I found this essay to be the most frustrating piece I’ve written. I think that there are some people who really like the idea of having the freedom to write about whatever they want, while there are others who like more structured prompts. Personally, I like the freedom. I like being able to be creative and focus more on an idea than a text. Trying to find a theme that matches a piece of text while analyzing it, seems kind of mundane to me. I think when you put more of a focus on an idea, a theme, or some kind of argument, and you use the texts read in class as support or an example, that’s where the progress in writing comes from (well, at least that’s what I think). I know that in high school many of us were always given these rigid essay prompts that were either about analyzing literary devices, comparing and contrasting, or in the most “rebellious” cases: a critical lens paper. I mean, no wonder there are so many kids that hate english class and find writing to be a pain. A lot of the time they aren’t really given the opportunity to have a voice in what they write about. I mean, how creative can one really get when talking about the symbolic value of the conch in Lord of the Flies? I digress.
So, I really found it difficult to make this essay not seem as rigid. I wanted to come up with an idea that made analyzing a poem not seem as boring. Ultimately, I tried to draw a parallel between Terrance Hayes’ poem and New York City itself, in every possible way (from the way the poem looks on paper to the way Hayes manipulates language). At the end of the day, I think my content sort of makes a lot of sense, now that I got some feedback from the class. However, I need to just tighten my intro a bit and zone in a little more specifically on one idea and a cluster of ideas. I was very distressed over the essay, but after I got feedback on my intro in class, I felt a little more relieved. Sometimes all you need is a little reassurance or a fresh pair of eyes to get you in the right direction.
