"Plot is a primitive vulgarity in literature"
~Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged.
~Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged.
To
paraphrase or summarize a piece of literature is to attempt to carry the burden
of the whole of its mass into an essay. It’s
pure drudgery, trudgery, pain in the, as it were, lower back to write. It’s boring and a pain in the upper back (and
neck) for readers to read. Paraphrasing
and summarizing have been two of the forms of punishment—along with dunce caps,
raps on the knuckles, beatings with paddles and switches, and cages—with which
teachers have abused students (if only metaphorically). And if teachers are
bored reading the results, then, well, it (de)serves them right.
Early on as a teacher, I vowed to be
honest with myself and with my students. I don’t assign boring tasks that
result in boring reading. Paraphrases
and summaries are boring. If they are
improvements on the literature, then why have the literature?
But,
but, but, I hear a reader sputtering, We
have to know what it’s about. Yes, it surely helps to know that Hamlet’s
uncle poisoned Hamlet’s father, and that the play Hamlet is a journey through how Hamlet does or doesn’t cope. That’s the story of Hamlet. But we don’t have to know (and here I’m
leaving out a two-page summary of the play) every first-this-happens-then-this-happens-then-this-happens-then…
detail to cut to Hamlet’s To be, or not
to be soliloquy. We don’t have to
eat the whole wedding cake to savor our one (or two) slices. If we do attempt to eat the whole wedding
cake, that sack on the boy’s back becomes a big sack of a belly—we end up not
being able to stomach the literature. We
get sluggish, vomitatious, sleepy. (But enough of this extended metaphor.)
Let’s distinguish story from plot—or
what I am fond of calling “plod.” The story
is the two-sentence blurb we read when surfing through Netflix for a new film
to watch. It’s what we tell a fellow
student who corners you before a class and asks you (as she hasn’t done the
assigned reading) “What’s the story about?”
The process of distilling the story enables you to choose your focus and
to read more deeply.
The plod is the breakfast-to-bed
details of first-this-happens-then-this-happens-then-this-happens-then… It fills up the required number of pages; you
can do it while multi-devicing, eating, and (forfend!) driving; and you don’t
have to learn or change your mind in any way.
It’s substituting a false sense of thoroughness for depth and
originality of thought.
It’s no wonder that the children’s
story character, Mr. Plod, is a policeman.
Assigning plod—woops—plot paraphrase/summary—is to police students: Are
you following the teacher’s laws? Are
you thinking what the teacher’s thinking?
Summary sites were created to level the possibility of students actually
learning how the mind works, how it might work. They pander to our addictions
to games and social media—get this school assignment over-with, so I can get
back to my phone.
Other
forms of plod include writing (1) Annotations. In this exercise, students might quote a sonnet
line by line, offering a few remarks—notations—after each. (2) Breakfast-to-bed.
Usually used in not-so-creative first-draft story writing, the student
starts by detailing image after dutiful image of what it means for a character to
wake up. Unless you’re having your character wake up as a huge insect, as Kafka
does in “Metamorphosis,” a startling, and engaging premise, breakfast often
leads to another form of plod, (3) Close
links. First you wake up, then you brush your teeth, then you… (4) On and On. Attempting to cite every
instance of a theme or pattern than you discern in your subject matter. (5+)
Other variations include Monday thru
Sunday, 1 to 10, and, well, I don’t want to plod through all the plodding
possibilities here. Burdensome to write,
plod writing is burdensome to read. Whatever creates a feeling of “oh-no,” Do-I-have-to-plod-through-all-this-one-robotic-step-at-a-time?
disappointment in you, as the writer, will create it in the reader. As soon as I get a whiff of that in a student
paper, we’re back to the revision board.
Don’t be thorough—be deep.
As viewers might say about a film, “get to the chase.” For our literary purposes, it’s “get to the
story.”
Works Cited:
Because I Can Teach Resources:
A Monarch Shmoops…https://becauseicanteach.blogspot.com/2014/03/in-other-wordsthe-prison-and-misprision.html
One Paper Clip: https://becauseicanteach.blogspot.com/2018/05/one-paper-clip-detail-design-
depth.html
Thank you, Brianna Oddo, for alerting me to Ayn Rand's quote!
depth.html
Thank you, Brianna Oddo, for alerting me to Ayn Rand's quote!
Throughout being in school we have learned the method of “plod”. We learned to write a paper, with a introduction, three bodies, a conclusion filled with summarizing, throw a little analytical sense, and a thesis. We never truly wrote a paper because we wanted to or in our own sense of interpretation, but the interpretation that we think our teachers want. Our teachers have taught us to be robots and only look at the paper from what we have to learn, not what they actually want to teach us. Teachers don’t want to dig deep and read between the lines of the lines. They want to teach us the fluff that we can read online and thats it. Its not our teachers faults, but their teachers before and so on. We are so used to this routine of on going “plod” that until we meet a teacher like Dr. Rich we will never open our eyes to the bigger picture. No one wants to read a paper of the same information on and on again. Teachers want to read something different and unique. They want to learn something from their students and maybe get a new prospective on something they thought they knew. When learning a new play or story their will always be an endless way of interpretations and learning all of them is consuming, but life changing. Being in class and hearing the thoughts of others interests me because we all look at one piece and take it in ways no one else thought was even possible. “Plod” might be the easy way out, but truly writing your thoughts on a paper is a weight lifted off your chest.
ReplyDeleteSeanette Martin
ReplyDeleteMarch 26, 2019
Eng Seminar
Dr Rich
Writing in school is beginning to become so tricky. For years you are expected to write one way then as time progresses you realize that everyone expectations are different. So at what point do you know if you’re writing things the correct way or not? I mean do you ever know in reality everyone has their own way of how things should be written. There is no way to please everyone so instead of sticking to what you know or what you might be comfortable with just do what is expected of you. Me personally when watching a film or even reading a piece I love a good background story to give me a better understanding of what exactly led to the chase. That’s just who I am as a person I’m very wordy and have always been that way but now I realize this might not be the semester for that.
