Fulwiler Response

This is the first of all of the readings that was not hard for me to get through! I'm not sure why, possibly because the individual sections were short and manageable (writing tactic? hmmm). Okay, so I really like Fulwiler's concept of "provocative revision." I enjoy the way that he has his students compose their papers as multiple drafts, not one final product. I especially find his first three of the four points useful. Limiting, for example, is something that I think could help most writers in need of guidance. Fulwiler says that it is completely normal for a first draft to be general and vague, and that is why limiting is a great way to revise that draft. Limiting is basically taking certain points and narrowing in on them. If you write about surfing, you could accomplish this by focusing in on a certain day you went surfing when the waves were exceptionally large. This opens the door to telling the reader how you overcame this obstacle, which allows you to give them information that they wouldn't know otherwise. Adding is also something that I find beneficial when used in the way that Fulwiler describes it. He says that a writer could use the addition of dialogue, internal monologue, or an interview set-up to engage the reader. Using these creative tactics to switch up your writing style can keep your audience interested in the topic, while giving them a different perspective on the situation. Switching, Fulwiler's third point, is another way of showing your topic from another point of view. From switching from first person to third person, you can show the audience an inside as well as an outside view of the situation. However "transforming," which is Fulwiler's final point, does not seem to be as beneficial an idea as the previous ones. He says that a piece of writing, such as a research paper, can be improved by changing the entire type of composition. This means that you could take, for example, a research paper on the stars and turn it into a dialogue about stars. Fulwiler does account for the fact that many professors who give assignments such as this would not be open-minded to this kind of change, but I think his assessment of this issue is an understatement. I think that by "transforming," you are recommending that the writer changes the entire assignment, which I believe would most likely receive a poor grade. The only exception to this would be in a class such as creative writing, or a class in which the teacher has already expressed openness to creative interpretation of assignments. I do support Fulwiler's essay for the most part, and I think he brings up some extremely helpful ways for a tutor to improve a tutee's paper. He discusses many ways in which to help a writer that I would not have necessarily thought of on my own.