After reading Harris’s introduction and “Coming to Terms”, I feel him and Sullivan themselves carry a few characteristics with in them that are a like. For instance, both of these men are able to view the purposefulness of writing and how it is used in a social setting. As well, they both take into account that that writing and reading should be used in order to either elaborate on another topic or to reiterate what one has once said or felt. One of the biggest comparisons that both Harris and Sullivan have in common is the fact that they both believe that when one reads, they must first take in what is actually read and what the author might mean by this, but then proceed on to interpret the text itself into one’s own thoughts and meanings. However, on the other hand, Harris himself is more focused on the actual topic of meaning rather than format, while Sullivan talks a lot on his last post that we read “Why I blog,” about how his job of blogging has a different format than other typed of writers like reporters, columnist, and novelist.
Now, for our next readings, I am a little hesitant to continue already due to the fact that I am getting this vibe that what I am about to read about is going to entirely be about reading, writing and how they connect one another through different styles and how people view these styles. Personally, I am not a huge fan of this kind of reading and writing, but I guess only time will tell. Either way I have to read this, so I will let you know in future posts.
So you're hip to the "reading and writing about reading and writing" game. Well, you got me. But I promise that's not all we'll do.
ReplyDelete