For some reason I really believe many stories need that breakfast to bed no it’s not always to fill up the pages but many times that’s what is need in the story. This happened so this happened, for instance as I work on my story I realized that some of the extra words I added were needed to help understand why something happened the way it happened. Breakfast to bed is not something that is always needed but for many of my class it was needed to get me this far. I guess it’s time for me to take a closer look on how to get to the point without adding the breakfast to bed.
I have a very hard time figuring out when to not use plot in my writing. Growing up, most of my teachers expected summarizes of the literature we read. I always thought they wanted this so that they could make sure I read the writing and understood what we discussed. Most of my professors also asked for examples and proof from the readings which meant to write a quote and then explain it. This often just lead to a paraphrasing of the quote. I would always try to incorporate my ideas or my own examples into my paper too. This was also was what was expected from me so I didn’t think there was anything wrong with it. Sometimes I would take risks and get comments back from my teacher. My papers were also always organized and detailed. Now that i’m in college, some professors want me to take time with my writing and include lots of details while other professors want me to just get to the good stuff and go deeper. I think that as a college student, it’s important to just find the balance of what professors want and work towards that.
ReplyDeleteGrowing up I was taught to write just like every other student was taught. Introduction, thesis, body paragraphs, restate thesis, conclusion. My teacher’s called it a “sandwich,” as Dr. Rich calls it “plod.” Put the bun on, fill the middle with the meats, then add the other piece of the bun. I am so accustomed to writing how I was taught for so many years, that I am now feeling a sense of frustration when I am not doing something correct with my work. I am all for constructive criticism, but when I fall in love with something that I wrote, it is hard for me to give it up. I am a young writer and never expected to go down the English writing route, which ultimately, makes me feel like my writing is not at the level that it should be at. However, I fell in love with the thought of writing for self-therapy, therefore, I wrote about something that I wanted to vent out, onto paper.
ReplyDeleteI am learning so much about what is important in creating a story, and what is not. The first workshop that we had for senior seminar was truly an eye-opener for me. I was so proud of my first two pages, I did not want to give them up. However, it was all exposition. There was an introduction and a thesis statement. I was using “plod.” Hearing that was discouraging. I feel as if not only am I growing from this class, but I am also accepting the fact that I am not the only one who is reading my paper. There are readers who will be reading/ listening to this memoir and don’t want to be bored. They want the action, the imagery, and the dialogue. I realize I cannot make this memoir perfect, or please everyone with my writing. However, I am trying hard, taking the criticism I receive and growing with it as a writer.
We are so accustomed to what we once thought was the right way to write. I find myself giving too much unnecessary information when I begin to run out of ideas, but my take away from this is "to get straight to the point".
ReplyDelete- Jasmin H
While reading the blog, I was trying to figure out how these two themes have impacted me since I have been in school. Trying to go back in my mind to when I was first taught to write which would probably in the early 90s. I never had the problem of writing in a way that my teachers wanted when it came to writing. At the time, I preferred that form of writing because it gave me a purpose, an objective. It focused myself in what to do and how to do. As I got older and moved to New Jersey from New York, I saw that the educational system was very different, but still many of my teachers held true to this form of writing. It was not until I got into Kean after graduating from Middlesex County College did I realize that there were other ways of writing a paper. I sort of have had a love/hate relationship with this form of writing mainly due to the change from one professor's expectation to another professor's expectation. While I do like it when it comes to my creative side of writing papers and projects, I sometimes do miss the traditional or bland form of writing mainly because I have been used to it for over 30 years. When writing a paper on a project, for example my Marvel Cinematic Universe Project for my Research Class, I was able to use both styles of writing which allowed me to feel a little more comfortable in doing the project.
ReplyDeleteI was always taught that the plot of a story was more important to understand than the story itself. The story was what happened in general while the plot was the step by step process that the character takes throughout. However, according to this blog post, the story is far more important than the plot. What we were taught in class was simply a way for teachers to make sure we were following their guidelines instead of learning what made a story particularly interesting. What the characters say and do seem to be more important in the context of the story than the information about said character and his surroundings. As a result, workshop proves to be the most useful in sorting out the “plod” from the story itself. Through the deletion of useless plot, the story itself is able to flow without impediment from exposition or the “breakfast-to-bed” details. This blog post is hinting at the fact that a writer does not need to be thorough to be deep. As such, focusing on all the aspects of the main character’s day to day life should be avoided at all cost to reduce the “plod” and make room for the story.
ReplyDeleteI am happy I did not choose acting as most of if not all the time someone has to point out the plot to me.However I love literature I like what I get from it the different nuances and the pleasure of reading.I DON'T care much for plot summaries but I care about a good read a story that is able to pull me in and get me involved as a reader.So at the expense of my time I scan pages and see if its a story or plot.
ReplyDeleteDr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteSummarizing is overrated. Why must we, as students, tell our professors about what they already read or what they already know? All the topics they assign they probably already know what we are going to say. It is never knew for them so why must they want to continue to read the same boring writing. But not only that, as students we suffer because of this “PLOD”. There’s nothing less exciting than paraphrasing. We were always taught since we were young that, summaries need to be included before talking about a text but that is wrong. It has been a year since I last summarize something for a paper or in class writing assignment. I rather pick a part that I like the most and talk about it; what I think, how its relatable and what is its significance to me.
I really appreciate your metaphor about the wedding cake, you cannot eat the whole thing without getting slugging, sleeping or vomitatious. That is completely true. We cannot treat literature like that. So many different words bunched together having so many different meanings. And to slap it altogether like a three tier wedding cake is absurd!
Therefore, I thank you Dr. Rich for crossing out the summary on my first draft in Shakespeare Spring 2018. Since then, I have been enriched by language and words. I can read something and not worry about having to summarize. I can highlight my favorite parts and just receive true knowledge. That’s what literature is all about, knowledge in your own way, not the Sparknotes summary.
-Anastasia
Whenever I watched a new show or movie, I always hated what I call 'fillers.' They are unnecessary and they are just there to fill in the time. I hated it, but I what did not realize was that I was doing the same to my stories. I wanted to fill in all the details by being thorough but it was exposition and it was unnecessary. When Dr. Rich pointed it out, I realized that I was doing the same things as the dramas I watched.
