Shitty First Drafts

Lamont attempts to educate the reader on the fact that great writing doesn’t just happen (usually). She argues that most writers struggle just like anyone else when starting out, except for Muriel Spark apparently.  The assumption that writing comes naturally to these people is so prevalent because their work is getting published and they’re making money, so of course it comes naturally to them. Lamont argues that writing starts out with a shitty first draft, good second draft, and finishes with a terrific third draft. I personally think this essay is part shitty first draft. She gets her point through, but damn does she struggle keeping her thoughts coherent at the end. She mentions the voices in her head and mice, I especially enjoyed the Orwell reference, I love 1984. But, back to the point, when we view the history of an article on Wikipedia we can go back to the extremely shitty first draft. Unfortunately, the articles we submitted last week are in fact, shitty first drafts. As we move forward through the history of articles on Wikipedia we can see a progression from a steaming pile of shit, to a dried up pile, then some manure and eventually a beautiful flower if we’re lucky. Of course that flower sprouting from the shitty first draft still could use a pruning and watering and what not, but that terrible pile of shit we call assignment 1 really has the possibility of becoming a beautiful flower, or something like that. FIN