John Trimble makes the case that all writers are like warriors, defending claims and fortifying arguments. How do you respond to this trope, this figurative turn?
Generally, I agree with Trimble's assertion. I believe that all writing should have a point to it and that writers should try diligently to ensure that they are writing effectively to support their claims. I would also agree that in certain types of writing (for instance, in the composition of an essay) it is imperative to make strong, clearly stated arguments as evidence to support one's thesis. However, I find Trimble's metaphor of writers as warriors slightly troubling. It has a very bold, if not confrontational, connotation. Trimble seems to suggest that all writing should be approached the way one might approach an essay: with a strong argument and rigidly outlined supporting details. I think it would be a mistake for a writer to approach every project this way. A poem or a novel, for instance, should both have a point, but the writing would suffer tremendously if the writer abandoned all delicacy and subtlety in their efforts.
No comments:
Post a Comment