Orwell says that these motives exist in different degrees in all writers. According to Orwell people will react best when all four motives are present and he also said that he was somewhat forced into becoming a pamphleteer because he was unaware of his political loyalties. From reading his essay I gathered that descriptive writing could be written without all four motives but other than that the writing cannot be whole unless all four motives are displayed. Similar to Orwell’s view on the political motive for writing Linda Hogan believes that writing comes from the community and goes back to the community. Hogan believes that writing should be used to ask and answer the deepest of all questions, both internal and external.
When reading “Cliché” you almost feel like Collins is in a state of sadness, almost along the lines of depression. He is trying to work through his life in order to find out who he is as a person. The poem that Collins wrote almost goes back and forth, writing each stanza contradicting the one before it. It’s like Collins is having this ongoing battle in his mind, trying to decide if he wants to be an open book, or a closed book. In my opinion, Collins wants to figure out what kind of man he wants to be, what kind of people he will allow himself to trust, and what circumstances and experiences is he going to let reflect who he becomes as a person.
Character traits such as these are indicative of someone whose struggles should be recognized. Another emergence of irony is present later in the essay, when Douglass is explaining his mental struggle, long after successfully learning to read and write. He refers to his literacy as his "wretched condition" and even tells the reader "I would at times feel that learning to read had been a curse rather than a blessing" (Douglass 71). This admission is relevant because although Douglass's notoriety is in his feats in
I find myself lost in thought of how they create ideas to generate their writings and find this to be a difficult task. I would rather “read generously, work inside someone else’s system, and see my world in someone else’s terms—read inside the grain,” as stated in “Ways of Reading.”
It’s all real, but it’s not all true 1. Bush is bothered by the human tendency to assume works of fiction are, in fact, semi-autobiographical pieces about the author because she feels that “writers live through their narratives instead of reflecting their lives in them.” Bush also feels that the readers need to realize this, and wishes that fiction remain fiction, and be based on its own merit. The autobiographical fallacy is the temptation to read a writer’s life into their fiction. In other word’s it is a term that means literature can be interpreted as reflections of the life of their authors. 2.
I have learned how we can find a way to relate to his writings in the way the writer’ thoughts become our own reality by placing part of our own personal experiences into the writing itself. The biggest area this writing impacted me personally, was in the way it help me recognize the foolish ideas many people outside of Maine view
Intro to American Literature Writing an essay on a book, helps explore the different thoughts a person can have. It also lets a person think outside the ordinary box. When one can write an essay on a certain topic and get the right point across, then they have fully understood their topic. It is essential to know one of the many reasons why Professor Johnson paired up these two books. Their Eyes Were Watching God and Black Boy are extremely different novels.
John Steinbeck uses literary elements throughout his novel to bring the book to life. He uses characterization, foreshadow, conflict and more. John Steinbeck characterizes the two main characters, George and Lennie, well throughout the story. In the novel Lennie is not as well educated as George. George has to always remind Lennie about things cause he forgets.
When the topic of writing is discussed, there are many different thoughts and feelings that arise within a discussion. Some of the thoughts that may arise include the following: what is writing, should writing be used as punishment, do we all construct horrible first drafts, and is writing really that difficult? These various topics are talked about in the following essays entitled, “Writing Is Not a Skill” by Stanley Aronowitz, “I Won’t Use Writing as Punishment” by Roy Peter Clark, “Shitty First Drafts” by Anne Lamott, and “Bonehead Writing” by Craig Vetter. Within each essay the author displays to readers his or her beliefs of how writing should be. Writing can be considered both an art form, as well as a skill.
To get a true understanding of what an essay is saying we must look well past what the cover looks like and even past what the words are saying, what we must concern ourselves with is what the author is truly trying to convey. There are often hidden messages in writing that the inexperienced reader often looks over and takes for granted. This is the issue that is at stake with both readings of “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift and Garret Hardin’s “Lifeboat Ethics.” We have one essay that is serious in tone while the other appears to be serious in tone at first glance but in reality is far from it. To truly understand what Jonathan Swift is trying to convey in his essay we must first understand the type of writing we have at hand. “A Modest Proposal” is not an essay you could scan over and understand completely what the author is trying to get across.