Good Readers Good Writers

Based on his argument using a piece of story from his past, the writer conceptually supported his explanatory point of views on how skills can be developed with a passion of understanding the writer’s intention. I believe that the writer of this article addressed fundamental thoughts that should be useful in the process of reading as a writer, and on how to become a better writer.

The assigned reading of “Good Readers and Good Writers” by Vladimir Nabokov probes the subject that is the necessary attributes an individual must have in order for them to be successful readers and writers of literature. A list of ten rules is then stated in the essay and sets them as the baseline commandments that an individual must follow in order to be some kind of a devoted “good reader”. While the criteria sets the standard for a “good reader” it aligns with that of a good analyzer and can be applied to that sense. For example one of the first pieces of advice states “If one begins with a readymade generalization, one begins at the wrong end and travels away from the book before one has started to understand it” (Nabokov 1). If a

Miller asked a question in his text, The Dark Night of the Soul, which is asked on numerous occasions. ‘What might the Literate Arts be good for?’ Miller gives situations and reasons why we could say the Literate Arts are useless in today’s world. What might the Literate Arts be good for? I ask this question a lot nowadays too. When I go for an English class or see literary books, the question creeps into my mind unconsciously. In this modern world ‘reading and writing’ have gone downhill and yet people do not seem bothered or affected by it which makes the doubt in literary power even stronger. But after a lot of thinking and research, I have come to realize that literate arts are still needed in

In Francine Prose’ paper, “I know Why the Caged Bird Cannot Read”, Prose describes why many high school student dislike reading literature that the American education system has preached. The premise of her essay is that today’s high school English classes are largely flawed in both material and teaching method. Prose contends that these practices are damaging to the students’ understanding and appreciation of literature. She harshly critiques the quality of required reading in American high schools and suggests a reconsideration of the English curriculum. She challenges the audience to acknowledge the curriculum’s impact on high school students and urges the audience to consider how it may addressed. Prose crafts her argument by using an appeal to logos, asking rhetorical questions and employing negative connotation.

In his essay, Rodriguez shows all four characteristics of expressive writing which are self-definition, emotional responses, the expression of values, and subjective language. Rodriguez defines himself as someone who struggles with the validity of reading and learning to read. He states books were “unquestioned”. Rodriguez asked, “What was the connection between reading and learning? (172)? “Did one learn something only by reading it .“(172) He was made to think he should value books as a friend when he found reading a “chore”. Still, he values the opinion of others and “basked in the praise” by reading for academic approval. His narration of learning to enjoy reading is an emotional roller coaster from the loneliness of reading to the pleasurable joy he learned through experience. Thus the title of the book makes sense,

She does not understand why the older and well-known authors are not being read in high school. Prose uses a personal experience from her son’s sophomore English class. He had to read a “weeper and former bestseller by Judith Guest” (424), about a dysfunctional family dealing with a teenage son’s suicide attempt. “No instructor has ever asked my sons to read Alice Munro, who writes so lucidly and beautifully about the hypersensitivity that makes adolescence a hell,”(424). She again mentions books she approves of that should be read in English classes.

My English Literature major has helped me to achieve an outstanding level of appreciation, enjoyment, and knowledge of both American and British Literature. As a high school AP English student, I struggled through great works like Hamlet and To the Lighthouse. My teacher’s daily lectures (there was no such thing as class discussion) taught me merely to interpret the works as critics had in the past. I did not enjoy the reading or writing process. As a freshman at Loras, I was enrolled in the Critical Writing: Poetry class. For the first time since grade school, my writing ability was praised and the sharing of my ideas was encouraged by an enthusiastic and nurturing professor. Despite the difficulty of poetry, I enjoyed reading it.

How to Read Literature Like a Professor: A Lively and Entertaining Guide to Reading Between the Lines by Thomas C. Foster is a book that explains there is more to literature than just a few words on a paper or a few pages in a book. Thomas Foster’s book portrays a relatable message to a wide based audience. This book is relatable for two reasons, the way it is written and the examples it uses. The book is written in a conversational manner, as if the reader was in a group discussion about books and writing. As for the examples, they are informative, descriptive, relative, and entertaining.

