For Journal #2 you are going to begin to think about your theory of composing---basically this is like the first draft of your theory, so it's more of an exploration than anything definite.
Think back to science or philosophy classes—a “theory” is normally a group of statements put together to explain a phenomena (here it is composing) and assists in the understanding of these statements. So, what you are going to do is begin to theorize about composing—the process, the definition(s), key terms, etc. Here are some questions to help you begin (you don’t need to answer these, but use them to springboard your thinking):
1. What does it mean to compose? What does it mean to compose with writing (and not something like art or music)?
2. What is a composing process? How does the composing process differ depending on the genre in which you are composing in (e.g. do you use the same composing process to create a poster as you would to create an essay)?
3. How does composing connect to writing?
4. What is “good” writing?
5. What are key terms you think of for good writing? What key terms do you think of for composing? How would you define these key terms?
After you answer this journal you then need to create a wordle and post the link with your journal.
How to create a Wordle: Go to wordle.net. Hit “create.” Paste your text into the blank space. You can play and manipulate the colors and fonts as you wish once you paste your document inside the wordle. Save the wordle to the wordle gallery. Then once it is saved you can post the url inside your comment like I did below.
Below is example I have done using the words from above:
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2198608/Theory_of_Composing_Journal
I believe that everyone must know that I have a personal issue with definitions. The situation isn’t that I simply find dictionaries distasteful and have some personal vendetta against structured and formatted words giving meaning to something in question. Rather, I find issue in the idea that an article that is free and liberating, let’s say the term “composing,” can be limited to regimented and fundamental speech. Composing is ethereal. Composing is divine.
ReplyDeleteTo set pen to paper or hammer out keys on a word processing program is something that many desire and anguish for in the most desperate and intimate manner. The thin veil that separates composing from a complete miracle of the mind is placed in the idea that it must be defined. Emig is an opponent to the set structure of “’the five-paragraph theme’ with its predictable arrangement of an introductory paragraph followed by three paragraphs of development and a conclusion” (31). While genre and medium are most vital to the proper sentiment of a work, one could very well be expressive in the most dramatic means and still achieve the predetermined goal. A poster for an upcoming movie may not typically be executed in the same manner as a treatise, but why is that? Is the creative process not sparked by some mode of inspiration? Composing a work may require different sources of inspiration, but the same devotion and desire to achieve ought to accompany any form of work, regardless of method of invention.
Terms I find most important in regards to composition lie predominantly in the realms that determine the diction. Without regards to the situation, audience, individual style, invention and organization composing feels vacant. According to Covino and Jolliffe’s Key Concepts in Rhetoric, scholars argue “arrangement [organization] and genre have a heuristic role in the composition of texts” (30). In my view, both audience and situation dictate the genre of the composition, and therefore organization is fettered to the other key terms.
Returning to the idea that composition is supernal, in Key Concepts in Composition, Covino and Jolliffe present that “style has also been long invoked as a quantifiable object” (228). While this may be brash, I tend to disagree. Style is unique to the composer. As I sit here and type, so many factors differentiate my style from the posts that will follow. Weathers differs from the other rhetoricians concerned with style. He posits that “teachers should ‘say that style is the proof of a human beings individuality” (229). Along the same lines, Gibson states that style “is how writers ‘present to us a self’” (230). Contention arises, debating whether styles can be unique at all. Yet, even it one’s style is not unique, at least it isn’t a strict formatted clone of every other piece. Would it be very interesting at all to read twenty blog posts about the same subject, albeit differing views, with the same style, organization, and spark?
The Wik Theory of Composing involves obvious circumlocution. My style obviously involves more dramatic and misplaced words where a simple few would do just fine. Yet, that is my style. My verbosity is part of my style and my personal attempt to come closer to feeling adequate and achieving some ethereal sense of rhetoric as possible. Be one religious or not, the sentiment connected to composing is truly supernal. Getting to that end means that one is on a journey of discovery that will culminate in a completed work.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2359238/Wik_Theory_of_Composing
To me, composing is something that happens when you’re inspired and put that inspiration towards a creative outlet; whether it’s with writing, painting, sculpting or playing some kind of musical instrument. The reason I say it’s something that happens when you’re inspired is because in my opinion “composing” sounds like something that you actually want to do, and not something that you’re being forced to do—like a research paper or some kind of assignment.
ReplyDeleteI don’t really think it’s possible to define the process of composing as far as writing goes because it changes for everyone. The way I compose may not necessarily be the way someone else composes. The loosest way I can think of defining the process is just by saying a process of composing is the situation in which a person has the most inspiration. As an example, I find that I do the best writing at night, in my room, with the TV on as background noise. I can’t actually watch the TV because I wouldn’t get anything done, but can’t write in silence.
As far as my creative processes go, they don’t really change at all by the genre. Whether I’m writing, scrap-booking, sketching or painting, I’m usually in my room and with the TV on. The one difference is that when I’m “being arty” I can actually watch the TV while it’s on and not just use it as background noise.
I don’t think that there is a definite connection between composing, the composing process and the end result. There really is not black or white. Just because someone is composing something doesn’t mean that what they are composing will turn out to be “good writing”. It also doesn’t mean it’s not. It really depends on the person, as far as what type of writing a composer turns out. I’m sure all writers want to believe that the writing they turn out is always good, but I think we all know that that’s just not always the case.
