As a writer I have always been taught that grammar,
punctuation, and spelling are what makes a paper great. However, I was always
confused with this concept. I have always loved reading, and I noticed that in
many books, or other pieces of literature, often the grammar was not correct in
order to emphasize the voice of the author, or the specific speech of a
character. The punctuation was always very confusing. It seemed like there were
exceptions for everything, and no punctuation had a concrete definition. I
understood that a period completed a sentence, but when it came to commas I had
not the slightest clue what was correct or incorrect, and ultimately it just
took a great amount of practice and becoming familiar with the little guys.
I noticed that words were occasionally misspelled, although with spell check these
days spelling no longer really concerns me. After all of this being said, I
actually liked writing papers. I thought it was rather cool how stories would
just piece themselves together in my mind, and then I would end up with, what I
thought was, a brilliant piece of work with all sorts of characters, a unique
setting, and an important theme. However, it was always a struggle for me to
communicate my ideas on to paper, and I truly dreaded the process of
transferring my sophisticated ideas on to paper, but once I had finished I
enjoyed the results.
Goodman’s article “Calming the inner critic and getting
to Work” is something that I wish I would have read a long time ago. I feel
like I’m confessing at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting when I say that I have
struggled with the inner critic for as long as I can remember. The source of my
long hours writing papers came from the fact that I honestly was so caught up
with what each paragraph, sentence, and word would come across as to the
teacher. Would he or she consider it grammatically correct? Did my sentence
have enough detail? Was the format of it correct? Should I rearrange where this
or that goes? Where was I even going with this long and drawn out statement? I
constantly battled with these questions until I got so frustrated I just needed
to quit. After reading Goodman’s ideas, and possibly the simple fact that I am
writing for a blog, and my teacher is awesome and doesn’t worry about
grammar, I feel every word flows so easily. It is almost as if I am carrying on
a conversation with myself that has no roadblocks or random dead ends. I am
sure all of these things play a part in my new found success when it comes to
writing, but I can’t help but think that it is also the fact that I have come
to the realization that writing is simply a form of communication. I
communicate in so many ways with so many people on a daily basis that writing
really shouldn’t be too much different. It is just a process of recording an
individual’s ideas in a way that can be preserved through history and could
potentially become the next generation’s famous piece of literature. Whenever I
have read famous novels in the past I have noticed that each one is unique.
Sure authors sometimes write books that are similar to each other or have the
same concepts and ideas, but it seems that the novels that are most famous are
ones that involve ideas and creativity that no one has ever seen before. They
took a risk when choosing to move past their inner critic and allow their
thoughts to create full form. I believe that as a writer I should follow their
path. I shouldn’t be caught up worrying that my idea will fail miserably or
that no one will like it because a mindset like that can only hold back the
pieces full potential. We as individuals are unique, and I think we should keep
this in mind as we write as well. I believe that Goodman would agree with me.
She talks about how when we have to risk falling on our face when writing, and
isn’t that the same idea as showing people who you truly are? It is a risk no
doubt, and sometimes people don’t accept you but I would say for the most part
people are accepting and appreciate your authenticity. In my mind this carries
over to writing, and how there will be some people who criticize your writing,
but there will also be those people who thoroughly enjoy what you have to say.
As I was typing up my thoughts I took a break, and I
realized that maybe the inner critic isn’t all bad. Isn’t there more than one
side to everything? I thought to myself that the inner critic does have a
purpose, and it is actually quite useful. Sure as we write the inner critic
slows us down immensely, and sometimes even to the point where we completely
give up, but the inner critic is crucial in the revision process. The inner
critic allows us to scrutinize our work, looking for every little detail, and
try to perfect it. It is what takes a good paper, and makes it great. Now it
may seem as though I am contradicting myself and saying two opposite opinions
at once, but what I am really try to say is we need to be able to control our
inner critic. It may take a bit of practice and getting used to, but if we are
able to turn our inner critics on and off, I believe this is what makes a writer
a professional. Professional writers know how to flow through the writing process,
being confident in their ideas and overcoming the inner critic. However, when
they know they have finished and have come to the conclusion that they have no
more to add, they are able to completely change their mindset, turning on their
inner critic, and using it to organize their ideas in a format that is most
understandable to their audience. They catch any grammar or punctuation that
would truly throw off the meaning of a sentence, and they are able to tie their
ideas together with words that are precise and relevant to the paper. In the
past I have always been awful at the revision process due to the fact that I
was just ready to be done with the paper. I had said what I had wanted to, and
I guess I just hoped that it came across to the audience in the way that I had
intended. I also would always tell myself that I would have my teacher or a
friend who was better than me at writing revise my paper, and once again I
would end up being too lazy to actually get help with revising my work. I hope
that I can learn to control my inner critic, and use it to my advantage for the
revision process. I honestly don’t strive to be a professional writer by any means,
but I believe that being able write and revise a paper effectively is a
valuable skill to have for the work field, not to mention getting through
college courses. I think it will just take the ability to focus on my work, and
spend a little extra time looking at it once I am finished. I believe asking
for help is also something that I can use to strengthen the quality of my
writing piece.
These are my opinions on the good and the bad aspects of
the inner critic. Obviously I may be completely wrong in my ideas, but I feel
that the way I have described them should provide support for each argument.
Originally when I started writing I planned on writing to
my college peers. I feel that it is still spoken to them, but I also feel that
I have written it to myself as well.
