One of the first things that Joseph Harris mentions about
writing in his novel, Rewriting, is the fact that most pieces of writing
are formed in response to the work of others.
In turn, this makes the act of reading before writing that much more
important. Harris believes that “this
interplay of ideas defines academic writing.”
He talks about what is necessary in the process of rewriting and what
people need to do to turn already written pieces into their own writing, which
includes avoiding plagiarism, documenting sources, citing authorities, and
acknowledging influences. But directly
after he states this, Harris indicates that integrating these steps cut out the
ability to truly delve into another persons writing in order to make it your
own.
As the author describes the
structure of the book, he reveals that chapter 1 will talk about the clearest
form of rewriting, which is the representation of another’s work “in ways that
are both fair to them and useful to your own aims in writing.” I agree with Harris’ idea that there is no
such thing as a completely accurate summary of a piece of writing, because
there will always be a different set of eyes and different combinations of values that either approve or disapprove of someone else’s summary. He later shares that “Coming to Terms” is to
represent another work and to translate it into your own.
After reading both the piece by Andrew
Sullivan and the first two chapters of Joseph Harris’ novel I got the feeling
that they both had the same viewpoint that reading and writing are two very
powerful instruments that people should use more often to communicate, while
also becoming more aware of what is surrounding them.
It sounds like you understand the main parts of Harris' arguments so far, and the cruciality of reading before rewriting, as well as the struggle of writing creatively and personally about another authors' work without discrediting them. You also made a good connection between Sullivan and Harris about the power of reading and writing.
ReplyDelete