I'll start off with Noden, since that's what insisted my blog title. Chapter 6: The Artist's Special Effects really got me thinking about my own writing. I write on the fly, and there are many times where I want to portray a distinct mood, tone, thought. I want the reader to really truly understand a sentence the way that I meant for them to understand it-and sometimes you just have to chuck the grammar conventions that you're hung up on and go with your heart. As Noden says, "good sentences don't always follow conventions...[special effects] help create meanings that otherwise couldn't be expressed.
Now back to Chapter 5: Advanced Techniques. I'll start off by saying that some of the "chunks" that Noden defines are indeed advanced. For example, Chunk #3 deals with using run ons within your writing to create certain meanings. Now, obviously this supports what I just finished saying about conventions. HOWEVER, this isn't a technique that I'd find easy to teach a high school class. Students are taught for years and years that run on sentences are bad, that they need to separate lengthy sentences with the appropriate punctuation. How can we then say, "but sometimes it's okay." we can't. This technique is only effective for a writer who knows the conventions, has exhausted every other possibility, and then decides a run on sentence is appropriate. A high school student is not, in my opinion, an advanced enough writer to be able to decided when to follow and not follow convention. That's for the big dogs. Teach yours students the conventions, first; later they can learn to rule break.
Chunk #1 deals with noun collages and Chunk #2 with mixed collages. Of the two, I prefer the latter. In the examples Noden provided, I found the use of noun collages to be overwhelming. The authors are on imagery overload and the reader can't catch up. Detail and specifics are great, but moderation is also healthy. Mixed collages, in contrast, utilize variety and aren't as repetitive.
In Chunk #4, Noden discusses the power of describing invisible objects. I do this in my own writing - use "no" to show what a character or setting lacks - but I never realized I was utilizing a literary technique :) I love the examples Noden uses; the use of "no" is just as powerful and telling as the description of visible, animate objects and characters. I immediately thought of a presentation I did on my trips to Haiti. I started out by challenging the audience with this sentence: "imagine a world with no clean water, no ready and available food, no functioning and supplied hospitals, no way out." Of course, the reason I employ this method of introduction is because it immediately gets my audience thinking about what they have and what the Haitians do not. It is such a powerful visual-even though I'm describing invisible things. Crazy, huh?
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Make it Memorable.
I finally realized that the reason I enjoy Anderson so much is because he helps me understand grammar in a way I never have. He doesn't simply provide a definition-he gives a textbook definition, a simple definition, an example lesson, and a visual scaffold. I have 4 different ways of understanding a concept!
Anyway, after this weeks reading it dawned on me that I remember learning that using adjectives were important for enhancing a sentence. Buy I don't remember being taught how to correctly use adjectives, or even how different grammatical concepts can be used to help enhance sentences so that adjectives aren't overused. I have a pretty good vocabulary so I always thought that if I used a few good adjectives here and there my writing would be pretty great. Of course, over the years and certainly in college, I have learned that there is much more to creating beautiful, musical sentences than a good adjective. I now have an excellent understanding of appositives, adverb clauses, and specific nouns and verbs..among other concepts. I use all of these methods in my writing, but I couldn't define them until now. The ability to define the strategies I use to write well give me the ability to teach those strategies and to better utilize them myself.
I appreciate Anderson's use of visual scaffolds especially because I myself am a visual learner. I will understand a concept better after seeing a visual demonstration or example rather than reading a definition.
I really admire the way Anderson taught adverb clauses. I will forever remember that grammar concept because of his relating it to movie and song titles. It is those types of lessons that will engrave knowledge into students minds. We have to make it memorable!
Anyway, after this weeks reading it dawned on me that I remember learning that using adjectives were important for enhancing a sentence. Buy I don't remember being taught how to correctly use adjectives, or even how different grammatical concepts can be used to help enhance sentences so that adjectives aren't overused. I have a pretty good vocabulary so I always thought that if I used a few good adjectives here and there my writing would be pretty great. Of course, over the years and certainly in college, I have learned that there is much more to creating beautiful, musical sentences than a good adjective. I now have an excellent understanding of appositives, adverb clauses, and specific nouns and verbs..among other concepts. I use all of these methods in my writing, but I couldn't define them until now. The ability to define the strategies I use to write well give me the ability to teach those strategies and to better utilize them myself.
I appreciate Anderson's use of visual scaffolds especially because I myself am a visual learner. I will understand a concept better after seeing a visual demonstration or example rather than reading a definition.
I really admire the way Anderson taught adverb clauses. I will forever remember that grammar concept because of his relating it to movie and song titles. It is those types of lessons that will engrave knowledge into students minds. We have to make it memorable!
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Music to my Ears
I'll start with Anderson...
I like the way Anderson explains grammatical concepts..I do. BUT, in this particular reading it dawned on me that maybe Anderson is a bit too complex. I mean, all four of his concepts (Subject-verb, Inflectional endings, Do and Have, and Tense Shifts) relate in some way...so why not just teach them altogether? Now, maybe there is a method to the madness...maybe he thinks it would be too confusing to teach 4 concepts in one lesson, but I think it might be confusing to the students to have to learn 4 different concepts separately. First of all, they have to learn about one concept then move onto another 3. That's a lot of learning. Then, on top of that, they have to remember each one...I think that's difficult for students. Once they move on, the move on. Maybe it would make more sense to teach the concepts according to one another. You could still teach them separately, but instead of moving on at the end of the lesson...tie it in with the next concept, and in each lesson make sure you are incorporating the prior lesson(s).
