Getting stressed deciding on a title in the same way I get stressed about picking a viable topic!!!!

The analogy of childhood curiosity in comparison to the situational curiosity in adulthood is an interesting way to approach the planning phase of a paper. I initially thought of the children I nanny and their never-ending questions and the excitement behind them. I liked how Ballenger included this because planning a paper is normally somewhat stressful for me simply because I feel concerned over if the topic is worthwhile or can allow for a smooth writing process. I also get overwhelmed because my mind works best step by step, and at first the process is all big-picture and I’m unsure of where to begin. He/she explained it in a way that came across as natural, as in, one really should just be pretty stoked about a topic, and have the dedication to it to explore that topic. It’s an easier approach to phrase it that way.

Reid suggests that anything worth being good at takes some time and that there is always room for improvement. This relates to our writing process because often I feel I’m rushing to meet a word count, or I’m writing inbetween other obligations and am unable to really consider everything on my paper. I interpreted his suggestion in relation to writing as creating the time to plan, plan even more, proofread, revise, plan again, and make sure it is improving at each step. I enjoy writing. I can’t do a simple math problem, but I can get a long paper done pretty quickly. This method relates to his part about extrinsic motivation due to grades and deadlines, because we’ll often rush an assignment knowing we can complete it, but it doesn’t truly represent our capabilities.

Both articles discuss that the audience and purpose is important to consider. We must consider the point that we’re trying to explain, as well as whom we’d ideally explain it to so we know how to phrase and organize our thoughts and style. Reid’s position within his or her blog is different than a student writing for a dissertation because there is more expected freedom on a blog, and less expectation for structure and academically advanced writing. Ballenger’s approach is transient between different writing styles and audiences because either way, one needs to consider an audience, and either way, picking an intriguing topic creates a sort of mental game for the writer to get excited about Ballenger also discusses working knowledge, and states it as something one can talk more than a minute about without repetition. Reid talks about vast content on the internet and the easy access that blogs allow for. We learn from the information we ingest whether forced or not, but what about the information we freely produce without the threat of a bad grade, or the ideal of a good one?

I really, deeply enjoy writing poetry and vignettes. It stays in my notebook and it’s only for my eyes, so it’s solely for intrinsic purposes. Once I start writing my hand just continues on the paper and doesn’t even seem to be guided by my brain. It’s like an auto-pilot. It’s exciting, and it’s an insightful experience to re-read what comes out so naturally. Sometimes I’m surprised at what finds its way to paper from my mind because I didn’t even know I felt so intensely about something until I begin to write. It slows my thoughts down. I feel like they’re always in constant motion, and its a little wild because one would think while writing that the brain is being used most, yet it seems that it’s one of the few quiet times. Super strange.

I understand both author’s purpose of writing each of their articles is to explain the type of interaction with writing that I explained above. A strong passion with a little bit of tenderness for the topic. Where it comes from a deeper place than just mulling over an article and instigating forced brain activity to get some words on paper until the count is reached. Being attached to the topic would seemingly create a more involved writing process and final outcome for the writer to be more satisfied with.