Again, there is no real clear-cut definition for what “good” writing is. There are so many different styles and genre’s of writing that what one person thinks qualifies as good writing, another person may think it looks like a monkey wrote it. I suppose a lot of it has to do with people’s opinions. I think the Harry Potter series and Twilight Saga are great reads, while some people I know think that they’re ridiculous (there’s no counting for taste, here).I suppose you could say that “good writing” is something that someone decided to publish. It doesn’t really seem to do the definition justice, though.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2362010/Theory_of_Composing
Composing is a very difficult term to “define”, because it is different for everyone and different for every field. We are all born with certain defining characteristics, such that we can be broken down and seen as different from everyone else. We all are made of the same chemical components, and the same basic elements; however beyond that come vastly different qualities. This is where I completely agree with Plato in his text Phaedrus, “every discourse, like a living creature, should be so out together that it has its own body and lacks neither head nor feet, middle nor extremities, all composed in such a way that they suit both each other and the whole” (30). The fact is that composition differs from each individual and although the process tends to be the same, I agree with DJ, that it is intuitive and based on a thoughtful and personal connection with the composer and not based on structure and formality.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the reading there are many different techniques described, all deriving from the aspect of an introduction, middle, and a conclusion. Some rhetoricians go further into detail and base their compositions off different criteria. For example, Bacons method is vastly different from a typical structure, in that his method tends to go more into an individualistic approach: focusing on the connection made. “Reason, the faculty that perceives regularities, analyzes and generalizes; memory, the repository of experience and facts; and imagination, the faculty that can conceive states of affairs as different from the way they are” (31). Whereas the Statis theory asks questions in order to clarify the meaning behind the text. Each technique is represented in a separate fashion; however, they are equally as correct when deciding which model to use while composing. This is exactly why individuality plays such a key factor in composing; not only the thoughts and prompts generated by the composer, but the approach the composer takes on.
Some of the key terms that can play an important role in a composers writing are style, creativity, relationship and connection, audience, and dialect. The style a composer uses is one of the most important aspects of “good writing” because it is the identifying feature between composers. The style is generated from the five canons, and depicts the way in which the composer chooses to display their work. The patterns, the amount one wishes to share, as well as the creativity put into the work all play into the framework of the style. The important thing to remember about style is that it helps display what the composer’s purpose is behind the composition he is writing.
The connection, relationship and dialect all relate to the audience. The audience is probably the most important factor when a composer decides to write. The audience determines the dialect. Such that if a composer wrote a heart wrenching love story designed for an emotional audience, an audience of militaristic individuals would not appreciate nor relate to the story. The connection made between audience and composer comes straight from the motives behind the writing, which also plays an important quality in “good writing”.
If there is one thing I have learned through not only this reading but life in general, it is that one does not need to have extensive credentials to be a great composer. The thoughts, relationships, and imagination level of an individual determine the greatness of a composer, not the amount of schooling and training one has had. Sure, in this reading all of the rhetoricians have had several pieces that have become famous, but these are the models in which we grow from.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2361548/wordle_one
Your own unique style, I think, is the important factor that explains your view of composition. It’s something that you don’t share with anyone else and the fact that everyone’s style is different makes your writing more interesting and entertaining for the reader. As the third of five traditional canon of rhetoric, style is under the general rubric can come as “treats of diction, or word choice; the length, variety and patterns of emphasis on sentences and the use of figurative language including tropes and schemes.” (87) This is one reason why everyone’s compositions whether it be an essay or poster for example are different. The choice in word length and variety for example can be the sole difference in someone’s composition. My writing for example using simple language and sentence structure compared to someone who uses very complex sentences. Whether composition to you is that of writing a song, or a musical piece, or sitting down and writing a book, everyone has their own interpretation of what they see as composing, which is why there is such a vast variety in the music charts right now and posters for example that are around campus advertising different events. I think that this defines good writing too. If you add your own unique style to a book for example or an essay, then you will appreciate it as good writing. I do think, however that the audience to which is looking at your poster, listening to your music for example, does play a big part in your composition too. The audience in the end does contribute to whether you are successful or not. Whoever your audience is, whether the general public, yourself or a teacher they need to be able to understand your sense of style and appreciate the ways you feel about this.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2362222/Untitled
To be quite honest, I had no idea where to even begin with this blog post. Composition, much like rhetoric, is such a broad term that I found it extremely difficult to pin it down to just one definition or a few key terms. The readings got me thinking, but I was still feeling a little confused about what exactly composition was. So I dictionary.com’ed it. According to the website, “composition” means, “to make or form by combining things, parts, or elements,” and also “to create.”
ReplyDeleteComposing is essentially the creation of art. I think there is a reason why you don’t “compose” a sandwich. The reason you “make” a sandwich is because composing has a deeper and more significant process than slapping together some ham and cheese. The combining of parts is there, sure, but there isn’t much creativity going into making your lunch (unless of course you’re Giada on Food Network). Composing is indeed the combining of parts or elements, but it is also the creation of something new, something original from those parts. I think that written composition should involve the five basic prongs of rhetoric: arrangement, invention, style and sometimes memory and delivery. It also should involve a level of creativity, originality and insertion of the composer’s own personality. In dance, a “combination” is a jumble of steps put together, but “choreography” is when steps are put together in an artistic way. I think we can look at composition in the same way. When your writing goes beyond the organizational process (like the 5 paragraph essay that every traditionally schooled American student has had pounded into their brain since age eight) and begins to move and change its readers, then you are composing.
I believe that one of the, if not the single most important part of composing “good writing” is style. My writing style is clear and concise. I like to get to the point quickly and allow my readers to know exactly how I feel about things. I’m not a big fan of hidden meanings or symbols but I do enjoy using sarcasm on occasion and I also like to relate big questions about life to seemingly insignificant activities (for example, I wrote an essay about how I discovered I want to respond to the world by working with children this summer and how all of the small things they did and said revealed deeper meanings involving their innocence, purity, etc.). Good writing should give the reader a sense of who the author is. Good writing is composed of basic elements and follows set structure, but it is also creative and interesting.
