Harris, Sullivan, Reading, Writing, etc.

As I read through the text, Rewriting, I came to think that Joseph Harris’ uses the term “rewriting” in quite a thought provoking way. His “active and critical stance” (Harris 2) provides an innovative definition to the term. Harris’ defines such topic by saying that rewriting other author’s texts is  


"using their texts for your purposes . . . say something new and say it well ” (Harris 2). 

“Our creativity thus has the roots in the work of others- in response, reuse, and rewriting”. (Harris 2).

Furthermore, Harris speaks of rewriting as a social practice, his definition of such being “the use of certain tools in a well defined context to achieve a certain end or make a particular product” (Harris 3).  Rewriting provides appealing approaches to the subject and provides the reader with tips on how to correctly and more critically be able to “rewrite” another person’s work. Moreover, Harris provides an interesting definition of reading as well. In his chapter “Coming to Terms”, Harris explains how readings “do not just reveal their meaning to us, we need to make sense of them. He goes on to explain that everyone reads and interprets texts differently, which means everyone will add a different perspective to the topic; he adds that if we all interpreted texts in the same way, there would be little to argue about when rewriting or discussing a text. As a reader, Harris suggests one to “strive to be fair and self reflective” (Harris 15). In coming to terms one must “give the text its due and decide what you want to make of it” (Harris 15). According to Harris “coming to terms” consists of three moves:

[to “define project of the writer in your own terms”

“note the keywords or passages in the texts” and,

“assess the uses and limits of this approach” ] (Harris 15].

In contrast to Harris, Sullivan provides a different approach and definition of writing and reading. This is partially because they both focus on different types of writing. Sullivan talks about how blogging can be a spontaneous expression of thought, whereas writing in a formal setting requires much more filtering, proofreading, formality, etc. Both authors talk about how one responds to another author’s text. Sullivan emphasizes the relationship between the blogger and the reader, and how this relationship can be quite critical. Harris, on the other hand, focuses more on the fact that the reader interprets an author’s text and uses the information to build upon the existing ideas to come up with new ones and implement one’s own opinion.

Honestly, I think both authors bring up valid points and ideas. I will use their suggestions and knowledge to better my writing and reading skills in the future.