“What is Style?” Part 2

In my first attempt to describe style, I mentioned that “style is something uniquely designed and distinctly interpreted.” I still stand by this statement, but I now know style entails much more. It has a long history stemming back to ancient philosophers who argued about different forms of communication. Technologies for communication have come and gone, but the same arguments always seem to live on: what tools should be used to express style, and what style ought to pertain. While an individual’s approach to style may vary, some things are and always have been consistently important to good style. These things are the basics of communication. Because what is style, if not a way to make communication better. Truly knowing how to use language and grammar in a clear and coherent way, is at the basis of being able to create good style.

I am not saying style is devoid of self expression or creativity, or if one uses perfect grammar they will have great style, but style is made more of ancient ideas that have been passed down. While the aspects of language and grammar may change and become unimportant or even wrong to future generations, as they have before, the fact remains that language and grammar will still be important to understanding effective communication. Although the rules of good grammar are essential to understand before good style can be completely understood, it is not always a vital part of good style. When the aspects of style are mastered, an individual can break rules while retaining a clear and coherent message as well as more effectively express a selfness that is often unique to a creator – although formed from ancient thought.

The final peer review recap

The peer review sessions in this class have slowly grown on me. The major thing I didn’t like about the process was finding an outside reader; like I said before, it was an added stress that I didn’t find to be worth it. On the other hand, I particularly like having the opportunity to ask my peers their advice about things I was struggling with. When I get stuck on something it usually drives me crazy and prevents me from concentrating on any other parts of an essay. Receiving a few tips makes it easier for me to fix a problem and then be able to focus on other aspects of my essay.

I also like the idea of the star system, but I think it would be more beneficial if the stars weren’t involved. The system would be better if people used it as a rubric for analyzing a paper and then gave advice on how to fix the problems they saw. I think this would provide the writer with better feedback.

The reviews that pin pointed problems in my essays were the most helpful. I really appreciated every comment that I received. My peers’ advice always helped me out and made my essay stronger than it was before. I learned to really take their advice to heart and try to make the best of it in my essays.

Reviewing others work was also beneficial to me. Sometimes, I would notice things in my peers’ papers, and then when I went back to my own essay I would notice the same, or similar, mistake that I hadn’t realized was there before. While I am not always sure if I am giving advice that my peers will appreciate, I think I get a lot out of it.

Overall, this last review was really good. I believe I really got excellent advice. My reviewers really gave me great advice on how to improve my essay. They provided me with ideas to help me with my specific problem and made comments about things they noticed. I think that is probably the best way to go about a peer review.

YouTube/Low-bridge videos

The movie making process has been very similar to the writing process. Both processes involve brainstorming, drafting, and editing. The aspect of collaboration is what seems to separates these two processes. The move making process is much more dependent on collaboration than the writing process. In the writing process a person can do their own brainstorming and drafting; an individual may collaborate for the editing portion, but it is not always necessary or as rigid as the collaboration that is needed for the movie process. In the movie process individuals must constantly communicate in order to work toward a common goal. While the amount of collaboration needed for either process could be switched, it would be more difficult to make a movie without collaboration. Even though collaboration can make a process more complex, it does offer several advantages: viewpoints, skills, and new insight.

I think it makes sense to use low-bridge technologies for projects like this one and for education in general. While Juhasz experience with multimedia/video making was unbeneficial to her and her students, I believe this was an extreme case. Low-bridge technologies not only help students learn about multimedia, but help them understand technologies that are a part of our culture through personal experience with it.

Looking Back, Looking Forward

The past reading assignments and projects are all related to this project. This project involves the use of a relatively new communication technology, YouTube. The invention of YouTube reminded me of the “Invent Your Own Writing Technology” project and readings because YouTube has received many of the same criticism as other past communication technologies. I think it is very interesting that this project’s video is going to be available for many people to watch.

The readings on ancient or rhetoric gave a lot of insight on the production of media which is also part of YouTube. I think these readings show that ancient style elements are just as important to media today as they were in ancient times. These elements are important to keep in mind when we produce our short video for this new project.

It is clear that the past assignments (readings and projects) are all important for understanding how to communicate an idea effectively to an audience.

Peer Review Recap, Part 3

I saw a few similarities between my peer’s thoughts and my own thoughts on the peer review process. I think that most of us really liked having the star system in the second review in comparison to having no system of review in the first peer review. I think that Angela was one person who was really on the same page as me, she said, “I think the star system is a good edition to the peer review, but I appreciate the comments more as I can see exactly what the reader means.” I think that’s one reason I really like the third review a lot more. Not only is there a rubric for grading papers, but also we can give and receive comments about specific questions.

I noticed that a lot of people liked having an outside reader. While I like it as well, it was also really stressful for me to find someone to read my paper. I hate asking people to do things for me, and when I don’t know who to ask it makes it even more difficult. So, I enjoyed not having that added stress this time around. As I mentioned in my first post, “I always feel as if my paper is better if someone who is an experienced editor reviews it,” and when that isn’t possible I would at least like to have someone who has decently passed an English class, review my paper.

What are others saying?