“Would it be very interesting at all to read twenty blog posts about the same subject, albeit differing views, with the same style, organization, and spark?” Well DJ, I would have to say that it really depends on whether or not anybody brings up any interesting arguments, I mean really that is rhetoric isn’t it? Composing, of course, is multi-purpose. But what better purpose here than to argue? Talking to you fellow bloggers out there. Let’s see if anyone here thinks that composing should be limited to nonfiction elements only for example, an extremist view but only an example, or if it’s better purpose is to explore the realm of fantasy to suit different tastes such as those partial to Twilight and Harry Potter. Accounting for people with no taste at all, thinking it’s all just ridiculous, right Alissa? Of course, I’m saying all of this with the most respect, but I’m feeling a little light-hearted today, it finally being September and all, woo-hoo finaid money! So here’s my two cents. My theory of composing isn’t really what I would consider a ‘theory’ in terms of science and philosophy. It’s something much more deliberate and human, it exists with a sense of fluidity. A person can bend it to their will, and use it interchangeably, which is something very appealing to use artsy types. It’s not stagnant and inactive, not necessarily to say that science and philosophy are, but they tend to follow more rules. Or maybe that’s just my imagination. The composing process is, to my own understanding, the process of streaming together words that make sense for a particular task. Of course the process differs depending on the genre, you wouldn’t use the same creative writing process you would for composing a vampire novel for the same purpose of composing a press release following an interview with the President. Totally different things. Composing connects to writing in the same way two slices of bread do with a sandwich. You have to know where to begin, and where to end. You have to have awareness throughout the writing process, that’s what composing is. “Good” writing, in my opinion, is whatever is able to accomplish this. It might not hold the interests of everyone but being deeply involved in whatever you write, I believe, will better your chances. Some key terms that come to mind are connection, innovation, and exploration. You need to have an understanding of the fundamentals of composing, if for nothing else the sake of making sure your writing isn’t just all over the place. But at the same time you can’t be so stringent that your writing stays in just one place, or you risk losing the attention of your readers. The biggest challenge for us, as composers, is to keep this in mind everyday.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2362387/Rapp_Theory_of_Composing
Ooops, here's my Worlde...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2362441/Feliciani_Theory_of_Composition
If you asked a room full of AP Language students “How do you correctly write an essay?” they would probably throw out a variety of jargon about form and function, as well as a proper defense of the argument, much like Aristotle points out when he mentions that a proper essay has two distinct parts where “you must state your case, and you must prove it” (30). The typical response about how a piece of literature (be it poem, song, essay, novel) is written tends to boil down to following rules and upholding structure; however, I find that composition, much like any artistic field, tends to throw the rules out the window when it comes to composing “good literature.”
ReplyDeleteMiss Mary Daly took this idea and ran with it in her feministic appeals, re-creating words to overcome the restraints set on her. I found this approach genius, even though I wouldn’t necessarily do it myself, as I tend to be a rule-follower and not a rule-breaker. Even so, the art of composition has allowed me to explore areas that would otherwise remain closed off, such as my creative side that I find is going to become a great asset this year in EWM.
Back to the subject at hand – Composition. How does one correctly compose? And who is to say what is right and what is wrong. From the reading it was clear that everyone seemed to have a different view on the matter. Plato concluded that the arrangement of a written work should be as “one body” with “no extremities” while Aristotle expanded on this idea by mentioning two parts, and Cicero expanding the proper form to contain seven parts. The definitions of proper form, and DJ I agree with your feelings on definitions as a type of restraint, continually change in accordance with who is looking at the subject. I wouldn’t say that “composing is divine” but I would definitely view it as something to hold dear.
Composing (in whatever field) is completely and utterly unique to the individual. You cannot expect two writers to compose in the same way (as several people have stated already). I had to laugh when I was reading Alissa’s comment and she said that she writes best “at night, in [her] room, with the TV on as background noise.” I swear I cannot get a good paper written until 11:00pm at night while my roommate is sound asleep and my music is playing softly in the background. There’s something about the scene of it all that suddenly turns my brain from OFF to ON. The same goes for what comes out. If two people are writing in the exact same way, then that’s a problem. One of the most glorious things about composition is the individual that surfaces through the words, pictures, paint, music notes, etc. Composition is an art form that accentuates the individual and allows one to truly break free of conduct and simply create.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2362855/Composition
My personal belief about the concept of composing is that it is the act of giving physical form to any idea, belief, or feeling. Though I have just presented my own definition, vague as it is, as to what composing is, I have to agree with DJ. I think the act of composing is so personal that it just isn’t right to give it a one-size-fits-all definition. At its most basic level, I don’t think there’s much to differentiate the composition of writing from that of art or music. The only thing I can think of to separate them is the medium that is, but even that is highly debatable nowadays. As Aristotle says of rhetoric (and I believe the same applies to composition) “[it] is an exploratory art that cannot be reduced to a disciplined system” (29).
ReplyDelete“All you need is a spark…” That’s the way Bert begins to describe how the Banks siblings can turn a hum-drum day into something wonderful in the Mary Poppins musical. In any form of composition, that’s all you need. That tiny bit of inspiration can take you anywhere. Sure, the process for creating a poster is completely different for that of the next great American novel, but in their most basic forms the two can’t differ that greatly.
Asking to define “good” writing is like asking to define “good” art. It can’t be done. Of course, there are those critics who walk around with their faces permanently scrunched into pensive scowls who will tell you their opinions on the high literary art of today, even if you never asked. But I like to go with the tried and true “to each his own.” Society may agree those few worthy of fifteen minutes in the spotlight, put everyone has their own preferences. The example that immediately comes to my mind is this vampire mishegas (sorry, that’s Yiddish for craziness) that’s consuming all the tweens and twenties out there. That section of society agrees that it’s all the rage, but for myself, I don’t really care. I’m sorry ladies, but vampires don’t sparkle in the sun because they’ll die if they are touched by it. My personal opinion is that you don’t mess with the classics (Yo, Bram, I got your back!). Don’t get me wrong; I’m not saying that Stephanie Meyer isn’t a good author. I just don’t agree with some of her creative choices. But who am I to talk? I’m not the one who sparked the newest Harry Potter-like movie madness. Back to my original point: Writing, similarly to art, is highly subjective. That is all.
