Most textbooks or “informative” books come off as very bland, so I was pleasantly surprised by the tone at some points of the book. While his inner-monologue was slightly off-putting at times, it helped me stay engaged and made it an easy read.
The “English Teacher’s Revenge” was a great way to discuss the outline. I knew exactly what he was talking about and identified with it a lot. As a whole, the Formal Outline sucks. Throughout my education, I’ve done my best to avoid them. Even when required, I’d sketch a quick outline of some paper, but probably not anything I would ever actually write. Franklin’s dynamic outline seems like something I would use though. It’s simple and it defines a path or idea to follow, but it doesn’t seem definite, there is room to stray and create.
I also enjoyed the section about the “saga form.” The idea of writing in segments, each with a sort of cliffhanger is great. I’ve never really thought about it, or rather, never thought about it in my own writing. But you see it everywhere. Franklin’s example of Star Wars and movies made to have sequels is a perfect example. Something else I thought of was the feeling you get when reading a book and you just can’t put it down, you must read the next chapter. I’m interested to look and think more about the structure within smaller pieces, such as “Mrs. Kelly’s Monster.”
YES! Franklin's book deconstructs the process that creates the can't-put-it-down story. You got it!
ReplyDeleteI am finding it really interesting that we all seem to have had problems in the past with the traditional outline form. I am curious as to why this version which is, in appearance, more fleshed out comes to be more alienating. Are there any ways that Franklin's book did come to embody the typical "informative book" for you. I know for me, sometimes he read as conceited or as if he believed himself infallible. Despite those annoyances, I thought the text was very informative and helpful and I look forward to talking more in class!
ReplyDelete