I couldn’t agree with Sillisa more when she wrote “Commas have always been tricky for me, something that I haven’t always been quite so sure of.” I always have trouble with commas, sometimes I overuse them and sometimes I don’t use them when I should. They drive me absolutely crazy. Punctuation of any sort is probably my worse enemy. I am always getting the different marks mixed up and this probably confuses the reader even more than it confuses me. I can’t tell you how many times I have looked up the rules, but for some reason nothing ever sticks.

The next statement I could identify with was written by Christine:

It may seems obvious, but lots of people need things spelled out to them step by step before they fully understand. To build on existing knowledge one must have a firm foundation and to just say “It’s obvious” seems a little callous.

I am usually one of those people who need things to be spelled out. If I am asking a question, then “obviously” the answer isn’t clear to me. It always drives me crazy when a teacher repeats the exact same thing to a confused student or makes them feel stupid for asking the question. I had a Biochemistry teacher whom I believed strived to make it terrifying for students to ask questions. While she never belittled me – or any of her “good students” – I witnessed her blatantly embarrass kids and even other faculty members whom she thought were inferior to her. Plus, I believe that she didn’t know how or want to take the time to explain things differently: she would repeat the same thing over and over again. So, for all of you who intend on becoming a teacher, I beg you to learn how to communicate with students and guide them in their learning. Sometimes that might mean holding their hands and walking them through step by step, but that is what a teacher is for – helping students learn and understand things. (Sorry about my rant, but this particular teacher made me a strong believer that universities should separate those who want to teach from those who only want to do research.)

I also really liked what Jessica C. wrote:

Williams…provided readers with a nice section on concision (115). I found this chapter particularly helpful because it helped break down sentences, offer ways to shorten sentences, use different words that have a greater meaning, and form well developed and concise paragraphs. As a writer, it is easy for me to go on and on when I’m passionate about something, but reading Williams’ book has helped me to revise some of my work and find better ways to express what I’m trying to say.

I think it is important to be concise and I know it is definitely something I struggle with. For instance, I went back and pulled out the word “that” three times in the last sentence. I probably could have removed the phrases “I think” and “I know” and the word “definitely,” but I happen to like the sentence better with these needless words. So, sometimes I disagree with Williams and Strunk and White.

Comparing Strunk and White and Williams

In my earlier post, Strunk and White, first impressions, I mentioned how I didn’t understand how to use colons correctly and that Strunk and White’s rule didn’t help in this matter. If I was an advanced writer, I think Strunk and White’s commanding rules, like this one, would have been adequate; but, as a novice writer who is looking for guidance, vaguely stating that something is, without explanation, is useless and sometimes confusing. Williams’ book, on the other hand, is comprised of very detailed and well explained elements of style that are appropriate for the novice. Therefore, I was hoping Williams’ book would guide me through the process of writing with colons; so, I was slightly disappointed when it didn’t cover the subject. Many of the rules for punctuation were not discussed in Williams’ book, and I think that they should be discussed – maybe in the length section.

Williams did cover a number of other important elements of style which were intelligently broken down for the novice writer. Unlike Strunk and White who stated rules like, “omit needless words,” Williams explained how and why words should be omitted. He wrote an entire chapter on the importance of concision. Through introducing concision as an issue in style, providing examples of both concise and not concise prose, and then explaining why one example was better than the other, he was able to help the reader understand how to identify and fix wordy prose. I especially liked his discussion on metadiscourse. He explained through the removal of meaningless modifiers and redundant words a sentence becomes more concise.

The previous post also mentioned Words and Expressions Commonly Misused; Williams sort of mentioned these things indirectly.

Well, since I think the books have different purposes, I didn’t expect them to discuss elements of style in the same manner or for the same audience. Both books are useful and effective in their own way depending on what the reader expects to gain. For the novice writer Williams’ technique is much more useful. He guides the reader to understand how to develop style and explains why it is important. Williams’ book is meant for a reader who wants to understand style and how good style differs from bad style. On the other hand, Strunk and White’s book is meant for the advanced writer who is aware of how to write with good style but wants a quick refresher. While Williams’ book is intended to be read straight through, Strunk and White’s book is designed to be easily referred to – like a dictionary. Strunk and White’s book more or less states what good style should look like. Their approach is therefore much more effective for portraying the basic principles of style. Williams’ book is too detailed to be a quick reference book. A reader who was looking for a quick reminder would find his approach cumbersome; in order to understand his point a reader would have to sort through numerous detailed paragraphs along with tedious examples.

Overall, both books, while very different, are excellent works!

Revising with Williams

Passage from EMU Catalog

Graduation Application

Candidates for degrees and/or certificates must make formal application for graduation during the first two weeks of the final semester or session. (The application should be made after final registration is complete but not later than the last day of program adjustment for the semester or session in which the student expects to graduate.)

Application forms, obtained in the Office of Records and Registration, 303 Pierce Hall, must be submitted with the $95 graduation fee to the Cashier’s Office, 201 Pierce Hall, or the fee may be charged to the student’s account.