Certain terms I deem vital to successful compositions? Let’s see… I’d definitely include style, without which every book on the shelves would be the previous one’s photo-copy. Style is a personal way of expressing oneself. It’s how you do your “thang”. Arrangement, of course. If it weren’t for that, we would all be very confused about the plotline. You have to know who you’re aiming to please, so audience is obviously key. I really could go on for days with this, so I think I’ll suffice it to say that there are several terms not included in this list which need to be used (consciously or not) for a successful composition.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2363993/We%27ll_Comp_That
Like DJ, I have trouble putting a set definition to certain words, especially to something as broad as composing. In the simplest terms, I tend to agree with Sammi in saying that composing is creating art. I normally would not think of composing as a research paper, however, after the readings I’d have to disagree with myself in that aspect. Whether you are researching, or writing a novel, you are still creating something, and I think this is the basis for composition. I do not think that composing is much different than making a sandwich; you are still creating something the only difference is the amount of time and thought you gave to create it.
ReplyDeleteThough a lot of the points Jocelyn makes are similar to my own, I do not agree with her when she mentions that disciplines like science and philosophy tend to follow “more” rules. The process of composing has certain “rules” and although they may be loosely applied, they still have certain guidelines to follow, otherwise we wouldn’t be sure what to categorize as a genre or not. This brings into question what exactly is the process of composing, and I’d have to say it all depends on the type of genre that it is being composed in. Rhetoric goes hand in hand with composing, because without realizing it or not, whatever it is you are composing is being done so with a purpose, and in that case written to persuade. I believe that in terms of loosely defining this process as a general approach to this process regardless of genre, would be to include the five “traditional canons of rhetoric”: invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. In terms of the process differing per genre, the way an essay is arranged is quite different than the images on a poster are arranged, in the same way, delivering a press release on the news of a new head coach for a sports team, is not the same way you’d deliver a poem at a poetry reading.
When determining what “good” writing is, I believe it is up to the discretion of the reader or audience. I agree with Jocelyn when she says that good writing is anything that accomplishes “where to begin and start”, but I also think it’s much more than that. I always enjoy reading something that is thought provoking, I feel like although it is important to be straight to the point with what you are writing, that you still somehow include in your writing something that will provoke a thought in someone else’s mind. The writing must also be coherent, because without any apparent order or purpose, the reader would be at a loss of what they are supposed to ingest from the writing.
As far as key terms, when I think of good writing I think of some of the concepts covered in the reading: coherence, audience, and arrangement. The audience must come first, because as stated “audience is often framed as an essential part of the writing process.” Your writing will not be considered even remotely well put if it is being delivered to the wrong audience. Without audience awareness, I feel like the other concepts would not exist. The arrangement of the text not only establishes the genre, but also allows for creativity and is essentially the control you have over your work. As the composer, you have the power to either go with a more traditional approach to your work, or determine what points go best together in order to have a maximum effect on your audience.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364025/Composition
I think the word “compose” refers to the expression of ideas or feelings in a deliberate manner. The only difference between composing writing, art, music, and anything else, is just the medium used. The goal of composition is to express the ideas or emotions of the creator, no matter what the finished product is (book, art, etc.). I like what Charlotte said about a person’s view of composition being based on their unique style. It’s true that composition is relative to the person doing the composing.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think about the composing process, I picture piles and piles of drafts. I see an organizational guiding sheet marked with categories or section ideas next to bullet points. I’ve learned that drafts and editing are what make a piece of work into its best form. In general, I think the composing process can be the same or similar when working with different genres. For example, when I’m writing a paper, I use one sheet to keep track of everything I know I want to and have to say. On this same paper I might list paragraph numbers and write the subject of each next to its respective number. I’ll do the same thing when it comes time for me to create the poster project. Also, composition often includes research, which is necessary for every genre. Still, the composing process can vary when it comes to physically painting a picture or playing a song.
For writers, composing is the process that leads to the writing. Composing involves research, organization, a mess, organization again, more drafts, and more research. Once the composer’s ideas are organized the writing will flow more smoothly, more purposefully.
Good writing is hard to define because it is so subjective. I’ve been in classes before where people write something they think is great (or even just acceptable) and I think it’s bad. All I know for sure about good writing is that it is composed in a coherent, organized, grammatically correct manner. It follows the rules of language and writing. Not to say that good writing has to be strict and formal all the time, it just needs to be something that looks like it was written by an intelligent person. Sammi explains it well when she says good writing should be structured, but creative and interesting too.
As far as key terms for good composing and good writing, one concept that comes to mind (and I’ve repeated it many times in this post) is organization. People feel uneasy when reading, looking at, or listening to something that is messy. No one would like a song that consists of a bunch of instruments clamoring together for four and a half minutes. As students we’ve learned that an unorganized paper won’t earn us a good grade. But, I don’t think that writing (or anything) should be predictable and cookie cutter. Like Richard Coe says in History of Rhetoric, it’s okay to be “teaching students that many compositions require a thesis and that it’s good to be able to offer at least three main points in support of it” (31).
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364127/Composition
Like my classmates (DJ and Giselle) I too have a hard time defining the term “composing”. I liked Sammi’s argument in which she stated that no one “composes a sandwich”, you “make” a sandwich, because it isn’t your own creation or anything uniquely yours, it isn’t a work of art. Just like writing a standard “FCAT” paper isn’t considered special because of the countless rules and regulations one must follow. Once you begin to compose, you break free of outside influences, strip away bias, rules, and confinements until you’re left with your naked thoughts and inspiration. Composing is the art of creation and a part of you will always live within your piece. It is a reflection of you.
ReplyDeleteComposition differs by genre. You wouldn’t use the same process to create a leisure piece that was directed for entertainment purposes that you would use for an article for your job at a newspaper. You have to be in the right mindset as well. Again, compositions are a reflection of you, and emotions are sometimes involuntarily tangled into your words. For example, let’s say you are in a horrible mood, your boyfriend just dumped you and you crashed your brand new car. You decide to write a poem about it, of course it’s gloomy, morbid, etc. Then, you realize you have to write an article for your job congratulating the new mayor on his victorious election. Wouldn’t you think some of the negativity from the last piece would find its way into the new one? Or maybe really good writers are able to channel whatever type of energy is needed for their piece and exert it into their composition? That may be true, but I feel like emotions are so powerful that they creep in between the lines of compositions.
Writing leads to compositions. Anyone can write anything down, but not everyone can compose. Writing is the foundation of composition, but creativity, emotion, and vision, among other factors, are the building blocks of the structure. Without these, you cannot make a connection with your audience, another important term.
