How does Becker’s book stick
up to your expectations for a book claiming teach you how to: “start and finish
your thesis, book, or article?” Keep in mind that in spite of this
negative-seeming prompt that I find the book to be worthwhile enough to assign
it!
Despite wishing that Becker had followed his own advice and kept his writing more concise and less metaphorical, I grew to appreciate his clear passion for helping graduate students become more comfortable, confident, and capable writers. To illustrate, I mined a few gold nuggets that hit home with me (do my mixed metaphors do any work here?). Although it took me a few chapters to warm up to Becker, I expect to return to his folksy teaching for support and advice.
ReplyDelete• Chapter 1: there’s a necessary messiness to the writing process; good writing doesn’t appear on the first (or second or third) draft
• Chapter 2: use plain English
• Chapter 3: put the conclusion in the introduction (genius!); also, spew first, then arrange and organize; finally, talk/write about what you’re having trouble writing about
• Chapter 4: use metaphors with care
• Chapter 6: take risks and be open to criticism
• Chapter 7: Do it; “You can’t start swimming until you get in the water” (p. 134)
• Chapter 8: balance originality with relevance and connections to the literature and prior research; “Use the literature, don’t let it use you” (p. 149)
Love your nuggets! How's that for making the metaphor work? #6 is my challenge as fear often holds me back.
DeleteBecker’s book served to bring about a deeper level of self-awareness in my approach towards The Dissertation: that looming project that I can scarcely bring myself to face. I realized that I’m measuring myself against an unrealistic ideal, and I’ve begun to change my way of thinking about “the last school project I will ever do.” I saw myself in some of the quirky writing habits Becker described. I’ve tried the “just start writing” technique, and it has helped me overcome procrastination. Despite my early criticism of Becker’s style, he won me over with his chapter on risk. As passionate as I am about my topic, I am afraid to jump into the discourse. I am afraid of sounding stupid and losing respect. Bringing this fear to the surface and talking about it is one way I’m working to overcome it. Yes, it was a worthwhile read and made for constructive class discussion.
ReplyDeleteWe all have stories to tell but we are not all good at telling stories.
ReplyDeleteBecker’s book has been a delight. It comes at a time in my life when I listen for and appreciate brevity. Crispness. Words spoken and written that are free of junk.
Extemporaneous speech done well takes practice. Our daily debates and diatribes, conversations and complaints, are littered with transgressions of grammar and public speaking and journalism. We speak of small things or in small ways about big things. Most of the time, this is okay. I’ve no such excuse for dirty, inconsequential, thoughtless writing after reading Becker’s book. My metaphors are decidedly mixed. But I’ve got to get this blog comment out the door.
Becker writes about literature reviews the way I think of facilitating adult learning. Adults like to connect new ideas with ones they already hold as true. They appreciate that their beliefs are worthy. Then, it’s not awfully difficult to add a little something to the stock. A good lit review provides a deep and broad foundation on which a budding concept finds purchase. Our predecessors and peers appreciate the nod we give to what they have built. They allow us to contribute something, namely ourselves, with a twist. In this way we pay homage to what has come before and really, what else is there to do? We could not know what we think we know if we did not understand how we got to this place.
Flexibility is essential for success. The audience, and purpose, of writing often dictates style. Understanding the rules of scholarly writing, and the essentials of good writing a la Becker, and being able to use them both with discretion seem to be ingredients for a product worth reading.
I knew an author whose writing was rejected over 1400 times before an article was finally accepted. He declared that he learned how to write for his audience and not for himself. As an old man, he had a large appetite and impressive willpower (just not at the same time). As a young boy, he trekked alone across many of these united states with a shotgun and a $20 bill taped inside his drawers. As a young and middle and mature adult, he was an incorrigible womanizer. As a writer, he spent years researching his historical novels and made a nice living doing so. I did not care for his writing style. He was imperfect and magnificent (at the same time).
Finally, Becker reminds me to be a collector of stories and partly formed ideas and references to interesting so and sos who did interesting such and suches. One day, when I am forming my own theory of deviance, I will find a such and such in my collection that will be exactly the right piece to connect my baby of an idea to what the big people have been working on for awhile.
