Hello again everyone. Over the past quarter I have been working on a research project focusing on the role of the writing tutor in any writer's life. This project has taken me down roads I had not yet traveled as an English major at Cal Poly, reading articles and books that I would not have otherwise. Along the way I stumbled across a series of articles by Nancy Sommers who has spent much of her career writing about the importance of the revision process in writing. While I am not here to discuss any one of her articles in particular, I would however like to share with you how some of her ideas, as well as some of my own, may be able to inspire you the next time you sit down to write.
When writing a paper one is often confronted with the necessity of using sources. Why? Because sources establish ethos. They increase the credibility, or attempt to increase the credibility, of your paper because, if they are the right sources, they establish that your topic matters and someone who is considered an expert in the field shares similar opinions as you. However, there comes a point in any paper where the use of sources can begin to overwhelm rather than uphold. The sources begin to deteriorate the argument because they mute the writer.
Well what do I mean by this?
I mean that an overwhelming amount of sources can actually become a bad thing. Writing is a tool that allows us to express ourselves. As declared by Walter Ong, writing is a technology that allows critical thinking. When we write we establish our beliefs on paper and make them visible for others to read and learn from. Bringing this back to the essay, if our essays are filled with quotes establishing how our claims have been proven true by others, then we are doing nothing more than restating what others have already stated. We are doing nothing more than establishing what has already been established, and, in no way, are pushing that specific field of research or literature forward in anyway.
So what are we supposed to do when we write a research essay?
Establish a balance. I am not prescribing that one annihilates any and all use of quotes in their writing. Quotes often allow for a jumping point. In fact, this is exactly what researchers want when they research. By publishing articles and performing experiments researchers want others to read their work, and through this reading they hope that others will find their work interesting to pursue it themselves and further revise the insights they themselves have made. As Ferdinand Saussure elicits, words gain meaning based on their differences. In this same way, what we write about gains meaning because of the dissonance it creates in the literary circle it enters. If a circle has only one theme, and all of the writers and minds of this circle function only to restate what has already been stated and no disagreement occurs, no dissonance is present, then no new knowledge will enter this circle. It is through difference, and the clashing of ideas that new ideas are formed and earlier thoughts and theories are transformed and revised into something new, often more practical, and more accurate.
So my point today. As I write my research paper I do have sections where I am restating what the researchers before me have stated, establishing the past research that has been done in attempts to prove why my research topic is important, and I have been tempted to stop there. But it is necessary that I don't. It is necessary that none of us stop there. When we write, when we draw, whatever it is that we do, we should never neglect to think critically, analyze, and attempt to bring our own opinions and theories into the argument. We should strive, with our work, to create dissonance with other works around us. We should aim to stir the waters and revise what needs revised, because without this, we accomplish nothing more than what already has been.
Until Next Time Friends,
Nick
No comments:
Post a Comment