The audience in this literacy narrative essay is widespread because people from different social-cultural groups might be interested, but most importantly people from upper-middle class. Alexie's purpose is to express how anyone don't need to be affluent to learn. He expresses his point well in the literacy narrative essay and his tone is inspirational because he uses positive words such as “loved”, “bright eyes” and “lucky” to give an inspirational message to the reader. Alexie’s main idea in the literacy narrative essay “The Joy of Reading and Writing”: Superman and Me is how Alexie used his own personal experiences to express his point of view, about his love of reading. He learns to read with a superman comic book for the first time when

In literary education, from childhood to maturity, individuals are taught how to write not to improve themselves as critical thinkers, but to fulfill the requirements given to them in a prompt. Whether to analyze or argue, this form of writing has led to a cease of literary improvement in students today, making many question the effectiveness of writing classes. Mike Bunns, in his article “To Read like a Writer”, explores this topic and stresses the necessity for young readers to critically examine the author’s choices in order to improve their own pieces of work. Bunns effectively argues to his audience of college students that improved comprehension comes from focusing on the rhetorical choices authors decide to make in their compositions by tying personal narratives with repetitive questioning throughout his article.

Dostoevsky’s believes in existentialism, and the idea that individual freedom is essential to the development of the mind (Copleston 165). He speaks through his characters by presenting them as “continually defeated as a result of their choices” ( “Existentialism”). Though Raskolnikov is allowed to make his own decisions he ended up making the wrong ones. He is forced to face his consequences of the murders he committed. Dostoevsky’s blend of philosophy with the novel allows

Imagination is important to make a good reader, but he argues that you need to have imagination but it needs to remain impersonal. The reader can enjoy, but must know when to curb their imagination. In this form of reading the reader is almost always having to restrain themselves. Nabokov said earlier that after closely studying the world that the author created the reader can then analyze connections to other worlds and branches of knowledge. These are all valid points that he chooses to argue, but what Nabokov fails to see is that some of the best connections are made as an impulse on a first read. These valuable pieces of information could be lost during one of the many rereads that Nabokov suggests. The line also begins to blur when Nabokov refers to “other branches of knowledge”. It is easy to assume he means that we can draw from the ideas of other authors. But what makes it okay to connect to other authors and not your own thoughts? A good reader can receive the same, if not more, benefits if they are able to make connections personally with the text than connecting to other

Over the past month, we have been studying the concept of reading and writing in different communities. To assess this, we have read two different texts. Richard Rodriguez’s the achievement of desire”, from his autobiography “Hunger of Memory”; and Lucille McCarthy’s “A Stranger in Strange Lands: A College Student Writing across the Curriculum” from “Research in the Teaching of English”. Both answer key questions regarding what it takes to become a great reader and writer, however, from the reading that I have done, each one only answers one part of the question. Rodriguez’s main focus is in the aspect of reading, whereas McCarthy mainly focuses on the writing portion. Both do a decent job of analyzing and putting forth a view of how they believe a person can best perform in these environments. This then allows us to use their concepts and create our own version, based on their points of view. But why should we care? Most people at this level of academia will have developed a system of writing that works for them, and will have a difficult time breaking from it if they’re process doesn’t meet the criteria that Rodriguez, and McCarthy put forth. The reason it’s so important is because of implications these ideas have. Both authors put forth concepts that are indirectly related to one another and that are highly beneficial to all who will apply them. They will force you to conform to new environments in order to succeed, this in turn will make you more

Through Raskolnikov’s exemplification of the impracticality of this principle\, Dostoevsky makes his greatest point in Crime and Punishment. His commentary on the subject seeks to discredit the theory in the circumstance of an individual “superman” by displaying Raskolnikov as a character who is difficult for readers to identify with because of his inanity. Even Raskolnikov’s name is a symbol of nihilistic ideas, the word “raskol” meaning schism in Russian, illustrating the shift from an older school of thought (social utopianism) to a darker philosophy: nihilism and utilitarianism. Raskolnikov seems to fluctuate back and forth between the two philosophies, acting on one and then mentally chastising himself for it, immediately and almost erratically changing his mind. This symbolizes the more human side of him struggling

The author showed his opinion on the structure of the society, social norms and beliefs. He expressed his disagreement with “The Extraordinary Man Theory”. He told the audience that all people have feelings and emotions and cannot rely only on logic and calculations. People cannot hurt others and go unpunished. The ending of the novel helped to strengthen his ideas and convictions. In the end, everyone in the novel received the deserved punishment assigned either by the law or by fate. Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov realized that their actions were wrong and contradicted to the all social norms. They recognized that they were not extraordinary men. Dostoevsky made this novel very educative and filled with morality. It is great for people of all times and generations. It reveals what is good and wrong; it teaches how to be a