My response to this week’s blog prompt is not going to answer the question regarding meeting my expectations because I did not have any expectations when beginning the text. However, in reflection, I think there are a couple of overall themes that I will take away from the book that assist in the dissertation process. First, I think we must learn how to write without fear of completing the perfect manuscript in our initial draft. Becker does an excellent job of reinforcing the point of putting our thoughts on paper – or computer – without overthinking elements such as word choice and sentence design. Second, I think that scholars should do a much better job of relying on others. I think we are often too afraid of others forming a negative perception of us based upon our writing and therefore would rather put out average work that is only seen by ourselves rather than going through the process of allowing others to edit our writing, which would result in a much better finished product. This is where I think we should remember that the work we are doing is not about ourselves but about the specific field in which we are studying. Our mindset should be to do the absolute best for our field instead of worrying so much about ourselves. Finally, going off this point, while we should strive for excellence, we also must understand that our writing will never be perfect. As we discussed in our previous class session, our goal should be to produce work that advances the conversation. Simply because our study design or argument is not great does not mean we should not attempt to publish our work. Sometimes we need to hit that ground ball to the right side of the infield to get the guy over to third base with one out. We are not always going to hit home runs, and that is okay. (I had to serve up a sport metaphor to drive home the point, which I know Becker would love.)
ReplyDeleteIn saying all this, though, one aspect of scholarly writing that I think makes the writing process difficult – or in some cases easier – is the organization of manuscripts. Especially concerning the issue of journal fit, many scholars must write in a specific way that makes articles very formulaic as well as dry. While I wish I could incorporate certain suggestions of Becker, each individual’s discipline often mandates a certain style of writing. Therefore I feel that while I understand and agree with much of what Becker states, many of his recommendations are useless.
Overall, I think Becker’s text is beneficial to scholars of all stages – especially those of us at the beginning stage of our academic career. Another text that I think serves as a good companion to this book is Paul Silvia’s How to Write A Lot. This text’s focus is creating habits of writing on a consistent basis. Knowing that many scholars’ problem is simply the act of writing, Silvia offers advice of how to incorporate writing into one’s daily schedule. So, while I think Becker’s is of aid, there are gaps that need to be filled by books such as Silvia’s.
Prior to starting the book, my expectation was that Becker would get into the mechanics of writing for graduate school/academia and maybe give some direction on writing a dissertation. The book really doesn't do that but I still consider it having exceeded my expectation. I pretty much know (or can easily find) information about the mechanics of scholarly writing. What I love about Becker is that he gets to what really holds us back when writing at this stage/level, the stuff that no one wants to talk about- our psychological hangups. In the beginning some members of the class had mixed feelings toward the book but I have enjoyed all of it. I find myself laughing out loud sometimes when reading it. My laughter is not because Becker missed his calling as a stand up comedian, but because I find relief in knowing "It's not just me! I'm not crazy!"
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this book I'm better about getting started on writing projects when my ideas first start coming together. This leaves plenty of time to reflect and revise. My old m.o. (sometimes, not always) was to procrastinate to the point where I had to try do my best work in one shot.
In our Wednesday class a couple of weeks ago I picked the Nike slogan "Just do it" to represent how I was feeling. I feel like reading the Becker book at this point of my academic journey has helped me take that approach towards my writing projects.
The Becker book definitely met my expectations! I enjoyed reading the advice and especially his experiences with his students and their writing processes. However, I really appreciated the last chapter of the book. His words on how difficult it is to get published in “major” journals, even for well-known authors like him, provide a cautionary tale for any lofty ideas a newly minted researcher might entertain. I especially liked that he said, “the possibilities of electronic publication have yet to be explored seriously” (p. 183). That is very true, but there are now quite a number of online, open-access journals on various subjects. They are most likely not seen as “prestigious,” but they are a way of getting one’s research out into the public domain. Sites like researchgate allow anyone to upload even their unpublished work for review by famous and non-famous researchers. These sites also create the possibility of building personal and professional relationships with authors from around the world. Overall, I would say that Becker wrote this book as a realist, although he does so from a seat of privilege. I am sure I will revisit this book in the future, when and if I reach “dissertationland” and beyond.
ReplyDelete