Devil's Advocate

First off I would like to apologize for not having the “Writing and the Writer” book. This problem is mainly due to a situation that actually comes up in the Hairston article in the “Writing, Teaching, Learning” book. That is, I am of the old system of consumer who is afraid of the internet, and does not trust non cash currency.

I believe that I had a completely different experience from the initial writer of this Blog topic. I found myself in constant need of reasserting the need to finish the articles in the “Writing, Teaching, Learning” book. However, despite the constant threat of distraction and potential boredom I did find some of the ideas brought up to be interesting. Unfortunately, I am having a terrible time connecting that interest with the meaning of this course for the simple fact of I do not know much, or as stated on the first day care ,much, about composition writing. Despite this I can see this Paradigm Shift theory at work in the type of writing that I do enjoy, fiction. Comparing a novel written in the early eighteenth century to a novel written in the last fifty years a person see a significant change in the style of writing. However, there has been little to no change in the novel, or at least the popular novel, in the last half century. The conventions that existed in the 1940’s are style, for the most part, in command today. Those authors who attempt to break that mold will be praised by academics and critics but virtually ignored by the general reading population for the outlandish writing styles the author uses. However, slowly change is happening, and the idea of what makes a good novel “good” (in terms of writing, voice, and technicalities) is again changing.

The Murphy article, funny enough, reminded me of something that happened right before I got out of the army. My section officer, a 2nd Lt. who was younger than me, and straight out of college himself, discovered that I was intending to go straight to college after I got discharged. Knowing this he pulled me a side after the final formation of the day to give me some advice. “SGT. De Santo,” he said, looking very solemn. “You need to remember one thing when you get to college.” He paused, I suspect he wanted me to ask what I remembered, however, I just stared blankly at him. “It’s called a BS because everything you do to get it is bull shit.” With that he wished me a good weekend and ran off to his SUV. I have found that imany college students “fluff” their language and their writing so that they can meet even the minimal requirement for a paper, often devolving into what I call "Mojo Jojo" speech. What I have just said my seem cynical or a sign that I am “tempting the devil” but as long as word and page count are the definers of any paper bullshit, fluff, and gunk will exist in a paper. This, however, is not to say that college level papers are not informative, or worthy of praise, only that many college students learn early on that big words, and round about explanations get the job done faster.

I would just like to add as a note that I may or may not fully endorse the above statements fully and that I believe that the title of the post is a clear indicator of that.