ReplyDeleteI began taking out unnecessary chunks out of my manuscript and it did not make a difference. I started putting the details in the dialogue to make my characters stand out. It made it much so better. I added the details of my characters in the images and the actions. I started off one of my chapters by giving my character breakfast. I wanted to build up to the 'momentum,' but it was just 'breakfast to bed' as Dr. Rich mentioned in her blog and also in the class. I discarded that whole piece and just started right in the middle of a situation and it made that page better. The action, imagery, and dialogue bloomed after taking out the fillers. It was not hidden behind what i was trying to build up. Being deep instead of through has been helping me immensely in my manuscript and even my reflection paper.
Priscilla Boa-A
In reading this blog post, Story! Not Plod: Don't Be Thorough. Be Deep, I found that it related to the everyday life of not only being a college student but being a student in general. I was always taught to write my essays and papers with the following content; an introduction paragraph, three main body paragraphs, and a conclusion paragraph. These essays and papers would also include a thesis statement, summary, and an analysis of the topic. Before having Dr. Rich as my professor for my Shakespeare class this semester, I would always follow the tools I’ve learned in the past for writing my essays and papers. In her class I learned what plod was and what it considered to mean when actually including a plod in a paper. I truly appreciate how in the beginning of this blog post you used examples of body parts. I strongly agree when you state, “It’s boring and a pain in the upper back (and neck) for readers to read. Paraphrasing and summarizing have been two of the forms of punishment.” As a student I would summarize and paraphrase all the time in my papers, and I would never even come to the realization that I was doing it. Until I had Dr. Rich as my professor and she taught us how not to do, and how there is so much more to a paper than including a summary. In writing my papers now, I do catch myself when I’m summarizing or paraphrasing, and I immediately stop myself from continuing to do so. I appreciate how she as a teacher, vowed to be honest with herself and with her students, because I can truly tell when she’s being honest (which is all the time). Not all educators are 100% honest with their students. Not all educators want to help their students find a better way that can help them in their writing, but Dr. Rich does indeed do all of these things. I also appreciate how she taught us to distinguish story from plot, which I feel I’m now getting better at. I as a student, would love to enrich my mind and writing by connecting with the literature and write my heart out, rather than typing a boring old summary that every other student also wrote. (BEING ORIGINAL IS KEY)
ReplyDelete- Kelci Neto
Learning about the difference between Story and Plod (through this post and our Shakespeare class) is something I haven’t really thought about before, despite being a performing arts fan. There have been plenty of times when I’ve come across a particular book, film, or play that I really enjoyed and was dying (metaphorically speaking) to tell someone about it. However, when I was able to tell someone (usually a family member) I usually ended up telling them the whole plot. As mentioned in this post, the issue with giving them the plod is that it goes on and on and on, and then becomes completely boring. For instance, after I read one of my favorite books (Just One Day by Gayle Forman) for the first time, I got so excited about it and ran to my mother to tell her about it. The issue that I came across (and one that I often do when I’m explaining a book/movie) was that instead of just telling my mom the story of the book and telling her what parts I found interesting and exciting to read, I told her the whole plot. The issue with just talking about the plot was that I not only was blabbering on and on but I also was trying to tell her everything and it started to get boring not just for her but also for me. It became less about why I liked it and more about summarizing it. Which then most likely left my mom less interested in reading the book.
ReplyDeleteWriting the plot of a novel also becomes really boring and dull when it is used in school. Unlike vocally explaining the plot of the story, which can at least show some excitement through expression in the voice, writing the plot of the story turns into just words on a page. Instead of the book telling a story and being full of personality and themes, the novel tells us this happened, now move on. The characters get discarded from the discussion and are just there to get us through the book. The themes and feelings that the readers should be getting from the book gets thrown out the window.
-Anna Lee
Every paper I’ve ever wrote before this class was filled with “plod”. I always had a summary of any piece of literature I was writing. Even during this semester, I would write papers with “plod”. My professors LOVE it. They love to read the summaries, it’s the most ridiculous thing, because, didn’t they already read the literature? And annotating? The worst thing I’ve ever done. There is no digesting when you annotate a quote, and it’s not a good time. “I used this quote because” is the worst sentence to put in an essay, but some teachers love it! It sucks because I would rather write all of my papers without plod, but then we begin getting graded wrongly. This all stems from how your teacher expects you to write. If a teacher expects “plod” in the paper, you have to write it. That is extremely ridiculous, because students should be able to write however they feel comfortable. Writing without “plod” makes me feel so much more comfortable, and I thoroughly enjoy writing without it. This class has showed me that you are able to write a paper without bullshit, and enjoy writing it. “Plod” and annotations are my enemy, and I’m so glad I was able to write without them this semester. Having papers that actually show how I feel, make it much easier to be proud of myself. The work I’ve handed in this semester have been the best pieces of paper I’ve written in the four years I’ve been in school.
ReplyDeleteHi Dr. Rich, I totally understand what you mean here, especially after all of your lessons. At first, I thought, "Oh god, what do I do? I don't know what she means. I'm going to do this wrong." However, especially after my first paper, I totally understood this concept. With each paper, it became more and more clear to me that you don’t need to recap a whole play, even if the reader is unfamiliar, they will understand your paper if you include a small part of the story. That concept was wild to me when we first spoke about it, by the way, like really crazy. This blog really puts it so eloquently though. How students think they thrive off of putting all that unnecessary information in their papers and all it does is make the paper dense and boring. I suggest giving this as one the required blogs in the beginning of the semester because I think it will take away a lot of the fear students (like me) will have when you tell them to cut the bulls***. I appreciate this way of writing because I feel free. I don't have to mention every little detail and I can prove my point much faster. These papers have become so easy and I actually don't dread writing them after your class. Also, using this technique, the length of my paper is not a concern anymore either. The length comes with the creative writing style. Thank you for introducing this concept to me and I hope to be able to use it in other classes. It’s effortless.