“Good” writing I believe is writing that is distinctive and matchless, writing that is cherished. Style plays a vital role in creations in which readers fall in love with the way something is written, rather than the actual writing. A million people can write about the same exact topic, but when people fall in love with your writing, your style in particular, that’s when you know you’ve reached them. You’ve composed.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364334/Composition
Composing writing is much different that composing anything else. Writing is more that just one thought or idea, it contains many different aspects that come together to create and support a story being told. The size and orientation of the project you are composing greatly effects what will be exposed in that project. For example, when composing a poster; color, font, visuals and message are a few pieces of that composition. On the other hand, when writing an essay the components are more specific since they are completely text based, an essay is about showing solely through words.
ReplyDeleteComposition was a term that I would normally associate with music but composing is something we do daily. Anything we put together is a composition. Writing is taking an idea and creating different aspects and elements and making that idea a composition that supports a theory. It is a composed and finished theory with support that can be shared as a finished thought. I think composing is interesting, because everything composed is supposed to leave you feeling a certain way.
I think of how to try and compose a piece of good writing…Im unsure what the formula is exactly. I think its from a different viewpoint, and it depends on if it is a novel, a short story, or a news story. If I absolutely had to create a formula for a piece of good writing, I would have to say it is a combination of if the writer believes in what they are writing, if they have a good story to tell and the language they use.
I really think this topic has opened a whole new way of writing to me. I would like to compose my next writing, model it, much like the way a song is composed.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364426/Theory_of_Compostion
Composing is the way that we go about putting our ideas and feelings into something external and tangible. Whether it is done through writing, music, or art, composition is expression. Some forms of composition may be more creative than others, but they all begin with an individual idea. Alex said that the only difference in the creation of different forms of composition is the medium used… although I agree that medium can have a huge determining impact on the final product (and the process of getting there), I think the differences go much deeper. In writing alone, the composition process across different genres is extremely different.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jocelyn’s ideas that certain disciplines, like science, tend to carry more structure in their related writings. For example, a lab-report is a written composition that must follow the structure of the scientific method (curiously enough, developed by Aristotle…). On the other hand, poetry, composed in the same medium as a lab report, can carry no structural rules at all. In fact, it is sometimes the case that a poem’s seemingly absurd structure is what makes it so interesting. Some genres of writing are what they are because of the way they’re structured – even poems with different rhyme schemes and pentameters.
So what is good writing? What a question to ask. Good writing is honest writing. To me, writing is at its best when you can really feel the author through his/her words. When you can hear their voice, feel what they’re feeling. Should it follow a set of rules, as suggested in the reading? Maybe, to a certain extent. Personally, I tend to think that good grammar is a MUST. Nothing irks me more than terrible grammar. I guess that’s where the keyword “coherence” comes in. As grammatical rules are in place to improve understanding, I think they’re a fail-safe. Sammi said she thought good writing should be structured yet creative. I agree that this is true in many cases (essays, novels, etc). Some writing turns out best without structure - I think stream-of-consciousness writing is very interesting.
I don’t think organization is as important as Alex kept saying. I’ve done some of my best writing, and some of my best artwork, without really planning anything in advance. Sometimes, it’s almost enough to just do it… To just write the first thing that comes to mind (writing often generates ideas just as well as it records them). I think audience is incredibly important, as it can sometimes define the purpose for a work.
It’s funny to me that all the arts have some form of basic structure, but then becomes greatest when style takes over. Style is the proof of a human being’s individuality, of personal freedom from structure. It is something that can be imitated, but not duplicated. Whether it is a conscious or unconscious element is unsure, but style adds a certain personal flare to every composition. Style is what makes writing genuine and fresh.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364431/writing
The thought of composing brings to mind images of music paper and in the place of notes are words dancing across the page and I am skipping through them like a field of flowers. Weird, I know. To me a well written work should flow as seamlessly and easily as Beethoven or Spohr. Who’s Spohr? Yea, that’s kind of the point. He was another German musical composer during the Romantic era but nobody remembers him like they do Beethoven. Why? Because Beethoven is good, he lives on in the stanzas of his music. His equivalent in the writing world (in my opinion) is Shakespeare, or even a more contemporary version, Dr. Seuss. It is my goal to be the next Dr. Seuss (maybe not for kids though) the only way to do this is to be a good writer. But what is good writing? I think that good writing is made during the revision process. Inspiration doesn’t always strike as eloquent and cohesive; once you actually get the idea down on the page then you can worry about how well it’s written. I really like what Carol Berkenkotter says about revision being “the way skilled writers internalize their audiences and then use this sensed audience and their relationship to it to help them modify” (210). I’ve noticed a lot of times my first draft of things are written mainly for me, I have to take the audience into account and tweak it after the fact. If this holds true then it stands to follow that the audience is one of the most vital aspect in the composition process.
ReplyDeleteI spent quite a bit of time on good writing, I think because it is something I am continually striving for. I guess I did this backwards but here goes, composition is coming up with a concept, sometimes inspired as Alissa suggests, and seeing it through to the bloody end. Through the brilliant scenes, the unsavory moments, the so-so bits, and the writer’s block we must trudge forward, more faithful then the US Postal Service in our dedication to delivering our stories. Mailmen don’t have to face down self doubt, what’s six feet of snow compared to that? For me the composing process involves outlining my idea, researching relevant topics, making a playlist that fits my mood and story, and just letting the creative juices flow so to speak. I almost always do my best writing to music, maybe that helps explain why music and writing are so mashed up in my head. No matter what genre I am working within that is my consistent process, the actual work itself though will be extremely different.
My Wordle:
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364442/Future_Seuss_Theory
The art of composition is just that - an art. It’s difficult to define because everyone has a different process of creation and each writer’s individuality influences their approach. Composition is a means of expression, a profound creative outlet. It’s a process that involves harnessing inspiration in order to convey an idea to others. A clear topic, defined audience, and organic structure are just a few of the many elements present in good writing. However, many are as enigmatic as the word composition.
