1

Jon Brown English 1101 Adam Padgett 11/17/2013 Effective writing vs. ineffective writing Good Writing is everywhere, from the great Shakespeare to people of the modern day like Dr. Seuss. Although I do not think that good writing is necessarily limited to the well-known prodigies of today. B y prodigies I mean authors who have pieces of writing that masses of people are interested in. Usually one would think that to be a good writer you have to go through school and learn how to write effectively to capture your audience and such. I do not think this is true. I think good writing is found everywhere. Of course some writing is better than others such as Stephen Kings novels compared to an intoxicated person writing a Facebook status, but that does not mean it is bad writing. In my essay I am going to convince you that there is no such thing as good or bad writing, but effective and ineffective writing. First off, what is effective writing? Effectiveness is when a piece of writing compels an audience. Effectiveness is when the reader is influenced in some way to change their way of thinking about a certain subject. Effectiveness is ultimately when a piece of writing does what it is meant to do. Then what is ineffective writing? Ineffectiveness is when an audience does not acknowledge the piece of writing, maybe the reader doesnt even consider reading it after the first sentence. Ineffectiveness poorly emits a message and doesnt change a readers viewpoint. Ineffectiveness is simply when a piece of writing fails to achieve its goal set by the writer.
Comment [AP6]: So must writing change a persons point of view? Comment [AP3]: Ha! But Stephen King was intoxicated while he wrote some of his best sellers (like Cujo). Comment [AP2]: Good! I really like how you are defining your term here. Comment [AP1]: Great title!

Comment [AP4]: Great! I like this thesis here, clear and to the point. Comment [AP5]: I also like the use of inquiry as a rhetorical device.

Considering the differences in writing between a well-known author, like Stephen King, and an intoxicated person writing a Facebook status, you can see that they both have potential to be effective writing. Stephen Kings writing would be more structured and neatly written to appeal towards a certain audience of people. The drunkards Facebook status would probably have misspellings, horrible use of modern grammar, and missing crucial elements to sophisticated writing. Although the drunkards message may appear to be bad writing, it could easily be considered good writing. The point of writing is to convey a message towards an audience. If the drunkard just went through the ending of a close relationship with a girl, he might be writing this knowing that she will read it and see that he is in an emotional mess. If she reads the writing, whatever the next circumstances may be, it conveyed a message towards her. I believe that this is unmistakably an important element of writing effectively. Words are but symbols, every word serves a purpose and every word has a meaning and can convey a message. Writing one word, cat, could easily put a picture into someones mind of a familiar feline effectively. Effective writing is also relative to an audience it can be simple or complicated. Nirvanas song Smells like Teen Spirit is a song with lyrics that make no sense in any way. Even with this odd kind of writing Nirvana was still one of the greatest bands of the 1990s and they are still often played on the radio. This is one of the verses of the song, Load up on guns,
bring your friends, its fun to lose and to pretend. She's overboard and self-assured. Oh, no, I know a dirty word. Even though the lyrics would be considered meaningless and poorly written to most
Comment [AP10]: But is their greatness predicated on their lyrics or their music? Comment [AP9]: Your writing in cloudy hypotheticals here. can you give me something more concrete than this hypothetical drunkard? Comment [AP8]: Im not sure Im following what youre saying here. Comment [AP7]: How can you quantify this?

people, Smells like Teen Spirit was one of Nirvanas best-selling songs of their career and most of the lyrics of their other songs were similar to that song yet they still captivated their audiences. The difference between Smells like Teen Spirit and songs that didnt make the
Comment [AP11]: How did it do this, do you think?

charts was the fact that even though the lyrics of Smells like Teen Spirit seems horrible it was very effective towards the audience Nirvana was attempting to appeal to. Dr. Seuss, in my opinion, is one of the greatest writers ever but he could also be considered a bad writer. One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish That was one of my favorite lines Dr. Seuss wrote, but its so simple that most people could easily consider it bad writing. Dr. Seuss is among the most renowned writers in the world, but why? Dr. Seuss writes books for children. His work is extremely effective towards almost all children . I havent heard many children not absolutely loving stories like The Cat in the Hat or How the Grinch Stole Christmas by Dr. Seuss. The writing center at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill says that to define what good writing is you must first ask yourself what is writing? The writing center defines writing as a response, a reaction to someone, to an audience or crowd, and writing consists of rhetoric. The writing center also notes that vocabulary and grammar are specific to your audience. Referring back to the drunkard, his vocabulary and grammar may have been perfectly suited to convey a message to his ex-girlfriend. Stephen Kings vocabulary and grammar is also suited to a particular audience. Dr. Seuss mainly writes children stories with many rhymes that have odd vocabulary but are necessary to pull the imagination out of his readers. Most of these people are responding toward their influences. All writing is influenced in some way. The drunkard was obviously influenced by his excessive drinking of alcohol. Stephen King and Dr. Seuss were probably influenced by many things throughout their life to write their unique pieces. Another key to effective writing is rhetoric. I learned more about rhetoric than I ever have in an English class this fall semester and the biggest thing I took from class was the simple fact that rhetoric is everywhere. From advertisements to college essays everything contains rhetoric.
Comment [AP14]: Where did you get this info, and should you cite it? Comment [AP13]: Okay good, so audience awareness is extremely important. But I would want you to, again, go deeper and explain why this is the case. Comment [AP12]: Again, how?

Logos, pathos, and ethos are the three subdivisions of rhetoric and all writers use rhetoric, the difference is whether or not the rhetoric was used effectively. Things such as emotional ads can pull you into the writing and immerse your feelings into the writing, after having that experience you may be influenced to act upon that ad. If the ad consisted of cute kittens with sad music talking about the deaths of animals from abuse then you may be emotionally influenced to help out with the cause. If the ad consisted of ugly animals and thrash metal in the background then you may think that the ad is inconsiderate and not even acknowledge it. Even though the differences are obvious, one ad used pathos very effectively and the other ad used pathos extremely poorly and you can definitely see the difference in effectiveness. Then you may ask yourself, since writing can be effective and ineffective why do those things not go hand in hand with good and bad writing? I believe the difference is because writing being good or bad is relative to an audience. To an elementary teacher an extremely poor college paper, that was extremely ineffective for the student to get an A, may be a prodigys paper but to the professor its just another D for the grade book. Something such as Cat in the Hat by Dr. Seuss would seem very silly to teenagers but children would think it is the best material ever written. Relativity of the audience determining whether a piece of writing is good or bad is why you cant actually mark a line on good or bad writings. Good and bad writing are all opinions of people and the audiences, not all people think a certain piece is good and not all people think a certain piece is bad. There is however a clear line that says if the writing was effective towards an audience or ineffective and I believe that effective and ineffective writing is a much more suitable way to separate writing than good and bad writing.
Comment [AP16]: Good. I like this claim here, seems to be reiterating your thesis. Comment [AP15]: It can also repel an audience, right?

Jon, I think you do a really good job asserting your opinion and providing a clear thesis. I also like how you seem to be actively and continually supporting your thesis. I would like to see you lean a little more on solid examples to support your argument as opposed to these nebulous hypothetical scenarios you seem to pull out of thin air. Be concrete and be more specific. Having that said, I really like the argument you are making and youve demonstrated thoughtful reflection on writing as a serious subject of study.