I considered writing this post in the form of a 5-paragraph essay. I decided that that was a waste of my time. Why? Because strict adherence to some arbitrary stylistic convention doesn't always serve a useful purpose. (For example, can you spot the telltale signs of informal writing in the previous few sentences?)
Even when writing an essay, there are other ways to go about it. Your primary objective, as an essayist, is to convey an opinion regarding a topic, in a format that is appropriate to the audience. If this objective is served by making like Shakespeare, and busting out a sonnet, then why not? Similarly, there are (potentially) occasions where the driest, most sedate writing style is appropriate. But the key is not to teach writing in a formulaic way, but to teach an understanding of what it takes to engage your audience with the written word.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KarenH
Here's how to tighten the academic thumbscrews: My son's current English teacher has forbidden students to use first person, second person, or contractions in their essays for the rest of the school year. I think that's a much stricter standard than is actually being followed in most professional writing these days.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EricH
Mom, I think that you forgot that the pronouns--except for "one"--are forbidden also.
|
Seriously? He/she seems to have completely misunderstood the necessity of making this stuff readable. Using third person to the exclusion of all else is like playing tennis with your feet cuffed together; you can still hit a decent opening serve, but you fall flat on your face when you try to do anything creative. Actually, perhaps worse still, it makes you sound like
Mr. Data—but that was for intentional comic effect, rather than an actual attempt to sound erudite.
Although there are numerous examples of good essays which make liberal use of personal pronouns, I'll point instead to something with which everyone ought to be at least a little familar. Consider any one of Bill Clinton's speeches. Though he might not be universally adored from a political perspective, he's widely considered one of the best public speakers of our generation. And what does he do to great effect? He interjects personal anecdotes to illustrate points. He uses familiar situations as analogues for whatever topic he's actually supposed to be discussing. There's no absolute reason why that's inadmissible in an essay—all sorts of great writers do it. The key is, as always, to do it in a sensible way.
I fail to see how you're supposed to learn just what this "sensible way" is, if you're not allowed to attempt to use it. (And the key word is "attempt", because sometimes it goes badly.) In the interests of disclosure, I was once (in grade 8) taught the 5-paragraph essay as well. It took one or two assignments to get the hang of it—I'd been writing much as I do here, until that point. But all that it was good for was cementing the idea that you're supposed to keep referring and relating to your overarching theme, throughout the piece. It should quickly become apparent that the essence of the essay is not the rigid format, but rather that you're always striving to get the point across to the audience. If you spend an extra sentence or two somewhere, elaborating on a salient point, what's the harm? You make the essay better, and you're reprimanded, not rewarded, because of some alleged violation of "the rules"? What kind of FUBAR pedagogy is that?
I'm not sure of the proportion of malice and stupidity that causes the 5-paragraph essay to be the format of choice for some high school classes. But I'm actually rather relieved that many have replied that they're not forced to waste perfectly good words on essays that are inappropriately structured for the intended purpose. Write creatively, and treat it as a learning experience. Get a feel for what makes sense in a given context, and figure out how to write that way. That's what education is for.