistaken. While this article was brilliantly written and it is obvious that the author is extremely knowledgeable and cualified to write this article, I felt like I got a “twelve-step process” approach to the subject, from the piece. I am not an accomplished writer so I had no basis for this claim, however, I always felt deep-down while writing that someday I would learn “secret insights” about revising and the writing process that would defy the “a,b,c” format that I had been forced to use. I hoped that when I got older and more experienced with writing that the revising process would prove to be something more artistic than the grudge-work Murray presents it as. I am not sure why I held this hope/belief to be a truth. This article was not what I expected, ultimately killing that unsupported notion of mine. Murray’s approach is a structured process that seems to be the epitome of most of the unheeded points of my High-school English education. I have come to the realization that revision is a hard and dirty process that must be utilized and undertaken. There are no easy solutions or shortcuts.
Mr. Murray himself
I read the credentials in the introduction of Zinsser’s article and because they didn’t appear to be as great as Murray’s, I didn’t expect to glean very much from him. I was totally surprised to find that this was one the most helpful articles that I have ever read about writing. The article addresses a problem that I have encountered with many individuals, including myself. Many people choose to bombard their writing with the most complex vocabulary that they can muster, often using words from a thesaurus that they only know the adjacent definition for. However, Zinsser claims “the secret of good writing is to strip every sentence to its cleanest components.” His commentary on how using simple language is important to keeping a reader, was very beneficial and surprisingly honest. “The reader is someone with an attention span of about 30 seconds…” This truly put the subject into context.
William Zinsser-An honest man
So what does this mean for my paper, now? Having read the articles, I have a few thoughts. Overall, I plan on revising to create probably two more drafts of my paper, if at all possible. More specifically, I plan to look through my work, during the revision to make sure that I am not using extraneous vocabulary in any amount. I plan to read the paper, the night before it is due because that is as long as I can put away the piece of work for fair evaluation, and make sure I have a definitive voice in the essay. I believe that these three things combined with the other hundred changes I expect to happen, will make my paper as successful as it can possibly be.
Scott- So glad you found Zinsser worthwhile. He is, indeed, an honest man. I found your comments about Murray really interesting and appreciate that you continue to be suspect of the articles you’re reading in 125. It’s a good practice to read against the grain. I can understand why you feel a sense of disappointment, but I will offer you this–I don’t think Murray is suggesting that revision is not an art. But all art forms have essential elements and Murray outlines what elements are essential and what strong writing must possess. The art of revision comes in infusing your own writing with those elements–or carving them out of a rough draft–whichever metaphor you care to adopt or works best for your process. When Murray talks about revision as a way of seeing, he’s talking about re-seeing our own work in a new way, a more effective and artful way. And there really isn’t any formulaic way to do that. It is, as you point out, a difficult process.