ReplyDelete-Sofia Feggulis
I loved the, "Don't be thorough-be deep" and "Get to the story". You are literally the only staff member at Kean that wants us to be deep without making us rush to the story. All of the other teachers don't care about us being "deep" in our papers or when we participate because our deepness, for lack of a better word, is not the answer they were searching for. I feel like a lot of us are deep when it comes to non-school related assignments and if all professors allowed that flexibility maybe they would have more students participating during their lectures.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of "be deep and get to the point" I think of 2 conflicting matters. Sometimes we want to cut out the middle man, don't sugar coat anything and get to the point. However, sometimes we need the richness and deep perspectives that require taking that much needed time that seems like forever.
As I continue my education I/we will definitely remember this and many other blogs that you have written that are vital in our growth.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate this blog post because it is something I struggled with many of my papers. Before taking this Shakespeare Survey class, I used to simply regurgitate the plot into my paper without fully examining it. After Dr. Rich's advice to read this blog post, I truly learned what it means to digest the text and the quotes from a body of work. In addition many of the teacher and professors on my academic journey have never challenged me to be "deep" with my papers. Being Dr. Rich was the first professor to require this task, I was a bit apprehensive but soon realized how cohesive and thorough my paper become after applying this technique. With each and every paper I submitted I revised It multiple times until each quote was "digested" instead of simply being placed into the paper. All in all, I was positively changed as a writer and student. Throughout this journey I also learned that many times, when someone as experienced as Dr. Rich is advising you to change something about your writing style, YOU SHOULD PROBABLY LISTEN!
In conclusion, I will attach this strategy to my arsenal of strategies and incorporate it into my future papers.
- Robin Gill
Dr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteThis post is so appropriate for many of us, and I hope that it is acceptable if I speak for not only myself but for my fellow students as well. Throughout my entire schooling career, I was taught to fill in the gaps, and spaces. As wonderful of an education as I had (which I am forever grateful for), I did not agree with some of the ways that I was taught how to write. Specifically, while focusing on writing an essay, to make it seem not so intimidating, my teachers would teach us to write about content that had nothing to do with the focus of the paper. Segways and distractions are not appropriate when writing a professional college paper. The entire focus of an essay is to write about a specific issue or two that relates back to the original idea of the paper. The focus of the paper is not to mention factors that have nothing to do with the subject matter. This is called Helicoptering. Unfortunately, I have a bad habit of doing this being that it is the way I was taught how to write a paper. I have learned from Shakespeare Survey that that is not the case. Real writing requires focus on the original stream of the paper. This does not mean that the essay has to be boring and strictly mechanical. It can be tastefully mechanical, with life and passion to it! There is nothing worse than a boring, chalky dry paper. It is torture to sit there and read a paper which was just written by someone, because it had to be written. That is similar to cooking a meal because you just need to make it. When I cook, I cook my emotions also. If I am angry, I cook and I use chopping, sauteing, and simmering as an emotional release. The effort is tasted and appreciated. Writing should be the same. When writing, we should put emotions and color into it. The audience who reads the paper will see the hard work and dedication.
Back in grade school, I was taught to learn how to paraphrase and summarize any literature story. I would summarize stories by breaking it down into sections. Or I would paraphrase literary works, paragraph by paragraph. Sometimes when I summarize a literary work and I have to discuss the piece into a five and/or more pages of paper, I tend to summarize every detail possible just to fill up pages. I never saw a problem in paraphrasing because back then that's what teachers always asked for. Today, if I were to summarize a piece of literary work, I probably would not have done it like I was taught back in middle and high school.
ReplyDeleteI now understand why you hate plodding because it does not give a sense of enjoyment to read a piece of literature. I also understand from your point of view that it can be boring and not engaging when words are scribbled down on paper with no meaning. When I read something that is not interesting, I always skim through to find the purpose for what a story is about. If I can not find the purpose for it then I know it is not interesting or worth reading. . I also believe in the perspective of ‘getting to the story’. Words with no meaning does not help or justify the point I would be trying to get across in my work. It would simply be another boring paper that would probably get a grade of a C or a B, if I am lucky. Moving forward I can practice taking a different approach in summarizing and paraphrasing any of my literary work.
Dr. Rich, thank you so much for this insight! Growing up in middle school, I was taught the hamburger method of how to write a paper. First, we must start with the intro/summary to give some substance, then we must deliver the meat, lettuce, and tomato that is our info, and we must finish it off with a conclusion that only restates our point. This method would constantly get drilled into our brain until I firmly believed this was the correct and ONLY way in writing papers. Once I hit college, writing papers would freak me out because here is where I was told to write papers differently than what was previously instilled all throughout my school life. I truly didn’t know the first thing about writing a paper without incorporating its summary. Dr. Rich, you have truly opened the doors for me when it comes to writing my papers. When I first had you back in Shakespeare, writing our first paper was nerve wrecking for me. I didn’t know how to pick out one paperclip and focus on just that one. As time went on, it became easier and I felt wiser. Having you currently for Emily Dickinson, I truly enjoyed going full depth with Emily’s poems and being able to read her openly and intently. We were able to pull out so much depth from the same, one poem. I was no longer sitting here with a one-sided left-brain track. I truly thank you for allowing me to think and perceive from so many different perspectives.
ReplyDelete--Angie
Writing papers in school seemed to be always the same generalized design. Write an introduction that has a hook sentence and that ends with a thesis statement. Then have at least 3 body paragraphs and include a conclusion that will sum everything up. Basically, in these papers, you will be trying to put stories into plots while trying to focus on a certain topic on a literary source. The paper would be 90% plot and a 10% subject. People like to focus on the plot than trying to analyze the story presented to them. They will be too busy using the left side of their brain rather than using the right side of their brain and trying to explore other options. In this class after doing a few papers, I learn that you really don’t have to explain a whole story to get your viewpoint around. I learned that if you just focus on your one ‘paper clip’ then you have an engaging paper. It is best to skip the boring details and just go straight to what is really important. But when it comes to a paper that is on a book no one has ever read then how can I show a teacher what I am saying is valid. I guess I can kind of see why certain teachers during my high school time made us summarize a portion of our books during research papers to understand our informative view of things. But adding on lengthy messages with no thought or no intriguing information it is still just going to be boring.
