Dear Reader,

Writing is a beautiful thing that can be empowering, a great tool for reflection, and

inspire people to positively impact the world, but it is also a tool that can just as easily inspire

people to turn on one another in hate. Throughout the course of this quarter, I have learned in so

many ways how writing is a fluid, dynamic process that can take a variety of forms, but is above

all else, a multi-tool that can be used to address an unknowable number of situations. Going into

this course I knew writing was a broad thing that could be utilized to accomplish a variety of

goals whether they were good or bad or literary or argumentative, but coming out of it now, I see

that it is so much more than that.

The projects we completed throughout this course were particularly insightful in showing

me how writing can be adapted into different situations and the importance of different

perspectives. WP1 in particular was thoroughly engaging although it came with its own

challenges. In translating genres from an academic article to a social media post, I found that the

tradeoff between engagement and effectiveness to be the largest obstacle I faced. My initial

project was colorful and had an eye-catching font, but I feel as though it lacked content and that

the aesthetics of my post detracted from the purpose of it. For my revised version I made a

special effort to dial down the visual aspects and change the font to increase readability, this was

in addition to adding more article specific content such as direct quotes. The revision process

really illustrated how revising is one of the easiest ways to increase the effectiveness of your

writing. Now although the revision process is incredibly valuable, I think it is additionally

valuable to highlight the importance of the first draft, because, just as Anne Lammott said,

“Almost all good writing begins with terrible first efforts. You need to start somewhere. Start by

getting something-anything-down on paper.” (Lammot, 25). Lammot is touching on a really

better, so it turns out that in one way or another, the first draft is actually more valuable than the

final!

Now although I may have learned less from it than from WP1, when it came to WP2,

that's where I had the most fun. WP2 was centered around a discussion regarding writing

conventions and when it was okay to veer away from them as a writer. During the writing

process for WP2, I was conflicted over what genre I really wanted to use to best exemplify the

larger conversation being had. In my first draft I had decided that the scholarly conversation

would best be demonstrated in the genre of a simply informative essay, however after

exchanging drafts with my peers during our writing workshop, I realized that my genre choice

was a subpar decision and that I could have a more engaging time and effective product if I were

to change genres, so that's exactly what I did. My partner for the workshop, Jenny, used the genre

of a dialogue for her draft and I felt inspired to do the same after seeing how effective her genre

choice was. This uncertainty about what genre to use specifically reminded me of how genre

selection is a rhetorical tool in the same way tone selection is. This Idea is articulated well by

Amy Devitt, as she writes that “…genres have the power to help or hurt human interaction, to

ease communication or to deceive, to enable someone to speak or to discourage someone from

saying something different.” (Dirk, 252). Devitt shows us here that the genre you use for your

writing is an important rhetorical decision that should not be taken lightly, which is something

that has become abundantly clear in both WP1 and WP2. In addition to this lesson, I think it is

important to mention that during the process of finding articles for the scholarly conversation I

was able to learn something relating to my goal set at the beginning of the quarter. At the start of

the quarter I had set the goal that I wanted to learn how to properly use commas because I felt
that I used far too many in my writing as a bad habit. Over the course of this project, by virtue of

my question for WP2, I learned that it’s okay to break writing conventions depending on the

rhetorical situation, and that writing is a dynamic process that doesn't have to take just one shape.

Although I didn't necessarily accomplish my goal of decreasing my comma usage, I gained a

better understanding of my goal, which changed how I perceived my “problem” with commas.

Overall WP2 was engaging because of the genre I decided to use, but WP2 did show me

something unique that WP1 didn’t. Because WP2 was centered around a larger “conversation”

being had by academics around the world, I was able to gain a larger perspective on the writing

process. Now when I look at writings of all sorts, I ask myself “what conversation is this adding

to? What question is it responding to? What call to action is it answering? What is the larger

picture?” These are questions I find myself asking now when reading, and I feel as though it’s

because of WP2 that I am asking them.

As a whole, my writing journey this quarter has been eye opening as my idea of what

writing can be used for expanded and my overall perspective widened. The projects we had

during the quarter were both engaging and insightful; WP1 showed me just how useful genres

can be as rhetorical tools to persuade your audience, and WP2 further illustrated this quality of

genres, but left me with something more. WP2 imparted onto me the idea that every writing has

a purpose and is a part of a much larger cause the author is contributing to. After learning all of

this I am excited to see how these perspectives and lessons become part of my writing, because,

according to Kathleen Blake, our experiences in life become part of us, shaping our actions, even

shaping our writing; “As Kathleen Blake Yancey explains it, ‘each writer is a combination of the

collective set of different dimensions and traits and features that make us human’ (52)” (Wardle

and Downs, 12). This idea strikes at the core of what I derived from this course, because
although I learned a variety of valuable and specific lessons as detailed above, I think the nicest

lesson of all of them is that everyone’s writing is unique as everyone themselves is unique. It

might not be the most useful or practical piece of knowledge to have gathered over the course of

several months, but to me it is the kindest and makes me smile.

Sincerely, Jakob Rosales.

Dirk, Kerry. “Navigating Genres.” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, edited by Pavel

Zemliansky and Charles Lowe, Parlor Press, West Lafayette, Indiana, 2010, pp. 249–262.

Lammot, Anne. Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life. New York: Pantheon 1994.

Print.

Wardle, Elizabeth, and Doug Downs. Writing about Writing. Bedford/St. Martin’s, Macmillan

Learning, 2022.