| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Bibliography by Julian Levy

Page history last edited by Julian Levy 9 years, 4 months ago

Annotated Bibliography Assignment

 

By Julian Levy, Team Free Right

 

 1. Elbow, Peter. "Freewriting." Writing without Teachers. New York: Oxford UP, 1973. N. pag. Buffalostate.edu. Web.

 

     Peter Elbow describes the process and purpose of free writing. He claims that its ability as a tool to negate the detrimental effects of self-editing allows for a more natural and unimpeded flow of ideas, similar to the process of speech where one must produce an idea in a limited time frame. Elbow describes self-editing as a process that can limit the flow of ideas and stymie creativity. He acknowledges that editing is necessary in contexts outside of free writing exercises, but claims that the activity of the exercise can help to enliven one’s natural “voice.” According to Elbow, “your voice is damped out by all the interruptions, changes, and hesitations between the consciousness and the page.” He concludes that utilizing one’s own “voice” is necessary to good writing and free writing is a useful exercise to reestablish this “voice.”

     Elbow states that “the only requirement [for free writing] is that you never stop.” He also lists activities such as self-editing, focusing on correct punctuation and grammar, and pausing for reflection as antithetical to the free writing process. He does not evaluate or describe any outside factors to the free writing process that may affect the quality of the experience, such as medium of writing, addition of music or prompts, or physical setting of the activity.

     Elbow’s description of free writing affirms the goal of the Free Right tool to create a medium that promotes continuous and unedited writing. His descriptions of what to avoid in free writing can be applied as supplementary goals of the Free Right tool and applied as guidelines in adjusting and evaluating the tool. Elbow’s ultimate goal for free writing, to affirm one’s own “voice,” can be applied as an evaluative factor for the success of the Free Right tool in each testing subject.


 

2. "Write Now. Edit Later. The Creative Writing Software with a Twist." WRITE ONWARD Write Now Edit Later. N.p., n.d. Web.

 

The WRITE ONWARD! software is designed as an offline word processor that disallows editing. “Both the Backspace and Delete keys are disabled, and while you are writing you cannot select, copy, paste or edit anything you have already written.” The WRITE ONWARD! website claims that “you will relearn how to let the words flow freely from your mind onto the screen, without spending valuable time ‘getting that sentence right’.” The software tool is not free but offers a trial version for Windows and Apple computers.

     The Software follows more traditional concepts of free writing in that the words written cannot be edited, but self-editing while writing is still possible. There are no features that support continuousness of writing, the imposing of time limits, or the limiting of self consciousness in production. The software simply disallows basic word processor capabilities such as delete, copy, and paste. In this regard, WRITE ONWARD! affirms the secondary goals of free writing, but ignores the primary one - writing without stopping.

     WRITE ONWARD! may be considered a predecessor to the Free Right tool in that it offers a software adaptation to certain rules of free writing. Because WRITE ONWARD! does not explicitly claim to be a free writing tool, it cannot be regarded as a direct competitor to the proposed goals of Free Right. One of Free Right’s most notable features is its ‘tunnel vision’ service where only a few words are displayed on screen at a time. This is expected to aid in preventing self consciousness, which the WRITE ONWARD! software does not address in its features list.


 

3. Benson, Buster. "750 Words." About a Little Thing Called 750 Words. N.p., n.d. Web.

    

     The 750 Words online tool is a blogging tool centered around the goal of producing roughly three pages of writing every day. The tool’s creator, Buster Benson, claims that “the idea is that if you can get in the habit of writing three pages a day, that it will help clear your mind and get the ideas flowing for the rest of the day.“ The tool itself is a simple word processing environment, similar to Notepad. It is possible to edit the text during the writing process. There is a counter at the bottom of the page that counts up to the 750 word goal. As one continues to use the tool, a points system takes effect and rewards the user for daily use of the tool, promoting it as an extension of one’s daily routine. The writing is saved to the website but not publicly. Benson claims that he tried to use existing blogging sites like Wordpress and Tumblr but felt that they were not appropriate for his goals. Benson states that 750 Words “is writing, and it's online, but it's not blogging, or Twittering, or Facebook status updating. This is between you and you.” The tool is available for free but requires an account.