Now Noden..
I have a thing for good writing. By good writing, I mean words that flow, words thaat allow the reader to have a detialed and clear image in their minds, words that sound like music. I had always assumed that you just had to have raw talent to write like that..you just wrote and SHABAM, there it was. I am pleasantly surprised to now know that there are ways to teach that kind of beautiful writing. Noden explains literal repetition and uses as an example a letter from a lover to a soldier. When I finished reading the letter, I realized that I had goosebumps all over my arms. Not only because of the emotionally captivating topic, but because of the way the lover wrot her heartfelt words. The death of her soldier was not just a death. It was poetic, it made me feel like i was losing him too. I literally felt her pain. Now that is good writing!
Noden discusses how, just like adding some literal repetiton can make words translike and captivating, a sentence without that repetition can be dull and lifeless. So I considered how I would have reacted to the lover's letter had it been written differently. I imagined the letter as a simple narrative. I did this, this happened. Boring. Of course, the story is still sad...a soldier dies and his lover regrets not being able to repay him for his kindness and patience. But my reaction as a reader is infinitely different. I am not moved, I don't have goosebumps, and I will probably forget about the letter in a few minutes. That's a pretty huge difference! This made me think about how our society reacts to and uses quotes. I thought about some of my favorite quotes and why I liked them and remembered them. They're musical! They read poetically, and they are memorable. For example, "those who mind don't matter, and those who matter don't mind." This is an obvious use of literal repetition...and this quote also just happens to be one of the most popular quotes around. I don't think this is a coincidence..most of the quotes we value and are inspired by incorporate some aspect of either literal or grammatical repetition; they are catchy and memorable. Nobody remembers a simple, uninteresting sentence like, "If people mind what you're doing then they shouldn't matter to you, but if a person matters to you then they probably wn't mind what you do." It's wordy and boring.
I also enjoyed reading about periodic sentences and the emphasis Noden places on strong ending sentences. I totally agree...I think it's very easy to forget something you've read, but when the author ends on a strong note, you remember it..it sticks! Noden also discusses how quick cadence or slow cadence in sentences can contribute to its meaning. I had never considered this, but it is so true! If a sentence has a fast pace, and the sentence is about a murderer chasing his vicitm, I am more likely to appropriately imagine that scene in my head.
I like the way Anderson explains grammatical concepts..I do. BUT, in this particular reading it dawned on me that maybe Anderson is a bit too complex. I mean, all four of his concepts (Subject-verb, Inflectional endings, Do and Have, and Tense Shifts) relate in some way...so why not just teach them altogether? Now, maybe there is a method to the madness...maybe he thinks it would be too confusing to teach 4 concepts in one lesson, but I think it might be confusing to the students to have to learn 4 different concepts separately. First of all, they have to learn about one concept then move onto another 3. That's a lot of learning. Then, on top of that, they have to remember each one...I think that's difficult for students. Once they move on, the move on. Maybe it would make more sense to teach the concepts according to one another. You could still teach them separately, but instead of moving on at the end of the lesson...tie it in with the next concept, and in each lesson make sure you are incorporating the prior lesson(s).
Now Noden..
I have a thing for good writing. By good writing, I mean words that flow, words thaat allow the reader to have a detialed and clear image in their minds, words that sound like music. I had always assumed that you just had to have raw talent to write like that..you just wrote and SHABAM, there it was. I am pleasantly surprised to now know that there are ways to teach that kind of beautiful writing. Noden explains literal repetition and uses as an example a letter from a lover to a soldier. When I finished reading the letter, I realized that I had goosebumps all over my arms. Not only because of the emotionally captivating topic, but because of the way the lover wrot her heartfelt words. The death of her soldier was not just a death. It was poetic, it made me feel like i was losing him too. I literally felt her pain. Now that is good writing!
Noden discusses how, just like adding some literal repetiton can make words translike and captivating, a sentence without that repetition can be dull and lifeless. So I considered how I would have reacted to the lover's letter had it been written differently. I imagined the letter as a simple narrative. I did this, this happened. Boring. Of course, the story is still sad...a soldier dies and his lover regrets not being able to repay him for his kindness and patience. But my reaction as a reader is infinitely different. I am not moved, I don't have goosebumps, and I will probably forget about the letter in a few minutes. That's a pretty huge difference! This made me think about how our society reacts to and uses quotes. I thought about some of my favorite quotes and why I liked them and remembered them. They're musical! They read poetically, and they are memorable. For example, "those who mind don't matter, and those who matter don't mind." This is an obvious use of literal repetition...and this quote also just happens to be one of the most popular quotes around. I don't think this is a coincidence..most of the quotes we value and are inspired by incorporate some aspect of either literal or grammatical repetition; they are catchy and memorable. Nobody remembers a simple, uninteresting sentence like, "If people mind what you're doing then they shouldn't matter to you, but if a person matters to you then they probably wn't mind what you do." It's wordy and boring.
I also enjoyed reading about periodic sentences and the emphasis Noden places on strong ending sentences. I totally agree...I think it's very easy to forget something you've read, but when the author ends on a strong note, you remember it..it sticks! Noden also discusses how quick cadence or slow cadence in sentences can contribute to its meaning. I had never considered this, but it is so true! If a sentence has a fast pace, and the sentence is about a murderer chasing his vicitm, I am more likely to appropriately imagine that scene in my head.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
