Course overview:

This course has been designed to take the guesswork, the mystery, the anxiety and anguish out of writing. During this semester, you will learn what makes writing seem clear and concise, what makes it “flow”–even what makes for elegant, powerful, memorable writing. Along the way, you’ll learn how the history, grammar, and usage of English can tend to make certain ways of writing seem tired, confusing, or tedious, as well as how some supposedly indisputable principles of English grammar have become about as authoritative (and practical) as long-forgotten blue laws.

You’ll also look at “good” and “bad” writing and analyze the qualities of each, learning how to apply the corollaries discussed by Williams and Colomb in Style to your own assignments during both the drafting and revision stages. And we’ll consider the uses of logic and illogic in everyday writing, including the ways in which faulty reasoning affects even supposedly “objective” expository writing.

To help you improve your ability to evaluate your own work in progress–and to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of all the writing you encounter, published and unpublished–you’ll be required to provide extensive critiques of your classmates’ papers and to grade final drafts of the papers assigned to you. Your grade on each paper will reflect the average of five peer grades and the instructor’s grade; you will also receive credit for your evaluations (exceptional; satisfactory; unsatisfactory), which can add or subtract .025 of a letter grade for each set of evaluations to your final grade.

Required reading:

Joseph M. Williams, Style: Toward Clarity and Grace. University of Chicago Press, 1995 (available at the Hub).

Course pack
(available at Custom Copy kiosk in University Book and Supply).

Attendance:
You are responsible for getting assignments in on their due dates: both readings and assignments included in the syllabus below should be completed by the class following the assignment, unless otherwise indicated. Even if you have an excused absence, you should make every attempt to turn assignments in on time. Miss more than four classes and you’ll end up with a full letter grade deducted from your final grade. While I will accept late papers, late papers cannot be graded by your classmates, only by Yours Truly.

Assignments:
During this course, you’ll discover revisions count–rough drafts are all about working out the “meat” of your essays: selecting, organizing, and sequencing your material–while final drafts are all about making your writing clear, concise, vibrant, highly readable. Your three primary writing assignments include a revision of a badly written memo (1 - 2 pages) that uses the principles in Style to present the same content clearly and efficiently, a personal narrative (approximately 5 - 7 pages), a descriptive piece that profiles a person, process, location, business, physical or intangible thing (5 - 7 pages), and an analysis of a topic of your choice that considers both the strengths and weaknesses of your subject (5 - 7 pages). You will also be required to provide 3 detailed evaluations
(1 - 3 pages each) of your classmates’ final drafts, pointing out strengths and weaknesses in content, organization, and presentation and generally justifying the grade you assign each paper. You will also be required to complete and submit short, informal reaction papers (1 - 2 pages) to two of the reading assignments, considering the writer’s approach to the material, stylistic features, and techniques that may or may not conform to Williams’ advice in Style.

Grades:
As you’ll discover, much of this course is run by consensus: if a majority of the class wishes to change the weighting of the grades on assignments (or even drop a grade), we’ll do it–making this weighting open to negotiation:

Revision of bad writing: 10%
Narrative: 25%
Description/profile: 25%
Analysis: 25%
Reaction papers: 15%

Your performance in evaluating your classmates’ work may raise or lower your final grade by as much as 1.5 letter grades (since UF, for some obscure reason, doesn’t award “minus” final grades)–or leave your final grade unchanged.