ReplyDeleteThe saying “don’t be thorough, be deep” is almost like the saying I’ve always heard “don’t go fast go far”. I think the pressure of reaching page requirements and word counts cloud our judgement when it comes to what needs to be said and what does not. We as students sometimes get caught up in the fluff and forget than it takes away from the quality of the paper. Dr. Susanna Rich has taught us how to be deep by sharing with us the power of a paperclip; A small tool (idea) that hold together the entire paper. Choosing one idea to focus on and explain from all aspects and direction is much better than focusing on many ideas to only graze across. My first time actually practicing this form of writing a paper was in her class with our comedy interpretation papers. At first it was hard for me to think about the quality of the pages instead of how much I needed to write so I could avoid bringing up separate topics in hopes of filling up the pages. I used to begin all of my papers with summaries or overviews of the topic but I learned that is also just another way to fluff and it does not help explain YOUR topic to the reader only the author’s book. I found that when relishing one topic thoroughly the pages fill themselves and your idea remains the focal point. I am excited to continue to explore this writing mechanism in my other classes.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe teachers I have had in the past have always wanted to get straight to the point in stories. They only wanted the facts, what happened, and then just a tiny bit of asking what the class thought of it. I always figured either the teachers were lazy or they were trying to rush through plays to just get them done with or they did not understand the plays themselves.
ReplyDeleteFor the first time ever I am truly experiencing these pieces of art. No more paraphrasing and plot summaries just timeless literature.
Dr. Rich, This was a bit of a shock to me, I never had a Teacher advocate against a plot setting,I was under the impression that We should all have an Idea of what the story we reading is about.I completely understand that retrieving that information from online sources such as swoomp,does a disservice to the integrity of the story.I personally do not think that there is anything wrong with using some of these resources if you cannot comprehend what the text is saying. I will admit that when i comes to British literature I often get lost and confused. Therefore, I do rely on some of these sites to give me an idea of what the author is trying to say.However, As a scholar it is my responsibly to get an understanding for myself and use my own words by dissecting the text and doing the best that I can to verbalize what I understood from the text.
ReplyDeleteNajeeah
I totally agree with you! This is the first time I am seeing sch thing like that. Moreover, this is so helpful for me to drop down my points.
DeleteI find this interesting because through most of my writing studies experiences, I have been taught to paraphrase and summarize. It becomes difficult because I begin to question what exactly does the teacher want in the summary, and am I including the right aspects? It becomes a battle of what do I believe the important information is to be included, or what will my teacher want in the summary. Not only are they boring to write, taking pieces out because it is quick summary sometimes, I feel, changes the narrative of the writing. Writing summaries or paraphrases can be helpful in some cases, but overall I have never found them helpful in my journey of English studies. I find myself going back to the piece I summarized to look through the entire things anyway. It’s an assignment that I have always dreaded and just wanted to get it over with. I do find annotating the entire piece more helpful than summarizing. I am able to pick out certain points in the text that I feel are important, and pick out the ideas that I want to write about. I feel it helps organize my ideas for when I begin writing my draft of a paper. Annotating may not work for every paper, and can be a tedious task. When writing something more creative, I force myself to stay away from the academic status quo of annotating and summarizing. It is not an easy task since that is what I have been taught and told to do for years.
ReplyDeleteThis blog post is really refreshing to me. It showed me a new idea that I never thought about before. After reading this blog post, the more I think deeper into it, the more I realize that paraphrasing and summarize literature is unarguably a bad way to digest a piece of literature. Currently I'm taking Poetry and Creative Writing, both classes require creativity and I am so grateful that I have learned many new concepts in writing and reading throughout the classes. There is really no such thing as "the right way" to interpret literature or "the correct way" to jot down your thoughts and turn it into a piece of work. Restraining creativity should not be advocated in college.
ReplyDeleteReply
I understand where this blog is coming from. But it is a hard pill to swallow. I have been in school for years and years and I will say with certainty that you are the first professor to ever state these words to me. Since grade school, it’s what we’ve been taught. Read, summarize. It’s what I know how to do. In fact, summarizing in a sentence or 2 as you mentioned Netflix does, seems hard. What do you include, what do you keep out? For example, in the case of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, how would I explain the plot without important details of what happens to each child inside the factory? Let’s try.
ReplyDeleteA man sends out five golden tickets in candy bars for children to find so they may visit his candy factory. That’s the gist right? In a summary as I know, I would include maybe a background of Charlie and his poverty. Or I would state that things go terribly wrong in the factory and one by one each child fizzes out. But now looking back, I guess that ruins the story for those who haven’t seen it, doesn’t it?
Dr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteWow! I am shocked that a professor is actually telling students to write about what is interesting to them about a piece of literature. Since elementary school, we have all, as students, been taught: read and summarize, and how to do it efficiently for the sake of standardized testing. I feel that by allowing students to "free-write" can go either when receiving their papers. In one way you probably, most likely, do not get boring papers and the students are allowed to interpret the literature based on their own life experience. However, on the other hand, and I am speaking from current experience, this way of writing is very difficult because it is so different from what we, as students, are use to doing and also because it does give a clear idea on what the professor is looking for in these papers.
-Stacy
Dr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteI have been in school for quite some time now, and every single one of my professors assigns the same writing assignment for an essay. Usually the assignment and topic is chosen for you, so it becomes redundant over the years, because let’s face it, most of the college students have been in school for quite some years, and this isn’t their first rodeo. I have been to community college, a four-year university, and a second four-year university until I found the right school for me. In those three different forms of college, I have been assigned countless essays, as I mentioned before, that have become redundant, and thus, I have become good at. I know what the professors are looking for because each of them have assigned the same thing over and over again, just with a different story to read and respond to.
I decided to read the blog posts before writing my paper because I was having some trouble, because this form of a paper is not the norm, and out of my comfort zone. It’s hard to break the vicious cycle you were so used to doing papers a certain way. I chose my paper topic awhile ago, but I have run into the issue of just how to write this paper. The form of this paper is not the form that I am used to, and accustomed to doing. This paper is asking so much more of me, and is basically asking for my input on this play. This blog post has shed some light on this form of a paper, and has given me the motivation to begin working on my first two page rough draft.
