Craft Group Responses should be substantive and thoughtful, but they need not be formal. They should be in standard written English, though, not text-speak. You are welcome to comment “I totally agree with you, Jane” or “Great point, Bill” but these will not be considered substantive enough for credit. Responses should expand on a point, disagree with a point, compare or contrast to another passage or text, or explore a new way to look at the craft point. Make sure you read all the responses before yours, and please refer to others who have responded before you by name when appropriate (e.g., “Although I agree with what Susie said about Wallace’s repetition, I think what he was really after was a sense of . . . .” ). Do not simply repeat a response that has been submitted before yours. This would be plagiarism.
1-In “The Rose Metal Press Field Guild to Writing Flash Nonfiction,” Patrick Madden writes, “essays often do contain some moral rhetorical quality that threatens to improve not only their authors.” He adds that regardless of the fact that the inclination and shape of an essay do not support suasion or the fact that an essay does not direct a reader to think like an author, essays consist of complex content that sparks thoughts that exceed the mere notions. In this perspective, he adds that the best contrary essays do not challenge moral principles, but instead seeks to explore the validity of humorous platitudes regarding various notions in society. From this perspective, it is clear that essays ought to concentrate on challenging notions that do not interfere with the morality surrounding a situation. In Jeff Gundy’s essay “from the rocks at dusk,” what is the moral rhetoric in the story? Is the moral rhetoric clear and why?
2-In The Rose Metal Press Field Guild to Writing Flash Nonfiction, Patrick Madden wrote “Ideally, then, an essayist has the sense to rise above pettiness and tribal politics. She thinks deeply about life, hesitates before committing to an ideology, undercuts and revises her own assumption as she writes.” He goes on to explain that a personal essayist should go against the popular belief in the community. He goes on to explain, “There is little to say in affirmation of the truths that everyone believes, but some small self-implicating excursion into divergent waters might open the authors and the readers and the reader’s mind alike.” Writing an essay requires an essayist to always become creative and always ensure that the content of their work is informative and not easily predictable to the readers. Readers are always attracted to essays that tend to enlighten them. Writers must embrace a diversity of thinking when putting down their work to ensure they do not inflict damage on other people’s believes but should be supportive of the people at all times.
I also believe that an essayist should always wish to be more engaging and expose issues that occur in society from all perspectives to invoke an opportunity to critiques. An obvious essay can be very boring and fail to engage the audience. Readers are always eager to learn new ideologies and read on issues that will help in brainstorming. Engaging in pettiness and tribal politics makes an essay to be vague and bias. An essayist should be a person who approaches things on an open mind and values other people’s opinions and can be able to support and challenge them while giving their ideology. However, I have a great concern with the writing of non-fiction. How do you ensure non-fictions capture different arguments and it is personal experience?
3- Gundy (2012), commences his article by exploring the traits of a great nonfiction writer. He argues, “If the writer can lull the ego into bored torpor or get it to bound away to chase squirrels and sniff around in the leaves, the parts of the psyche that only unfold and stretch themselves when there are no walls around them—which mostly have to do with paying attention to the world outside the self—can get something done” (Gundy, 2012). As a follow-up statement, Gundy describes how contemporary nonfiction writers are not effective at their writing because they are limited by their ego or by what they learned to do at school or a combination of both limitations. I agree and relate with the above statement because sometimes when writing nonfiction, it is easy to forget that as it is your life story, you should tell it as you would a story and not as you would a structured essay. Are there times you have difficulty writing nonfiction because of your ego or because you get carried away by the structures of academic essays?
4-According to Jeff Gundy in The Rose Metal Press Field Guild to Writing Flash Nonfiction, “there are various strategies for this shifting of focus, but I find walking or running- going outside in general-among the most dependable.” He continues to explain by saying that a lot of memorable and important things happen within a room, but there are many other things outside our rooms that can help expand human perceptions. I think the main intention of the author was to explain the importance of thinking outside the box and keeping an open mind in getting ideas that can help enhance their writings. It is critical for any writer to learn how they can enhance or borrow ideas that are not only based on the area of focus but multiple areas and integrate them into their writing. However, a question that arises is how a person can learn to determine the relevant and relevant information from the environment to integrate into their writing without losing the main focus?