ReplyDeleteGood writing has style and form, characteristics of the final product that serve as an expression of the writer’s personality. Form is difficult to identify in composition. According to Colomb and Williams we generally “become aware of it…only when troubled by it.” Skillful execution of form and style result in an organic reading experience that addresses the audience with expression and strong voice. It’s seamless. Stewart describes the style of a composition as “evolving like a plan from a seed,” it grows into something meaningful to both the author and the audience. A writer must work to discover their voice and develop their skill in order to create a shared experience and communicate on a meaningful level.
I can easily relate to the Expressivists notion that writing functions as a form of “exploration of self through language.” The best writers have a deep understanding of themselves and their values. They take the time to practice the craft of composition, using structure and revision to create a moving experience. By establishing a strong voice and addressing their audience on an intimate level a writer can shape perceptions.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364449/Theory_of_Composition
What does it mean to compose? I would have to agree with a lot of the posts from the class that composing is individual, ever-changing and results in the creation of something – be it art, writing, music etc. I just think that it’s strange that all of us can share this view that composing is so formless and transient when our whole lives we’ve been taught to view composing as a process with rules and regulations, which if not followed than odds are your creation will be viewed as mediocre, unintelligent or just crappy.
ReplyDeleteI really like the quote from the essay, “form became associated with conformity and with rigid rules…[and became] the most dismal stuff that students and teachers must deal with” because I think that this is how a lot of us as students associate with composing. Composing, like DJ said, can be a process that is liberating and free and also difficult to define. I think that if we were taught to approach writing in a different way, other than the usual academic format of - what’s your thesis? Now prove it using so and so amount of facts and at the same time toss in some big words to try and sound intelligent when you really don’t know/care what you’re talking about - we would all be able to express ourselves more creatively and enjoy composing all types of works more.
If composing is some sort of process where we synthesize ideas and form them into something then I think that everyday we compose things all the time. When I pick out my clothes in the morning I’m putting different pieces together to form an overall outfit that will be seen by an audience and in their minds maybe they’ll be thinking “oh those clothes match really well” (I hope) which could be a sign of my ability to collaborate, bring things into coherence and send out an overall message about who I am as a person. Many of us might even like to cook, in which case we would be bringing together multiple ingredients to form a meal, much like Jocelyn’s sandwich metaphor.
Composing and writing to me are somewhat different. When I think of composing I think of a more creative process that would allow me to flow into more than one genre or medium with less regard towards rules or structure. However, I associate writing with a more formal setting that takes into account structure or arrangement, grammar, coherence etc. To me composing is also more personal. If I “compose” an essay or a poem I’m not necessarily as concerned with how an audience might receive it, as I am when I am writing a research paper for example.
Good writing. This. I feel, is a touchy subject. Obviously there are conditions and standards that are typically met when a work is considered “good writing”. Yet, I think that many of those standards depend on the genre you’re writing in or the purpose you’re writing for. A spectacularly researched and proven theoretical essay wouldn’t be considered “good writing” in a fictional essay contest and vice versa. I guess what I’m getting at is that just like the definition of composing is fluid and depending on the situation, so is the idea of “good writing”.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364508/thinking-composing
I believe all composing comes from something that sparks inspiration and passion. I find that if I am not passionate about what I am composing the end result is never of satisfactory, no matter what the subject may be. I think that composing is unique to the individual, so that no one way of composing can be compared to the next. With that being said, I don’t find that one way is greater than the other, only just greater for the individual.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the fact that I have ADD my inspirations for composing can come at any moment really. It could be a woman on a bike ride with her little boy, or the hum drum of students foot tapping against the beaten cold floor. I find my inspirations in everyday life. I find that my best work in writing comes naturally and the words can’t help but dance across my blank sheet of paper. I don’t go looking for my inspirations, they find me.
Although I may not go looking for it, sometimes even when an inspiration finds me it doesn’t always come out on paper in the way I hoped. Not every bit of writing, inspired or not, is “good writing.”
Usually when I am composing, quite honestly I don’t start by thinking about what specific audience I am targeting. First off, I try to find the best way to communicate in my writing what emotions I want portrayed in my piece. Then I take a step back and read it as if I were the audience to see if it has come off in the way I wanted it to. In most cases, this never happens after a first draft. It is then in my revisions, after gathering all my thoughts, I being to target a specific audience if needed. I don’t have much experience in writing for an audience, I think in the past whatever I composed created the audience.
I think it’s important, especially when addressing the audience, to find a connection from the composer to the writing to the audience. Most of the time I like to dig deep, and that doesn’t always mean with lengthy sentences and overbearing words. Just find where the connection lies and pull the audience in deeper so they can see eye to eye. Sometimes saying a little is saying a lot.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364515/Connection
Composing is the taking of your ideas as putting them into a form that can be expressed to others. It’s when a writer takes a plot, characters, and events from their imagination and puts them on paper for others to experience. It’s a look into the writer’s innermost thoughts, how they see the world. You know the saying, “the eyes are the window to the soul”? Well I think that that is wrong, it’s really the writing, the way a person composes that is a window into the person’s soul.
ReplyDeleteComposing for writing is a little different than composing a song or paining. For writing you only have the words on the page, for music and art you have other components to grab the audience’s attention or add to the message; the melody for a song or the colors used in a painting are equal to the tone and structure of a paper. So it becomes a more difficult process to compose a paper than a work of art.
The composing process is the process that the writer goes through when they sit down to create something. There is no set definition for it because all people have their own unique way of composing. Some writers for example will sit down and write out a story and only have the one draft because it turned out perfectly and others will write many, many drafts to get that one perfect draft in the end. I disagree with Jocelyn, I think that you can use the same composing process, and remember that all writers(composers) have their own process so as long as it’s the same writer writing the process should remain the same no matter what genre they are working in.
Composing is writing, or well, maybe not exactly that. Composing is the process that you go through to write something. I think of composing your idea as starting with the idea and then using that stupid umbrella or whatever you were taught in primary school to organize your ideas and evidence, then the drafts of your paper. It’s when you figure out how you are going to write your paper; what type of language, style, how it will be organized, how much evidence will be put forth, etc. So while it’s not writing itself it is essential to writing.