Victoria Savino
Hello Dr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteThis is a very difficult thing to do, but not impossible. Throughout my schooling years, I have always been taught by my teachers to paraphrase or summarize a story, play, etc. in my paper because the audience needs to understand what is being discusses. However, you are the first professor who is actually against the idea of paraphrasing because like you said, it seems like the writer has to carry the burden of having to bring the whole story in a few pages. It is hard, I will admit, to break a habit that I have not only been taught by many teachers and professors but also a habit that I have been doing for many years now. However, it is a habit and just like summarizing has become the norm for me, not summarizing and writing straight to the point will become the norm. Habits can be created and broken, and in a similar fashion, my writing style can be altered if I am really determined to make myself a better writer. Thank you for the advice, Dr. Rich. It really does help!
I like the idea of both paraphrasing AND interpreting the text my own way. I do enjoy learning and being able to say what the story is about, because its just something that I was able to do well, and once I was able to get that down pat, it gave me a little bit of confidence. To me, it shows that "yeah, I did read this! I do know what it is about!" Writing this out, it does sound lame and boring, I will admit, but it does make me happy that I know I can do it.
ReplyDeleteHowever, being able to interpret things such as Shakespeare, gives me an even bigger form of happiness. This is some higher-level thinking, in my opinion. Thinking outside the box is something that I struggled with the most. It might have been because I never was exposed to it in high school, and I was taught just to say what the story was about. Even in the honors English classes I took in high school asked us to just spit back the same information over and over again, paraphrasing here and there. I was never really asked to give meaning to texts, rarely even my own opinion! It was what the teacher said, and that's that, and if you can't follow their word, then oh well...you fail.
I do in fact still struggle with interpreting things my own way; even though I know it is my thoughts and they cannot possibly be "wrong", I always feel like I will be judged somehow.
ReplyDeleteDr Rich
I concur, plot itself is often mistaken as important when in reality it is actually incredibly simple. Take Reservoir dogs for an example. The plot can be summed up as simply “Heist goes bad” without leaving any details or nuance. The real elements that make the work be it Shakespeare or something more convention like a Marvel film is not the plot but the characters,themes and other elements. The story is merely the drywall for which the decor and art to be hung on.
I have many times committed the sin of plodding or letting plot take stuff away from the story. I hope to improve though steadily as I write more.
James Patti.
Dr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteIn reading this blog post, I was reminded of the teachers who have misled me and taught me to write papers that only paraphrase, but also of the teachers who have encouraged me to dig deep into the interpretation of story and the beauty that can be found there. I know that the point this blog post is making is valid, but the fact that a strong tendency I have is something I might have to grow out of is a scary thing to confront. I am certainly willing to acknowledge that I have been conditioned to paraphrase. I think the hard part of this topic is the fact that paraphrasing and summarizing makes something boring. So what happens if we throw out these tactics? Then, I am left with only my ideas and interpretations. And I think the fear comes from a lack of confidence that I could fill the space I need to fill without paraphrasing. This lack of confidence comes from certain teachers who I remember well, who were too lazy to teach students to dig deep, instead teaching me and my classmates to rephrase someone else ideas.
Thankfully, I have had teachers who have encouraged me to be original. I liked that you mentioned the problem of plodding even in creative writing. I remember one teacher I had in eighth grade who was such an encouragement to me. She showed me that while I was writing my creative writing short stories for her, the stories should not be so focused on the plot. The plot could move the story forward, but being so stuck in the play by play of events would not move the characters forward. She encouraged me to focus on dialogue and symbolism, to figure out what I wanted to say and to create situations for the characters to express their feelings. This teacher taught me not to plod along, but to dig deeply. After having almost lost this originality, I am so glad to be rediscovering this skill in this class.
-Kathleen Peregrin
Dr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteeven though I am not a teacher I understand your pain when a student (could be me haha) describes the whole story (that of course you have already memorized) on a paper, and thanks to you I aspire to never do that to one of my teachers ever again!I admit that it will be hard to accomplish such thing when paraphrasing and summarizing has been put into my brain for as long as I can remember. what saddens me is that I was hardly ever told to make up my own meaning of something instead of saying "this is what I think such and such meant by this passage", because like you told us in class we will NEVER know what the author truly meant unless we ask them face to face. I one read a passage by Roland Barthes that said "the reader holds all the meaning therefore there are no right or wrong interpretations, the author merely holds the pen while the reader has all the power", and he is totally right.I aspire to make the stories I read mine and never try to guess what the author tried to say! it is impossible.
arianni rodriguez
10/28/19
Dr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteThis was my favorite point;
"They pander to our addictions to games and social media—get this school assignment over-with, so I can get back to my phone." It was a very mindful point to say because I can see it being true! Instead of taking in the homework assignment as deep as we should, our end goal is to just get it over with when that isn't even the purpose of the homework or any assignment. The assignment is to make you better, smarter, deeper. What's the rush for? To go back to what you do every.single.minute anyway? Loved that point.
Another point I also liked is how being thorough can sometimes be a boring task! Not only to write but to read and it's just overall not fair for both parties. However, how can I balance being deep and not boring? Is something that is deep automatically fun? I can see that being a belief. Regardless, how do I even know if I'm being deep? Well I know that taking away the useless breakfast in bed narrative where I avoid "getting to the story" would be a road block to deep writing. How else though? Putting genuine emotions, technicalities and deep understanding into one's paper?
I ask this because it's so important, at least for me, to be the best teacher I can be someday. Therefore, I want to know what it's like to be deep. I want to know what it's like to have a teacher not dread reading my paper. I want to know how to avoid going back to the revision board. Not for any ego boosting purposes but because someday I will have students of my own and I want them to not be thorough but deep.
Honest and important blog! Fruits I am taking for the rest of my life!
Like my theatre teacher says, when asking for plot she doesn't want the play-by-play, she's already seen it. She wants just a two sentence summary. This is the same for writing. The teacher has already read the play/story/novel, etc. why should they have to read the same thing in different words? They've already read what you read, they want your interpretations or your thoughts on the reading.
ReplyDeleteDr.Rich, I agree with your thoughts on Plots and Summaries.If the story is good and worth reading it will show in your paper. I do believe that some background is necessary. Similar to salt you need just a little to embrace the taste of the food, and too much will ruin the dish. Clearly as a Teacher you already have insight as to what we are writing about in the first place. Unfortunately, writers make this mistake all the time,myself included. However,interpretation is what matters. Although it does feel like most of my teachers disregard my interpretation and what to know from their own perspective. So there is a bit of a struggle but i totally get it, less is more and creativity will lessen the blow of boring paper.
