Adaptations, Limitations, And Imitations by Mark Mason was not an interesting read. I never read George Orwell’s book, 1984, so I guess that the fact that I couldn’t relate was probably a contributing factor to my boredom when scanning through (I mean, intently studying) this material. Of course, this work was not meant to be exciting. It was meant to be informative, and show a sequence of literary events. In which case, it was very effective.
Naturally, Mark’s first draft was the hardest of all the three to read through. There were blatant mechanical errors, a total scattering of ideas, no real purpose, and a complete lack of a traditional or effective introduction and conclusion. All of these factors play a key role in playing this paper off as a truly “Shitty First Draft”. It is obvious to the reader that this paper is a total mess, and if I were Mark’s sophomore British Literature teacher, I would have probably blamed myself for this catastrophe and quit my job.
However, I am not Mark’s British Literature teacher, so I can blame this lyrical tragedy on someone else and move on to how his second draft turned out. It was sub-par, at best. He didn’t really work on motivating the reader to continue… reading. He more or less focused on getting the paper to have a goal and cleaning up some of the grammatical errors. Not that I’m trying to say that doing so wasn’t a big help; it was. It certainly made the paper easier to understand, and slightly more rewarding at the end when you find out that there was a purpose for the writing.
Then comes the final draft. This is where he has already smoothed out what he wants his topic to be, and all of his grammar problems. Now it’s time to focus on the voice that he takes on, and the filler content. He does his best to personalize the paper, and make the reader relate to it a little bit more by making it sound less research-paper-y. I think he does this kind of fruitlessly, because it was REALLY cheesy and it seemed as if he was trying way too hard to be himself while still remaining ‘cool’. But, the effort was noticeable, and the effort was nice, so it contributed to a better read.
All in all, I’d say that I actually kind of learned something while reading this article, and that’s to never reach your full potential in your papers until the final draft. Well, no, but seriously, he kind of shows how it’s ok to have the worst first draft ever, as long as you methodically add on to your paper and make it better… effectively.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I somewhat agree and disagree with what marissa said. She made a point that we don't reach our full potential until that final draft, which I think is wrong. I believe that we reach our full potential at the second draft, at least for me it's that way. During my second draft I feel like I'm getting out what I need to say better. Usually I don't have a problem with my body paragraphs, it's my introduction and conclusion that I feel that take the most effort and stress. The introduction is everyting for me because as a reader, when I see a boring introduction, it makes me want to go and read something. Now, if you really grab a readers attention in the first paragraph, you really set the tone for the rest of the paper.
Post a Comment