Development

When I began my collegiate writing career, I was full of boast and almost too confident in my writing ability for the level of higher learning at Ball State University. During my high school years leading up to college, my teachers consistently praised me as a very intelligent writer. They would never have to push me to begin a writing assignment because normally I was ahead of the class and constituted a good work ethic in their eyes. This work ethic was beneficial in a sense that I was never afraid of writing, but it gave me a minor god-complex because my composition was judged and evaluated by timeliness and not by the actual writing itself, which I soon discovered was a hindrance upon my progression as a writer in college.

The realization of possessing weak writing traits came forth in my first English studies course of English 210. In this class, we were assigned to write a literary research paper over the Kurt Vonnegut Jr. classic, Slaughterhouse Five. I wrote a paper called "Slaughterhouse Christ," over the resurrection of the prophet image of Jesus Christ in literature through the new age prophet Billy Pilgrim. My direction and organization was focused around the resources of The Bible, and two one-page periodicals article besides the novel itself. Since, there were no other literary investigations in the area of prophetic similarities of the two icons, I was led down a path of uncharted terrain, considering in the past when I was accustom to finding numerous resources to support my ideas for composition. This dramatic change in my writing process of not discovering any resources on the area of my selected topic and having to critically self-formulate a reliable literary interpretation was obviously apparent considering theintroductionand conclusion I drafted to support my thesis. In these two painfully significant pieces of the composition puzzle, I showed a lack of confidence in voice and self-assurance. It is extremely noticeable in theconclusion, where I wrap up my thesis, which my professor felt was very original and worthy of study but contained an unsure stance that I like to call "begging the conclusion." This is when you think your point is valid, but because of your lack of confidence from the lack of outside or professional support you fall toward the safety net of ambiguity and beg the original question surfaced in the thesis to convince yourself that your drafted argument is sound.

This problem, however, did correct itself over time as I more frequently wrote in my English courses. For example, in the papers "A Rose Frozen in Time," and "A Plain Mystery that is Simply Odd," I show great improvement in the drafting of introductions and conclusions. With the implementation of outline preparation and brainstorming, I was finally able to create a mood in my prose that left no room for doubt in voice or position, which opened a door of creativity in my literary analysis. This creativity heightened in the paper "A Rose Frozen in Time," where I not only use the gathered resources to support my thesis, but I incorporate their words into my voice. By using this drafting method of borrowing voice, I was able to have the support necessary to write a sound composition and draw a connection between the text and the particular concept within a literary piece. In addition, the support I needed was not only allowing me to say what I wanted to discuss in my paper, but also gave my voice strength and assurance by having the sourcestalk for me in the work.

Next, I will discuss my difficulties in paragraph transition. As any avid reader can see (transition used in this paragraph), I had some minor problems with paragraph flow and relied too heavily upon speech transition techniques, which I was taught in my high school composition classes. These techniques usually directed me to use words such as: next, first, second, finally and in conclusion. Such transitional techniques are considered weak in literary composition and were a primary problem for me in the paper, "Slaughterhouse Christ." This paper, as I mentioned above, gave me troubles in terms of research and in turn suffered technically as well. It was a forced poor habit previously enforced, which I realized immediately after I received the graded version of my literary research paper. Though I received a satisfactory criticism over the work, I could not help but notice the marks made on my paper concerning transition and position. For example, theworst area of transitionis seen in my switch from discussing Billy Pilgrim’s and Christ’s belief systems to their ultimate martyred demise. Here, it is blatantly obvious that I was experiencing difficulty finding words or connections between thoughts to smooth over the internal voice, which the reader must have structured in a rhythmic schema of written analysis. It is my writing belief that the reader should be guided through a text and not have to painfully read your work, because if the reader struggles, then you as a writer are not doing your job efficiently.

This efficiency connection between writer and reader was a primary focus in my writing for "A Plain Mystery that is Simply Odd," where voice,transition, progression, tone, introduction andconclusioncome full circle to effectively offer the reader an enjoyable text to enrich themselves. In this particular composition, I present the idea that Poe purposely deceives the reader to fulfill the requirements of the mystery genre by creating two characters in one, but at the same time creating a mystery of sorts, which has various interpretations of the mystery’s conclusion. This paper was fun to write, and it shows with the analysis I present and twist to give it a Poe-like feel, so to keep the reader’s mind off balance and intrigued to continue through the text.