Response #1 "Making Meaning Clear: The Logic of Revision"

DFaye Anderson

Professor B. Gleason

ENGL 0862

Dec. 2014

 

“Making Meaning Clear: The Logic of Revision”

by Donald M. Murray

 

            Donald M. Murray advocates revision in his article, not simply to find out what is wrong, but as a way to find meaning.  “I have faith that if I read carefully - if I listen to my own developing voice – I will discover what I have to say.” (35) Discover what you have to say? I’d wager that most people don’t approach writing with this Christopher Columbus perspective. Yet, it is exactly the way I work when writing fiction or poetry.  I am absolutely working on the faith that it will all be revealed to me; I will discover what happens in the story, if I just stay at it – and stay open. Murray posits the same can be true of non-fiction writing, and he proposes a method to get there.

            You read for focus, form and voice. Murray believes you read your draft the first few times and focus only on its meaning. “A good piece of writing says only one thing.” (36) You read the draft in order to determine what you mean, and not for grammatical errors. Initially, you try to read as a stranger would. What is the meaning? Is additional information needed? Is there superfluous information? Is there evidence sufficient to support each point?  You read quickly, resisting the temptation to edit or revise with a pen.

            Then you read slower and you’re reading for form, but form is in service to the meaning. Do you catch a reader’s attention with your lead? Is there a variety of documentation? If there is a title, and is it an accurate reflection of the writing?  Finally, you read your draft slowly. Now you are looking at the organization of your paragraphs. You want to be sure that each paragraph speaks to only one point. Have you used the 2-3-1 arrangement of you argument? Have you checked for grammar issues?

            Murray’s position gives authority to the student and dovetails into Cheryl Hogue Smith’s ideas about empowering students to value their reactions to a piece they’ve read.  Smith, like Murray, turns the normal paradigm on its head when she asks students to focus on what they don’t know, instead of what they know.

            Murray’s technique requires several readings and rewrites of your draft. I’ll have to work to move students away from several notions in order to facilitate that: number one that I am the first line of defense when revising, secondly, that all that is required of them is to incorporate corrections that I’ve indicated. I must help them move out of the headset that looks to fix the things that are wrong, and finally, away from the idea that revision is punishment.  Revision is a way to talk to yourself, which implies that you have something of value to say.  Maybe that’s where I begin.