     The tool seemed useful as an outlet to produce and store one’s free writing exercises, and its word counter and points reward system seem to promote its functionality. It does not however include any features that may aid in dissuading editing or self consciousness. In this regard, it is not a holistic free writing solution, as Free Right intends to be. The word counter helps in promoting a steady pace of writing, but also acts to distract the user’s train of thought. The points reward system seems useful in promoting the routine use of the tool and does not distract from the writing exercise explicitly. The automatic saving of the posts, and the supposed privacy of their storage is a beneficial feature that makes 750 Words a more attractive tool but doesn’t explicitly aid in free writing itself. The tool seems mostly aimed toward creating a free writing routine for the user, rather than improving the free writing experience itself.

     Benson’s 750 Words offers an attractive outlet for free writing, and its use of a word counter, rather than a time limit, seems beneficial in setting a specific goal amount of writing. It may prove useful for Free Right to utilize a word counter rather than a time limit to influence the user’s production. It remains unclear which method produces the most beneficial effect on free writing without imposing a distracting influence. The ability to store and view past writings online is an obviously beneficial feature and should be implemented in Free Right. The points reward system in 750 Words also seems beneficial in influencing the user to free write regularly, and a similar rewards system may be explored for Free Right.


 

4. Skud, Emily. "Written? Kitten!" Written? Kitten! N.p., n.d. Web.

 

     Written?Kitten! is an online writing tool by Emily Skud that rewards the user by displaying a picture of a kitten after a set amount of words are typed. The tool is free to use and open source. The words intervals to display each new kitten picture is adjustable between 100, 200, 500, and 1000 words. The tool can also be set to display photos of puppies or bunnies. The word count is displayed at the bottom of the text box. Editing is possible in the tool and the content produced is stored locally on the user’s computer.

The tool utilizes the simple reward system of displaying cute pictures of animals for every set amount of words typed. There are no penalties for delaying one’s typing or editing it.      A rewards system in general seems useful in the free writing process, but the displaying of cute animal photographs is distracting and influences the writing, much like a prompt would. The tool’s usefulness as a free writing platform is therefore very limited and inappropriate for a serious user.

     A reward system such as that used in Written?Kitten! could be implemented in the Free Right tool, but the potential for distraction and content influence is very high. A more universally appealing reward system may prove more beneficial. (Not everyone likes cat pictures when they write.)


 

5. Kent, Daniel. "420 Fables." 420 Fables. N.p., n.d. Web.

 

     420 Fables is an online, social blogging tool created by Daniel Kent. The tool imposes a strict time limit of four minutes and twenty seconds in which the user must write a “fable.” After the elapsed time, the “fable” is locked and cannot be edited. The user can then title the “fable” and tag it. It is then available publicly where its quality can be voted on with a five star rating system. The tool is available to use for free with an account and offers an optional paid upgrade to unlock additional features.

     Because the tool allows for editing and revision, and does not impose any artificial constraints to deter self consciousness when writing, it is not strictly a free writing tool. It is instead a hybrid of free writing conventions and social blogging. The constraint of four minutes and twenty seconds allows for a brief story or poem to be written, and the conciseness of the resulting product makes for a more approachable experience compared to other tools that require larger contributions. The experience itself is not a pure free writing experience, as defined by the goal of writing continuously without editing oneself. Because the end goal of the tool is to share and rate each other’s writings, a self consciousness regarding quality and potential popularity seeps in and affects the writing. The meta goal of the experience is to create popular, highly rated posts, and because the quality of of one’s writing is subjected to the opinions of the community, the personal experience of free writing, and its inherent benefits, are lost. The competition of the meta goal does prove as a good incentive to write, but the backbone of free writing itself is destroyed.

     420 Fables offers a unique user experience where free writing is utilized as a means to produce finished, shareable content. This does not translate to the goals of Free Right, where the personal benefits of free writing are are paramount. The time limit imposed in 420 Fables also acts to rush the user, producing an anxiety in the experience that is counterintuitive to free writing in general. Because the end product is meant to be held to a certain quality, there is also incentive to edit oneself, which Free Right specifically  intends to avoid. The social aspect of 420 Fables also proves to reinforce conditions that are antithetical to free writing and therefore should not be implemented in Free Right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.