Whenever I inform someone that I am currently taking this course, there is a stale, predictable response I invariably receive. “Why? Did you forget to get your extra language credit?” to which I would swiftly reply, “no, I took it because I want to improve my writing”. I ensured I received the necessary credits in those three special categories a long time ago, by fulfilling the requirement in grade 10. I knew that in these bigger, more demanding grades, my course selection should not be dictated by matters as trivial as diploma requirements. Truthfully, I could have picked a course with a lighter workload, and chosen the easy path to graduation. However, over the past few years, English class has fast become one of my favourites. Not the tiresome
…show more content…
Sure, some talented individuals have it easier than others, but this form of art is different than others. Unlike drawing, or painting, which tend to rely more on natural talent, writing can be improved in an infinite number of ways. Through reading, we can expand our vocabulary, acquire new ways to structure our sentences, and learn the many eloquent ways of articulating our thoughts. By keeping a journal, one can write every day, practicing the craft daily in order to better their abilities. Surprisingly, Stephen King would disagree with me on this subject. In his book, On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft, he states, “I don’t believe writers can be made, either by circumstances or by self-will” (King 18). His admission that writers cannot be made is a surprising revelation in a book that is designed to guide those who are interested, not necessarily “talented”, in writing. Of course, he could not have arrived to that conclusion without thinking it through. After all, he is one of the most successful authors of all time, and with his wealth of experience, his opinion carries a lot of weight. If he had made the point that some writers are naturally more gifted, and thus start out with an advantage over other, I would have agreed with him. However, King is suggesting that, if one does not posses an innate ability to write, then, regardless of circumstance or effort, they will be unable to master the craft. I wholeheartedly disagree with Stephen King’s
Sure, some talented individuals have it easier than others, but this form of art is different than others. Unlike drawing, or painting, which tend to rely more on natural talent, writing can be improved in an infinite number of ways. Through reading, we can expand our vocabulary, acquire new ways to structure our sentences, and learn the many eloquent ways of articulating our thoughts. By keeping a journal, one can write every day, practicing the craft daily in order to better their abilities. Surprisingly, Stephen King would disagree with me on this subject. In his book, On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft, he states, “I don’t believe writers can be made, either by circumstances or by self-will” (King 18). His admission that writers cannot be made is a surprising revelation in a book that is designed to guide those who are interested, not necessarily “talented”, in writing. Of course, he could not have arrived to that conclusion without thinking it through. After all, he is one of the most successful authors of all time, and with his wealth of experience, his opinion carries a lot of weight. If he had made the point that some writers are naturally more gifted, and thus start out with an advantage over other, I would have agreed with him. However, King is suggesting that, if one does not posses an innate ability to write, then, regardless of circumstance or effort, they will be unable to master the craft. I wholeheartedly disagree with Stephen King’s