( I don't know why when I cut and paste it's not working properly)
Rubenstein writes about Carvers work being recursive nature of revision. As a writer, he enjoys the act of revision more than the act of production (Rubenstein, 40). The revision process gives him a chance to “gradually get into the heart of what the story is about” (Rubenstein, 40)
Most of the time, students fight against the revision process. As a student, I did not really get the “big deal” about revision until I got to college. Then it was a big deal. Actually, I was sick the other day and wrote a midterm for a different Cercone class, gave it a quick once over and sent it off. Later I asked my husband to listen to the paper and I was really disgusted at the style, syntax and even spelling errors—which reminds me, I have to tell him about that.
Rubenstein writes about the differences between the Carver stories “The Bath” and “A Small Good Thing” (which are about the same thing). I am having a tough time finding a transcript of “The Bath”, if you can, please share! I really want to read it. I guess “The Bath” ends where Scotty comes home to take a bath, goes to school the next day and the mother gets a call. The last words of the story are “Is it about Scotty”.
Rubenstein uses the two stories to talk about revision and how much the same story can change through the revision process. For better or worse depending on how you read the story. Rubenstein encourages her add characters or change endings of their works after they tell her “it’s good enough”. She agrees, but says it could be different. (Rubenstein, 47)
As a writer, its important to read, revise, and reread your work over and over. Through this process, it is where one can find the “heart of the story”—“coming to the truth and having the courage to speak it” (Rubenstein, 58) is the powerful position a writer in control of their work can be in.
( I don't know why when I cut and paste it's not working properly)
ReplyDeleteRubenstein writes about Carvers work being recursive nature of revision. As a writer, he enjoys the act of revision more than the act of production (Rubenstein, 40). The revision process gives him a chance to “gradually get into the heart of what the story is about” (Rubenstein, 40)
Most of the time, students fight against the revision process. As a student, I did not really get the “big deal” about revision until I got to college. Then it was a big deal. Actually, I was sick the other day and wrote a midterm for a different Cercone class, gave it a quick once over and sent it off. Later I asked my husband to listen to the paper and I was really disgusted at the style, syntax and even spelling errors—which reminds me, I have to tell him about that.
Rubenstein writes about the differences between the Carver stories “The Bath” and “A Small Good Thing” (which are about the same thing). I am having a tough time finding a transcript of “The Bath”, if you can, please share! I really want to read it. I guess “The Bath” ends where Scotty comes home to take a bath, goes to school the next day and the mother gets a call. The last words of the story are “Is it about Scotty”.
Rubenstein uses the two stories to talk about revision and how much the same story can change through the revision process. For better or worse depending on how you read the story. Rubenstein encourages her add characters or change endings of their works after they tell her “it’s good enough”. She agrees, but says it could be different. (Rubenstein, 47)
As a writer, its important to read, revise, and reread your work over and over. Through this process, it is where one can find the “heart of the story”—“coming to the truth and having the courage to speak it” (Rubenstein, 58) is the powerful position a writer in control of their work can be in.