I think that good writing is writing that gets a positive review from its audience. If it is well written; the language is good, the ideas flow ‘fluidly’ from one point to another, and there is evidence to back your point up then it is well written.
Key words that I think of for good writing are; composing which I defined above, language, audience and revision. Language for me means that you are writing suitably for your audience. If your audience is a five year old then you will write simple sentences of only a few words and meanings but if your audience is a college professor you will write complex sentences with complex words and phrases. For a good paper you need to gauge who your audience will be so that you can cater the language effectively. The audience is who will read your paper. You need to know this so that you can write your paper properly. Revision is the rereading of your paper and changing it because you found areas that need to be improved/changed to make the paper better.
Key terms for composing are; style, process, form, and coherence. Style, each writer has their own style. They have a certain way that they write that makes their papers different from everyone else’s. It ensures that a person will never have to read the same thing over and over and over again. Process is taking the form you were taught before, the five paragraph form and changing it to suit your topic and the amount of evidence you must compile for it. Form has to do with how you organize your paragraphs and ideas iin the paragraphs. Coherence deals with how well one idea flows into another in your writing. Personally I think that coherence is one of the most important components of composing. I hate reading things that don’t flow properly.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364587/ADR%3A_Composition
To compose a piece of literature- whether it be a poem, an essay, a short story, an article, etc.- means to create something you can only hope will deliver its purpose. To compose with writing, you need an idea, inspiration, and a motive. It’s very similar to what an artist or musician does. Except instead of simply looking at it or listening to it, you must do both. Good writing seldom lays its cards on the table. It requires you to get your hands dirty and dig in to exhume whatever message is being conveyed. So, what does it mean to compose? I tend to agree with Kimmi and DJ Wik, one formal definition doesn't work for everyone. Hemingway once said, “There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typewriter and bleed.” A talented writer approaches a sheet of paper in the same way a master pianist approaches a piano: with a purpose and emotion. And then they bleed: on the type writer, on the page, on the piano. Composition in itself is an art form and must be treated with total creative integrity of the author.
ReplyDeleteA composing process is whatever process one goes through to achieve a piece of work. I’m certain it differs for everyone, and especially based on the type of work their composing. It should start with a clear head and focus. A lot of what composition is, is really concentration. It’s important to take your time and really craft your writing. If the work is more creative, there is more leeway with its process. If it’s more structured, the process will be more rudimentary. Overall, I do agree with Sarah Kate. Composition is really special to each individual.
I don’t think that I’m an adequate judge for “good writing”, but I can think of a few characteristics that are found in most good fiction. Good writing should contain at least two stories that are told almost simultaneously. The two stories should connect, but stand only respectively as intriguing pieces of work. It should also have a timeless message. Think of “The Great Gatsby”, it was written about the ‘20s but the messages are timeless. Good writing isn’t afraid to offend the reader or push the envelope. Good writing boldly takes risks that bad writing is too unoriginal or timid to take. Which brings me to my final point, good writing is passionate and original.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2365072/word
WIth these blog posts I realized how hard it is to define words. Similarly with rhetoric, pinpointing a definition of composition is somewhat difficult. Initially the first couple of things that pop into my head when I think of composition is delay with music and then it makes me think of an AP english class I took in high school.
ReplyDeleteThe way Sammi described composition, I feel, is most accurate "Composing is indeed the combining of parts or elements, but it is also the creation of something new, something original from those parts." Which makes a valid point because if you think of most the essays you've had to write growing up normally you have to follow a 5-paragraph form and certain guideline. So the form isn't original that makes the paper it is the elements you add to make it original. I found it interesting how she compared composition to that of making a sandwich; it is not composed, rather made. Basically you have to general lay out and you just need to add the ingredients to make it a successful paper. And because these "ingredients" can be so countless it allows composing to be so unique to each individual. Each writer should be able to take a certain idea and present it in their own way and in their own style.
Good writing in my opinion is the most important part to composing. If your writing and style is horrible then the whole composition could go wrong. Good writing though is pretty subjective depending on who is looking it, but thats where it's also a good thing, while one person may not like your style of writing another may appreciate it. The one thing that I feel should be present along all criteria of "good" writing is that after reading a piece if the reader walks away with a message the author was trying to achieve then your writing must have been good. Other than that I don't think someone can lay out guidelines on "how to be a good writer". Individual style should be taken into account.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2365104/composition
Composing is akin to creating. Composing in music or art, there is a base to begin with, a blank piece of music or canvas. Composing in writing starts the same way: fresh, blank, and pliable. They all begin the same way and end up with visible (or audible) pieces.
ReplyDeleteWhen I compose, I typically always begin with an idea. From there, details develop and I expand the piece. No matter that the genre, I have to have an idea in order to properly create. I can't create something from nothing. With posters and other projects, it's the same way. I have to have a spring board, otherwise the creation that results is garbage and would be considered as me trying to bullshit my way through the composition.
Good writing requires a solid composition. It can't have holes and loose ends. Good writing is complete, with all the required parts: broad vocabulary, clear, consise word choice, an idea that is represented well, and a piece that is tied together from start to finish. Good writing doesn't wander around aimlessly hoping to get an idea across. Good writing displays an idea with evidence and conviction.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2365151/Composing
For any writer, speaker or rhetor, composing questions your mind, intellect and knowledge on the subject you choose, how you present it and who you present it to. I am not necessarily stating that these 3 questions are the main components of composition but they definitely seem to be the basis of the factors that go into the process of composing any form of text. In both of Covino and Joliffe’s pieces regarding rhetoric and composition they outline the facets that any composer must go through or should at least consider. I say ‘consider’ because many of them are not necessary for the existence of any and every text. Personally I believe composing ‘good writing’ does not have to involve changing an audience’s mind set like Covino and Joliffe mention in ‘Introduction to Rhetoric’, but more so allowing the audience insight into the writer’s mind or thoughts regarding the topic.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, for the rest of this particular journal, ‘writer’ will be used to refer to speaker, rhetor, and all other sources of forming texts.
