Most of the feedback I received was about clarity and word choice, which makes sense, as the issue I struggle with most in writing is my incessant need to overcomplicate very simple plot points, especially when it comes to creative nonfiction. Samantha D’s feedback helped me narrow down what I was actually trying to communicate with my metaphors, instead of just arbitrarily describing things esoterically because I liked how it sounded.
The feedback I received on my piece was vital for its improvement, and after a week of editing, I was finally content with how it came out. I truly think that the writing center appointment I made provided the necessary impetus for turning the rough draft I originally had into what I believe is absolutely the best work of prose I have written. This reminded me of one of the most important parts of writing – and its true purpose – communication.
I got feedback to expand the purse a bit more and delve more into my relationship with Kaa. In general, it was really helpful to hear how my work read to other people
This piece started as a rant about how much I hate the interface of Letterboxd, but it slowly evolved into a piece about how few movies I’ve seen. Writers Guild saw so many drafts of this piece. The feedback from the group helped me narrow down the focus and play up its strengths, and the live reactions helped me gauge which parts were funniest and which needed tailoring.
First a scribbled journal entry, my tutor and I worked to harness more feeling in this piece and avoid over-explanation.
This essay was still in the beginning phase when I submitted it for feedback. As the story deals with the recent death of my dog, I was consumed in finding a focus for the story. My tutor provided a few comments on syntax and structure, but her comment on a line she deemed “beautiful” stood out to me the most and became one of the few lines I kept from that first draft; the line was referencing the fear of the moment when I found the last stray dog hair.
My main focus in the editing process was on the point of view. My piece plays with multiple perspectives: a personal perspective which focuses on my own experiences, as well as a “you” perspective that alternates between a “you” character as the narrator and a character in the story who is experiencing Chicago for the first time. The “you” perspective sounds confusing and convoluted even through a quick explanation, but the feedback I received helped me work through some of the clunkier perspective transitions.
I ended up revising the story to reflect more on my relationship with my mom as well as this specific memory; I hinted at it in the original but held back as this was one of the first times I tried describing our relationship. I ended up including the second section from a different project to help elaborate a bit more on the importance of this moment and, in a way, my mom. The last big change was switching the order of the two main sections as they were originally the other way around. After making that change, the narrative flows better and aids in conveying the complexity of a strained relationship with one’s parent.
The specific feedback I received was to separate my two original writings. Together they didn’t work and the feedback to keep them as separate stand alone pieces proved to be correct. Originally, I had a preceding piece (Dogs Pt. I) which spoke to my love for my first dog. I expressed the friendship we shared and details of his last week which was the most significant death I had experienced up until that point in my life. But, it didn’t flow with (Part II). It was best to remove it and save for later.
In its early stages, this piece felt almost like three distinct parts crammed together even though it isn’t long enough to support that. The most helpful feedback I received was to compare those sections to find out what was making them feel different from each other and then to try to bridge those those gaps until it was one continuous story. We realized some of the divide was coming from the fact that most of the interesting creative stylistic choices about grammar and style were concentrated in the middle of the piece; incorporating those throughout helped with cohesion. Now, those stylistic choices build throughout the piece until you get to the end which ends with a kind of standalone poem.