When I first wrote my creativity essay, I felt as sense of accomplishment. I am just getting back into school, so it has been a long time since I had to write any sort of paper. I thought for days about what I wanted to write about and what creativity meant to me. I finally decided to write about meeting my sister for the first time, and the steps I took getting to that point. When I finished it, I sat and read it to my husband, who of course said it was great (he has to). But, after reading Bartholomae's essay, and rereading what I wrote, there's a lot more that could have gone into it.
I wanted to write something outside of the box, but when I look back at it, I feel like I may not have written too much about creativity. I spent more time explaining the situation than I did about why I thought it was creative. I guess you could say I used some commonplaces. I assumed the reader would understand why I thought this situation deemed me as "creative".
If Bartholomae read my essay, he would most likely compare it to the white shoes essay. I say this because of the comments he makes about it. He talks about how the essay was relatively free of errors, but pretty much just got the job done. Although at the time I wrote it I didn't feel this way, as I reread the essay now, I can see how I lacked the expansion of ideas.
I did discuss what creativity meant to me, which I feel makes my writing more on a personal level, but I definately could have added some confusion to the common understanding of creativity.
Looking back on my first discussion post, I realize I may have been a little too closed minded. Although I still don't agree with all of his ideas, I can understand his point, and I tend to agree with him more now than I did at the beginning.
No comments:
Post a Comment