Anyways back to the process of composing. The process of composing may not be universal among genres of text, however there are many similarities that exist. The differences, I believe, are subtle to one who see’s all genres of composing as art, however they do provide unique characteristics to each one. For instance where text, be it written or speech, targets the mind, music, on the other hand, though it requires some train of thought, appeals to the sense of hearing. As long as the process of composing involves sending some form of message, it could be said that it is universal among all genres. How it sends that message is what differs.
When approaching the composing process there are certain steps that are not necessary but allow train of thought
to flow easier. Firstly, before even putting pen to paper, thought to word or any other medium chosen to convey a message, an audience must be considered. The best definition of audience I came across was in ‘Introduction to Rhetoric’ where Covino and Joliffe discuss the audience as a ‘discourse community’. The writer needs to associate his text with a group of people who want to achieve similar set of goals as portrayed in the text and employ some form of intercommunication among each other to provide feedback.
ReplyDeleteThere is talk of encountering some form of emergence and identifying constraints as in the rhetorical situation when composing, however I believe the next step is establishing a style and structure. Covino and Joliffe separate these two, but I personally believe they can be analyzed in the same manner. Style being slightly different involves choice of language, tone, and mood and can be paralleled to the definition of rhetoric, that being “the language through which the writer or speaker seeks power over listeners or readers”. (Pg 4, Intro to Rhetoric) Structure comes into play in the approach the writer chooses to take towards his audience or discourse community. As mentioned earlier, I believe style and structure overlap at the definition provided by Richard Graves. Graves states style being “a way of finding and explaining what is true.” (pg 229) Graves’ definition to me seems as though it could apply to the structure in mind a writer approaches a text with.
Finally, revision seems the next necessary step in composing ‘good writing’ or ‘good’ anything really. To some thoughts may flow out in the style and structure they want, but there is always room for necessary improvement. Whether these improvements are the result of the writer himself of the audience he chooses, they are a necessary step in the process of composing. Where the revision step becomes unclear is how do we determine that we are finished revising? There is always room for improvement and sometimes the text can stand as it is, but the writer, and remember this refers to the speaker, rhetor etc., must consider changes in his audience, his style, his structure, the rhetorical situation he’s chosen to approach, the coherence of the piece and all other facets of composing before being able to happily stand back and declare their work ‘good’. Whether they choose to act upon these changes is reflective of the type of writer they are not the composing process they choose to take.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2364413/Composing
Quartet One: Composition begins with a passion. The passion doesn’t always have to reside within the composition itself, but within whatever urged you to do so. In most cases you don’t just pick up a pen/ or lay a finger upon the key board/ typewriter without initially having a first thought that triggered you to do so. This will always be there case, today, in the past, and in the future. Without this initially passion about anything, we would have nothing to write about, or maybe better worded, nothing worth reading.
ReplyDeleteQuartet Two: I completely and 100% agree with Kristina Z when she mentioned having stronger courses when it comes to English. I can’t tell you how much I was affected when coming to college and not having the proper education. My stomach churned by the thought of not writing the paper, but correctly citing it and using the correct format. I’ve always been able to grasp the creative aspect of writing, but it was the grammar and editing that always left me cringing. Today, education is evolving in ways to better educate in this specific field. Unlike most of the positive responses to choosing the EWM, this is the reason I have chosen this path. As much as I’ve never loved editing, I have always loved writing and understand the importance and advantages of having the ability to edit your own work. I wanted to force myself to go beyond my comfort zone and engage myself in work that I know will help me in my career.
Quartet Three: Just like many others have mention I also agree that circulation is key. It’s quite obvious it is in our everyday lives. Without circulation there would be no purpose in writing, for many who find there purpose in writing is to write for others. Composition is already circulated throughout the world in numerous ways, mostly always socially. Accounts such as twitter, facebook, and this very own site (blogger) are one of the biggest contributors. It is here that individuals are free to express any opinions of any sort on the web which is made visible to the entire world. This is also one of the beauties in advancement of technology that writing can travel so fast and efficiently to people all over the world. Books, magazines, and newspapers success all rely on circulation. Without the “approval” from the audience addressed there would be no demand for any of them at all. While yes I do believe some write for themselves, I don’t believe that those who do it so often wouldn’t be discouraged without a pat on the back. Although you may just be writing for yourself, unknowingly you are gearing it towards some specific audience, perhaps one that is much like yourself.
Composing-- it's what we do. It's what I am doing at this very moment for the class! Composing with writing is different when it comes to other genres is because each genre has their own form branched off of the original idea. The composing process will start off with the composer’s idea in any genre, but when it comes to say art, the final result will be in picture form. However, you can't write poetry for a short story in fiction and you can't mix nonfiction with fiction (although it has happened). Some writing has restraints like an essay or a writing prompt for the ACT's. You can't write just anything if it is writing prompt on say the Vietnam War. We as composers have to go off the ideas from what we know and can't make anything up like that napalm was really skittles and rainbows. We know from actual events in history that napalm was dropped and it didn't have pretty effects. Otherwise when we don't have restraints and can free write in something formal as this blog, even if it is for our class, we aren't told that we have to come up with exact definitions of what composing is.
ReplyDeleteAny good writing I say is what the composer feels is good writing. If as a composer you feel that you gave your all and put 100% into it, then who is to say that you didn't write well. Aside from the obvious like grammar and having to have a grade on it, if you believe your writing is good, then who is to judge. The composer is the one behind the idea and if that idea is great to them, then that’s all that matters. Some key terms I would believe go along with composing would be idea. I say an idea as a term because you have to have something in your mind to come up with before you start writing. It can't just say blah, blah, blah, and have no substance. That would be boring for one and pointless. Creativity would be another good term. Not everyone is creative, by all means I don't have any creative talent for most things, but simple ideas can become creative when it comes to writing when you wouldn't even think so. So even the most none creative person can seem brilliant with a small idea and a bit of ink.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2485198/composingwordle