ReplyDeleteNajeeah
I completely agree. So many times we are taught that paraphrasing is the right way to do things so that we understand what a story is about however this emilinates the artistry of the entire work. The author took the time to write poetry and lyrics, who are we to ruin that by summarizing their messages. We can analyze a line or verse without cutting out the language. All through life, I have been told that I need to paraphrase and summarize in order to succeed and one of my biggest struggles in Shakespeare survey has been trying to break that habit. Summarizing takes away the joy and beauty!
ReplyDeleteEdward Wagner
Throughout this semester I have realized how conditioned we are to summarize and paraphrase in our writing. Throughout elementary school and high school we are taught to have an introduction, 3 body paragraphs, and a conclusion and throughout that entire essay there was paraphrasing and summarizing. Recently throughout college I have realized that everyone’s expectation of a written assignment is different. When I am asked to digest and dig deeper into the literature we are writing about, it can be challenging for me because it is something I have never really done before. I have grown accustomed to adding in extra details and background information which would include summarizing and paraphrasing, and this is the type of writing Dr. Rich calls “Plod”. When “cutting to the chase” or “getting to the point” I sometimes feel as if I will run out of things to say. Adding in the extra details and background information helps the writer create a detailed essay and helps the reader have a better understanding of what they are reading. Learning how to dig deeper and pull away from the “plod” is less boring and allows the reader and writer to connect to the literature.
ReplyDeleteJacqueline Perez
I really think this post is helpful to not only people who want to write to entertain, but for those who want to write scholarly as well. We have to understand that teachers who assign us work know the source material as well, and reiterating what happens during the story to them is simply saying "Look! I read it! Give me credit!" and that's just not what writing should be about.
ReplyDeleteIf that is what teachers wanted from students than every paper would read the same, and that would be painfully boring to get through.
Greetings Dr. Rich and fellow classmates,
ReplyDeleteHow ridiculous is it that many of us, although college students, have never had to think outside the text, and analyze something other than plot? It's even more outrageous that I was terrified to write in this class, because we were expected to do something different! Thank you for redirecting the minds of the class, and helping us critically review Shakespeare through a different lens. I really appreciate the line, "Don't be thorough, be deep!" That is exactly the different perspective I am referring to. Some may think thorough is the same as being deep, but that is not true. They may have the same workload, but its about taking a step back, and approaching it in a better, more personal way.
Thanks,
Ellen B.
Dr. Rich
ReplyDeleteFirst and foremost, I love the fact that you used the metaphor "We don’t have to eat the whole wedding cake to savor our one (or two) slices." From that sentences alone, I can already interpret what this post is about. It also helps give me such a better understanding of what you are trying to say. Compare anything to food, and you have my full attention.
I can admit, I have been one of those students who may have read a plot summary instead of reading the story myself, just to get an assignment over with. But, I have also learned that the people who write these summaries often have different interpretations of the story. Then I wonder, if I had bothered to read the story myself, would I interpret it the same way they did? I think not.
We often write believing that we're giving our teachers what they want, but, sometimes, just because it is what they want, doesn't always mean it's what's right. How can I take all the amazing details of a story and sum it into one small paper? Also, why would I want to give the whole story away when the goal is to read it and interpret it for yourself? We are better off just giving a taste of it instead.
As a student, I thought that being able to hone the skill of paraphrasing or summarizing a story would make me the genius of the class, and everyone would come running to me when they need help with something. Unfortunately, that was never the case (because people would often avoid me regardless, hahaha).
ReplyDeleteIn all seriousness, when it came time for written tests, exams, and essays, being able to paraphrase or summarize texts (especially poetry) would never do me any good. It would never do me any good because I would not understand the text. What good would being able to tell the story of the text (or what it was about) without actually comprehending it? I would not understand any of the themes that were important, any significance of any literary devices used...nothing.
What would all of this do for when I become a teacher? How will I get my kids to understand what we are trying to go over? They need to be engaged somehow. If they are not engaged, and if they are not asked the hard-hitting questions--questions that require them to think. I now start to design my lessons into doing anything but that. Of course, I do want them to be able to paraphrase to a degree so that they could locate and understand where some of the important parts take place, but that is pretty much it. I like to design my lessons, especially exams, all according to interpretation ad not just regurgitating nonsense.
In all of my previous classes, my professors have taught us to do paraphrasing rather than doing translation word for word. Their purpose was to make us understand the main idea of what the literature piece is all about. So, throughout my high school and college life, I have been doing paraphrasing. This is now creating a problem for me because in Kean University, the professors want the students to do translation word for word. Additionally, the professor wanted us to go deeper and deeper into the meaning of each word. Moreover, the professor wanted us to put the author thought about the literature work rather than our opinion. In high school and in college, I was always thought to write about what my opinion is about the literature work rather than what author thoughts are in the literature work and while writing the literature work. Additionally, I was never taught to learn and understand each phrase of literature work word for word. English is my second language and studying literature is very hard for me. Furthermore, reading literature work was becoming harder because all of a sudden the pressure of reading literature correctly was increasing. However, now it has been a while of me reading literature; therefore, when I read each word of literature work and try to find the emotions and meaning hiding in those words, literature has become easy for me. I am very lucky to have a professor like you, who can guide us how to read and understand literature work in an effective way.
ReplyDeleteAccording to psychologists, it is perfectly acceptable to understand the behavior of the patient, but not excuse it. This helps them to research in the right direction - what caused this person to think in this particular way? How did they end up like this? In what ways can I not fix them - but help them to heal, to grow, be the best that they can be, and to be a better person? Victims of abuse can testify to this type of approach if they were lucky enough to get evaluated - or some refer to it as getting their brains picked at. This makes sense if you really think about it. Their situation from the way that the victim describes it is picked apart little by little, and this part takes time to do. Mistakes are made while the writing process takes place. Rants, tangons, and segways need to be edited and cut out to get to the real meat of the problem. Why is the victim procrastinating? Then, at a certain point, the doctor and the patient make an agreement that a change needs to happen - a type of editing if you will. This is what us, as writers, authors, readers, students, teachers, and audiences - we are human. We make mistakes. Here comes the shocking part...we are allowed! We have the right to be wrong sometimes. In fact, it is good to be wrong and fail once and a while to learn from our mistakes. Then, and only then, will we shine brightly.
