The first chapter I choose to read was Writer’s Block Just Happens to People by Geoffrey Carter. Carter begins this essay by emphasizing he inevitability of writer’s block, and then introduces his readers to Edmund Bergler, the first person to invent the term “writer’s block,” and who was also an assistant director to Sigmund Freud. Carter then proceeds to go on a one-page tangent where he circles around the idea of Bergler’s invention of the term writer’s block, and how apparently, Bergler once claimed that he had a fool proof method of “curing” writer’s block, but never told anyone of this cure, or wrote it down. So… yeah.
Eventually, Carter reaches the point the reader has been waiting for: in a 1974 issue of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, there is an article titled “The Unsuccessful Self-Treatment of a Case of Writer’s Block.” The following page is blank, besides a footnote that says the article of “published without revision.” Carter proceeds to go off topic once again, but eventually circles back to his thesis where he claims that writer’s block can be cured by simply playing around with words and writing- writing anything, because writing anything, or everything, is much easier than writing about nothing.
Carter finishes his piece on a note about a movie called Slacker, where a character desires to write the next Great American Novel, and this character says something along the lines of “Who’s ever written the great work about the immense effort required in order not to create?” Carter ends his essay with the words: “You have to try very hard in order not to create at all,” highlighting his argument that writing random words, playing with new/silly words, and writing about everything/anything, is his cure for writer’s block.
I appreciated Carter’s overarching argument, and his reference to Bergler and the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis was funny, but this essay over all was confusing. He made his argument in a very round-about method, making me miss the straight-forward and focused writing style used in the first 3 pieces we were assigned.
The second chapter I choose to read was Leaving Yourself out of Your Writing by Rodrigo Rodriguez. This article was much more pleasing to read, and reminded me of both Brayson and Wardle’s works, as this essay emphasizes the importance of writing about I, for I, and using I. Rodriguez reminded her readers that they are two people, both writer and reader, and that the writer needs to be present in their own masterpieces.
By leaving ourselves out of our own writing we neglect to add our own experiences, influences, and styles to our writing. Those who read our writing are expecting us to be present in our work. Rodriguez then lists the four major ways where we can implement ourselves into our writing: 1. establishing the writer through the use of I, revealing the writer’s purpose/interest in the topic, 3. stating the argument for the piece, 4. providing evidence/concepts for the argumentative side or topic. She continues to stress the use of first-person point of view, which allows the reader and writer to become acquainted, and gives the writer voice in their experiences.
Rodriguez ends her essay on a simple but clear note: “Speak up and be present and known in your writing!” Allow your audience to understand your work as both a writer and a reader.
In summation, I preferred Rodriguez’s piece over Carter’s quite obviously, as Rodriguez appealed more to the essays we were assigned, overviewing why first year composition courses should emphasize personal writing, and explore new kinds of writing, such as literacy narratives where students openly use the formal “I” over research essays. Carter made a good point in his essay, I just didn’t care for the way he chose to make it, and I didn’t see a whole lot of clear connections to Brayson, or Wardle, or Butts.