Response: Toward a Composing Model of Reading

After reading “Toward a Composing Model of Reading” I looked back on my experience with my Wikipedia article and considered the five acts described in the article. On the front of planning I’d like to think I spent the most time attempting to decide which information to include and what to throw out. Neutral voice was harped on a lot during the planning process, but I didn’t consider it a problem, I know how to write neutrally, because when not neutral my words pull at the reader like this. Freedom in planning was also taken away by the general format guidelines we had, find an article like yours and try to be similar to it, that way you won’t get deleted. I agree with the authors on drafting. I always think to myself, “Once I get a rough draft down I can mold it to get the job done”. The authors emphasize reading more than writing throughout this article, but for our purposes I’m only focusing on the writing (until revision I suppose). Again, alignment is chosen for us by the almighty Wikipedia standard. To be an effective article the voice of our article couldn’t sway towards favoring the subject, or bad mouthing. As far as monitoring is concerned you’ll just have to check back in a few weeks. If more changes need to be made to appease the Wikipedia gods then so be it. On a side note I noticed this article always made the role of writer female, where as the role of the reader was male. Was this some Oedipus complex coming out from these authors or was it a sign of the times. A lot of feminism was mentioned as well, maybe I’m reading into this a little much.