Long title. Whew,kmmmmmmm. Sorry. But I wanted you to know exactly what you were getting into with this post. And I find long titles humorous. (Incidentally, people think I’m funny in college. Isn’t that WEIRD??)
So two weeks ago I turned in my first graded essay of college. Woo. Exciting. Yeah. Here was my thesis: “But although the human consumption of meat is not inherently immoral, the current strain of American food culture with regards to meat production and consumption is, and it must be changed.” I thought it was a good essay. I actually thought it was an excellent essay.
But this was the comment I got back: “You’re still writing, however, in an informal, conversational style. That can be done in first-person essays, but you’ll get dinged for that style in many of the other essays you’ll be asked to write in college. Detach yourself a bit from the argument. Write more formally.”
I got similar comments in high school from AP teachers. “Don’t use first person pronouns” was the most common last year. And every time I get these comments, I absolutely hate it.
I write in a style I would like to read. If I have to skim something in order for it to sink in. it’s not written compellingly. I feel if light sarcasm and conversational tones were more accepted in the academic community, more people would read.
That’s kind of the premise of the speech event “After Dinner Speaking”, or ADS. It’s primarily a humorous speech, but in between the jokes are valid points of discussion about anything the speaker is interested in. Craigslist prostitution, conspicuous consumption, political dialog, you name it. ADS is generally more jokes, less point, but the idea is still there. Getting a point across through humor.
My conversational style didn’t take away anything from the essay, and it wasn’t even the overriding style. I discussed the consumption of cellulose, the morality of meat from different perspectives, anthropodenial, and our current meat culture and why it needs to be changed. The only time my conversational tone came up was in my summary of quotes and my transitions. “For the sake of argument, let’s say you’re still on the fence. You still believe that you can live without death. I wish I could console you, and say yes, life is possible without death. But I can’t do that. And neither can Keith.”
Apparently, this statement was too informal. Meh.
See, what really gets me is that my point was made no less valid by the way I structure my sentences. I still had quotes from reliable sources, my arguments were concise and understandable, and my essay made sense. So I threw in a couple little phrases to spice things up. Did that make my essay somehow less worthy? Apparently.
I figure if my use of language doesn’t detract from my point, then it’s a valid use of language. I really hate most of my school readings, because they’re so blasted boring. They could still get their points across with a bit of sarcasm. It doesn’t make them less of important. It doesn’t make them less reliable.
I understand that some people don’t write like that. Fine. Let them write their boring prose. But don’t hold me to the same standard. I write like I blog because my blogs are just as full of information as most of my essays. I can make a point however you want, but I can make a better point through my own style of writing. I convey information through sarcasm and informality, because I believe I’m more communicable that way. And isn’t that the point of writing anything? Communication? I guess not.
You know what’s even funnier? My prof also told me that I needed to use less quotes and more of my own language. Hah. What a laugh.