ReplyDeleteLexie Grell
For several years, I wrote my essays in one particular way up until I took this class. Most of my essays contained some sort of summary or paraphrase in order to meet the word or page count. It was nonsensical and repetitive information yet I was still given a good grade for it. I feel like most educators and students are stuck in this bubble on how to write in one particular way, which is exactly the situation I was in before this semester. Adjusting to the paper clip method was hard enough but to not summarize or paraphrase was almost as difficult. My favorite sentence from this blog is “It’s substituting a false sense of thoroughness for depth and originality of thought.” I believe this to be true. I feel as if summarizing the story in an essay does give me a false sense of thoroughness and it makes me feel like I know when I’m talking about despite the fact that I’m merely giving a summary. It’s something that I’m used to doing that I never really realized how redundant and useless the information is. It doesn’t actually do anything for me or for the person reading my essay, especially if they know what my topic is.
ReplyDeleteDr. Rich,
ReplyDeleteEvery teacher, since the beginning of writing papers in elementary school, has taught us subconsciously to write this-then-that-then-this. Especially when referencing a novel or poem, even in college, teachers ask what the author means or what is the theme and the easiest way out of this is to briefly mention the theme and then insert some quotes so that the paper can be done with. It is a boring process and most times the prompt for the writing is boring. It usually does not utilize the students own thoughts on the book, but what they were “supposed” to interpret from it and if their interpretation does not match the teachers then most times our grades reflect that. This causes a fear or frustration in including our own thoughts because it does not fit the structure of what the teacher expects. This is what I enjoy about this class, it is very different than what we are taught (and it does not appear to be good teaching). I enjoy the idea of writing from my own thoughts instead of trying to envision what my teacher would write or wants me to write. This post helps me remember to get right to the point and if I need to explain further on a quote or section of the book, I can, without explaining everything that has happened up to the point of the quote. Since we are used to reading summaries and trying to get to the “point” of the writing, that is what we, as students, do when we are writing our own works.
Janaya- ENG3215*4
Wow, Dr. Rich! You have yet to leave a stone unturned regarding your words. Welp, my story is straightforward. From grade school up to now, I never learn the way that you choose to teach. Now is a good thing or bad? I guess it’s the way one would perceive it. But let’s say Neither. It’s only an observation that professional teachers and professors teach a little different than the other.
ReplyDeleteSome basic (plot) and others may be unorthodox (plod). You know teaching outside the box. Going (educating) against the grain for lack of better words. Coloring (teaching) outside the lines and on and on. Or how about merely breaking all the rules.
However, the truth of the matter, I am capable of being taught “plot” and “plod” and still result in my creative voice. But, but, but, I guess it would kind of cool to break the mold, the traditional ways of teaching and cross over from thorough to deep. Then again, what do I know? I’ve also been condition and taught to eat Breakfast-at-the-table.
In this class Dr.Rich breaks the method that was taught to me by previous English teachers. She doesn't care for the summary and the order of the sequence of events. She tells us that it bores the reader and they quickly lose interest and shes right. A reader is someone who once loses connection it quickly falls down. A writer must maintain the reader's mind while they write. This connects with the paperclip blog. The paperclip is the whole story but what makes it is important. She teaches us that we must break away from the original form of writing and write in a new way. A way that will engage the reader and the writer will enjoy writing it. A writer must enjoy writing thier work or what is the overall point of the writer than? A writer enjoys thier work and they must make sure they dont drift off because one drift off and the reader is gone. Dr.Rich tells us this in our class and it is something I use today in her class and for any assignment I write.
ReplyDeleteJoe Menocal
ENG 3215 04
While reading this blog post I can’t help but be thrown back into high school and the first few years of college. English is so arbitrary, however, teachers always have such strict rules. I guess the rules were put on place to give structure but then it leaves little room to imagine. One quote from this blog post that stuck out to me was,“Paraphrasing and summarizing have been two of the forms of punishment” I really agree with this. I never understood why we had to do it, “summarizing the first chapter” I hated that when I was a kid I would always write too much and then eventually I gave up. I love reading but writing became such a chore and over the years I have resented it more and more. I love the idea of diving deep into the words and the writing; I never had much of an opportunity to do it and it has been difficult. I am not gonna lie.
ReplyDeleteAlyssa Ortiz
Through your class and these blogposts I have learned to not paraphrase. I do admit, I get stuck at times when trying to come up with creative ways to analyze a text, so I just jump right back to paraphrasing because it is what I was taught in middle and high school. I realize now how exhausting it must be to read several papers that say the same exact thing about the same story because they are all paraphrasing for the majority of it. Although I still get stuck, I try and force myself out of paraphrasing so that I can create an essay that I am truly proud to submit.
ReplyDelete-
Jessica DeLuca
The idea of paraphrasing has been conditioned into my head ever since I was a child. The fact that I have not been allowed to relish the text in a way that makes me happy is something that I wish i could have instilled into my brain a lot sooner. In turn, it makes me sad to hear that people do not believe in teaching students to enjoy the text they are reading by forming their own opinions of it. This is something that I know without a doubt will be implemented into my classroom when I am teaching theatre in the future.
ReplyDeleteDavid Rivera, Jr.
This might be the most valuable article on this blog that I have read yet.
ReplyDeleteI struggle so much to let go of plot summary. I once thought that plot was paramount, and that knowing what happens is the key to understanding a work, be it a novel or a play or a television show.
But I have come to understand that it is how the work happens that is important. It is the care and attention to detail that exists within the stitches, the fine minutia that make up the DNA of the work and show what it's really made of. A sensational plot can entertain a wide audience, but critical thinkers can really appreciate the extrapolation upon new ideas derived from a deep and close reading of the details of a work.
This is a method by which I intend to savor the media I consume from here on out.
-Liam