			1/5 Overview of course Discussion: What is “bad” writing and what’s so bad about it? Reading: Style: Preface (pp. x-xvi), Chapter 1 (pp. 1-14) Tom Wolfe’s ""The New Journalism 1/7 NARRATIVE CHARACTERS, AGENTS, AND NOMINALIZATIONS Reaction papers on "The New Journalism" Reading: Style: Chapter 2 (pp. 17-43) Michael Herr’s Dispatches 1/12 Reaction papers on Dispatches Reading: Style: Chapter 3 (pp. 45-65) Assignment: Using the principles discussed in Chapters 1 & 2 of Style, rewrite the samples of bad writing on the class website (or a sample of your choice). Hint: Do not rewrite the sample line by line; summarize the content, then focus on providing the information as clearly and efficiently as possible, adhering to the principles Williams describes in Style (due 1/19) 1/14 USING TOPICS TO ORGANIZE YOUR WRITING; SEQUENCING INFORMATION Suggestions for bad memo revision Bad writing fodder Internal policy memos Assignment: Write about an event that shocked, amused, or disgusted you–or one that changed your life (length: 5 - 7 pp.). 1/19 Bad writing revision due. DISCUSSION OF NARRATIVE DRAFTS 1/21 DISCUSSION OF NARRATIVE DRAFTS Assignment: Read the remaining narrative drafts on the course website prior to class on Tuesday. 1/26 DISCUSSION OF NARRATIVE DRAFTS Reading: Jo Ann Beard, “The Fourth State of Matter” Style: Chapter 4 (pp. 67-79) Assignment: Revise your narrative, taking into account the critiques offered by the other writers in class, bringing it to final draft form (due 1/26). 1/28 DISCUSSION OF NARRATIVE DRAFTS Reaction papers on “The Fourth State of Matter” Reading: Jonathan Raban, “Land of Cockaigne” 2/2 EMPHASIS, SEQUENCE Reaction papers on “Land of Cockaigne” Reading: Style: Chapter 5 (pp. 81-95) Leonard Frank, “The Development Game” 2/4 Final drafts of narratives due WORKSHOP ON EVALUATING PEER PAPERS Reaction papers on “The Development Game” Reading: Arthur Lubow, “This Vodka Has Legs” Oliver Sacks, “The Last Hippie” Assignment: read, critique, and evaluate the 5 peer papers assigned to you, taking into account the guidelines discussed in class (due 2/11). You'll find the index of final drafts of narrative papers by following this link. E-mail evaluations to jdouglas@nwe.ufl.edu. 2/9 TOPICS, THEMES, ISSUES AND DISCUSSIONS Examples Reaction papers on “This Vodka Has Legs” and “The Last Hippie” Reading: Style, Chapter 6 (pp. 97-112) 2/11 Evaluations of narratives due. POINTS, HEADINGS Reaction papers on "The Development Game," “This Vodka Has Legs” and “The Last Hippie” Assignment: Describe in detail a business, person, location, process, or object (length 5 - 7 pp.) (drafts due 2/16) 2/16 DISCUSSION OF DESCRIPTION PAPERS Reading: Susan Orlean “Show Dog”; Edward Conlon, “To the Potter’s Field” Assignment: Revise your narrative, taking into account the critiques offered by the other writers in class. 2/18 DISCUSSION OF DESCRIPTION PAPERS Reaction papers to “Show Dog” and “To the Potter’s Field” Discussion of evaluations Discussion of Feasibility Drafts (MACC students only) Reading: William Langewiesche, “The Turn” 2/23 DISCUSSION OF DESCRIPTION PAPERS Reading: Bill Bryson, “Where Words Come From” and Luc Sante, “Home” Assignment: Revise your descriptive paper, taking into account the critiques offered by the other writers in class, bringing it to final draft form (due 3/2). 2/25 DISCUSSION OF DESCRIPTION PAPERS Reaction papers on “The Turn,” “Where Words Come From,” and “Home” Reading: Style: Chapter 7 (pp. 115-133) 3/2 DISCUSSION OF DESCRIPTION PAPERS MEANINGLESS MODIFIERS, EXCESSIVE DETAIL, METADISCOURSE, WORDINESS, REDUNDANCY Reading: Style: Chapter 8 (pp. 135-150) Vicki Hearne, “Bandit” 3/4 Final drafts of descriptions due. COORDINATION, SUBORDINATION, MOMENTUM Reaction papers to “Bandit” Reading: Marc Reisner, “An American Nile” Assignment: read, critique, and evaluate the 5 peer papers assigned to you, taking into account the guidelines discussed in class (due 3/18). Follow this link to get to the description paper index and papers. 3/9 - 3/11 SPRING BREAK 3/16 DESCRIPTION VERSUS ANALYSIS Opening to "An American Nile" Reaction papers to “An American Nile” Reading: Laurie Garrett, “Distant Thunder” 3/18 Evaluations of description papers due. BALANCE,COMPLEXITY, AND RHYTHM Reaction papers to "American Nile," “Distant Thunder” Reading: Anthony Lane, “Picture Books” and Julian Barnes, “Kitty Zipper” Assignment: Analyze a phenomenon, object, process, or person, using some of the stylistic techniques and approaches covered in class (5 - 7 pp.). You must use at least two sources, which may be people you interview, primary or secondary textual sources (which include performances, film, television, museums/art installations, events). Drafts due on 3/30. 3/23 Reaction papers to “Picture Books” and “Kitty Zipper” Reading: Style : Chapter 9 (pp. 153-166) Chapter 10 (pp. 169-198) REVIEW OF DESCRIPTION GRADES AND EVALUATIONS 3/25GRAMMAR REVIEW–THE SOUND, THE USELESS, AND THE IMBECILIC NON SEQUITURS, INVALID INFERENCES, SLIPPERY SLOPE AND OTHER LOGICAL FLAWS Analyses drafts Assignment: Analyze a phenomenon, object, process, or person, using some of the stylistic techniques and approaches covered in class (5 - 7 pp.). 3/30 DISCUSSION OF ANALYSES DRAFTS 4/1 DISCUSSION OF ANALYSES DRAFTS 4/6 DISCUSSION OF ANALYSES DRAFTS 4/8 NO CLASS (JANE IN PROVIDENCE) 4/13 DISCUSSION OF ANALYSES DRAFTS Assignment: 4/15DISCUSSION OF ANALYSES DRAFTS Final date to submit late papers or to resubmit assignments. No exceptions. Assignment: Revise your analysis, taking into account the critiques offered by the other writers in class, bringing it to final draft form (due 4/20). 4/20 Final drafts of analyses due before 12 noon. No exceptions. PEER EVALUATIONS Assignment: read, critique, and evaluate the 5 peer papers assigned to you, taking into account the guidelines discussed in class (due 4/20). 4/27 Evaluations of analysis papers 4/29 Final grades posted.