Failure to meet the application deadline will result in the candidate’s graduation being delayed until the following graduation period. Failure to satisfy degree requirements, including the removal of incompletes in required courses or providing official transcripts for course work taken at other colleges or universities, will necessitate filing a new application for graduation for the subsequent graduation period. Only one application fee is required.

Revised Passage from EMU Catalog

Graduation Application

Those who are eligible to receive their degrees and/or certificates need to obtain, complete, and return an application for graduation (the application consists of a form and fee). The application needs to be submitted after the student has registered for their final semester and within the first two weeks of the student’s final semester. If the student fails to meet the application deadline, the application will not be processed until the following graduation period.

• Application forms are located at the Office of Records and Registration – 303 Pierce Hall.
• Application forms need to be submitted to the Cashier’s Office – 201 Pierce Hal
• Application Fees ($95) can either be paid at the Cashier’s Office – 201 Pierce Hall – or charged to the student’s account.

Note: If the applicant does not satisfied degree and/or certificate requirements – removing incompletes in required courses or providing official transcripts from other colleges or universities – the student will have to submit a new application for graduation for the following graduation period, but will not have to resubmit an additional application fee.

The original passage from the EMU Catalog is unclear and therefore incoherent. I had to reread this passage several times before I could figure out exactly what it was trying to say. In order to revise the prose that I thought were extremely awkward, I attempted to make a coherent topic string, unbury important ideas from the middle of prose, and transfer the subject to the beginning of each sentence just as Joseph Williams had suggested in his book, Style: Toward Clarity and Grace. By revising these things, a clear flow of ideas was created, the point of the passage was introduced in a point sentence, and the important parts were highlighted or emphasized.

The revision, unlike the original, allowed the eligible applicant to understand that if they expected to graduate there were certain things they needed to do by a deadline. Once this was stated, the details about where the needed documents could be found and turned in with the appropriate inclusions were highlighted below.

The original passage also contained some information that I thought applied more to what a student would have to do to be considered eligible to graduate rather than what an applicant had to do once they were eligible. Since, I thought that this information was still important, I included it as a note at the bottom of my revised passage.

Peer Review Recap, Part 2

I though that the star system was a good idea. I think it helped me give better feedback to my group members. Rather then focusing primarily on grammar, I was more concerned with making sure my group members’ papers addressed the purpose of the assignment. As for the feedback that I received, I think that it was very helpful. I wished that my rough draft wasn’t as rough as it was because I think that I would have received even better feedback. I think that one disadvantage of this process could be that people might think that once they fix these errors their papers are done; however, revisions are something that never end.

I think that having an outside reader is a really good idea. I think that their unbiased opinions are helpful. However, my paper wasn’t quite focused, so my reader had a hard time understanding it. His opinion was that it was a little choppy and not all my examples made sense. He understood that I was relating a commercials style to that of ancient style; I thought this was good considering how much work I knew my draft needed.

Strunk and White, first impressions

In my earlier post, Strunk and White, first impressions, I mentioned how I didn’t understand how to use colons correctly and that Strunk and White’s rule didn’t help in this matter. If I was an advanced writer, I think Strunk and White’s commanding rules, like this one, would have been adequate; but, as a novice writer who is looking for guidance, vaguely stating that something is, without explanation, is useless and sometimes confusing. Williams’ book, on the other hand, is comprised of very detailed and well explained elements of style that are appropriate for the novice. Therefore, I was hoping Williams’ book would guide me through the process of writing with colons; so, I was slightly disappointed when it didn’t cover the subject. Many of the rules for punctuation were not discussed in Williams’ book, and I think that they should be discussed – maybe in the length section.

Williams did cover a number of other important elements of style which were intelligently broken down for the novice writer. Unlike Strunk and White who stated rules like, “omit needless words,” Williams explained how and why words should be omitted. He wrote an entire chapter on the importance of concision. Through introducing concision as an issue in style, providing examples of both concise and not concise prose, and then explaining why one example was better than the other, he was able to help the reader understand how to identify and fix wordy prose. I especially liked his discussion on metadiscourse. He explained through the removal of meaningless modifiers and redundant words a sentence becomes more concise.

The previous post also mentioned Words and Expressions Commonly Misused; Williams sort of mentioned these things indirectly.

Well, since I think the books have different purposes, I didn’t expect them to discuss elements of style in the same manner or for the same audience. Both books are useful and effective in their own way depending on what the reader expects to gain. For the novice writer Williams’ technique is much more useful. He guides the reader to understand how to develop style and explains why it is important. Williams’ book is meant for a reader who wants to understand style and how good style differs from bad style. On the other hand, Strunk and White’s book is meant for the advanced writer who is aware of how to write with good style but wants a quick refresher. While Williams’ book is intended to be read straight through, Strunk and White’s book is designed to be easily referred to – like a dictionary. Strunk and White’s book more or less states what good style should look like. Their approach is therefore much more effective for portraying the basic principles of style. Williams’ book is too detailed to be a quick reference book. A reader who was looking for a quick reminder would find his approach cumbersome; in order to understand his point a reader would have to sort through numerous detailed paragraphs along with tedious examples.

Overall, both books, while very different, are excellent works!