Successful College Writing Anne Lamott's

Successful College Writing Anne Lamott's "Shitty First Drafts" and Natalie Goldberg's "Be Specific" provide complementary advice on the difficulties of the writing process and the need to find one's own unique voice. Although both women were commenting specifically on the creative writing process, their insight can easily be applied to the obstacles often encountered by college students when approaching an essay assignment or other writing-related task.

While both essays contain practical information about the various stages of the writing process, it is the humor and compassion that they offer to novice writers when articulating their own writing problems that may prove most helpful for college students as they attempt to clearly express themselves. In "Shitty First Drafts," Lamott cautions writers to beware of "the fantasy of the uninitiated" (Lamott 21), meaning a writer's unrealistic dream that the first ideas they put to paper will suffice as a finished draft.

Using her own experiences as a foundation for her argument, Lamott explains that it is a rare thing for a writer to accurately capture his or her intended meaning on the first attempt. Instead, writing is a process that requires thought, reflection, and a great deal of revision. There is a misconception, she suggests, that the act of writing is a romantic and revelatory one which finds the writer feeling "dewy and thrilled" (22) after typing a few "stiff warm-up sentences" (22).

The reality is much more prosaic; indeed, Lamott cites writer-friends who see the creative act as a choice between hard labor and suicide, and comforts would-be writers by explaining that even the most prolific of writers face substantial roadblocks during the process itself. This is helpful advice for college students who face the prospect of writing articulate and insightful assignments under the pressure of both school deadlines and personal obligations.

By acknowledging that the writing process is neither quick nor easy, Lamott's essay illustrates the importance of ample time and preparation for the college writer, while also demonstrating that all writers should be prepared to fail more often than they succeed. To this end, she provides a practical way for writers to accomplish their goals: the writing of "really, really shitty first drafts" (22).

From Lamott's perspective, the first-draft is an opportunity to write freely and uncritically, safe in the knowledge that no teacher, friend, or enemy will have the chance to read this "child's draft" (22). And, although such drafts will understandably need substantial editing, Lamott states that she knows no other way to channel her own writing abilities without first going through this arduous, but necessary, stage in the writing process. Like Lamott, Natalie Goldberg understands the difficulties that a writer can encounter in trying to express the world around them.

The advice that she gives in "Be Specific" implores all writers to reject general words that have little or no resonance: "Don't say 'fruit'," she writes. "Tell what kind of fruit -- 'It is a pomegranate.' Give things the dignity of their names" (Goldberg 77). By choosing specificity over the vague, Goldberg offers writers a way in which to find their own voice through the careful crafting of language.

Although her advice complements Lamott's, it is perhaps better suited for later stages of the writing process after the "shitty first draft" (Lamott 22) has been expunged from the writer's system. The revision stages of writing lend themselves well to both basic editing and a greater attention to detail because much of the pressure to produce some sort of writing, no matter how good, has been relieved.

Using the example of 'flower' versus 'geranium', Goldberg demonstrates that the choice of a single specific word can paint a much more detailed picture in both the writer and the reader's mind. "It penetrates more deeply into the beingness of that flower," she writes. "It immediately gives us the scene by the window -- red petals, green circular leaves, all straining toward sunlight" (Goldberg 77).

This is helpful advice for college students who wish for their work to stand out from that of their peers, for by choosing descriptive words over the general, writers can discover stronger and more vibrant ways in which to present their ideas in a thoughtful and critical way. Goldberg's essay touches on the vital importance of paying attention to the world around us as we seek to learn the names of everything that we encounter. This is a practical tool that Cheryl L.

Dozier cites as an effective way to encourage students to make the connection between what they read in books and what they see in the world around them. In such a way, a greater appreciation of words is created, along with an educational foundation which encourages strong literacy skills. In her essay "Literacy Coaching: Engaging and Learning with Teachers," Dozier writes that "noticing and naming involves an explicitness, an intentionality, and an opportunity for teachers and children to articulate developing understandings" (Dozier 16).

In the course of her discussion on the various approaches to take when building a child's literacy skills, she references Goldberg's "Be Specific," stating that the act of naming both things and practices allows for children and teachers to develop relationships with the written word.

Steve Sherwood, an instructor at a college writing center, continues this theme of creating strong personal relationships between words, the act of writing, and the novice writer in his essay "Apprenticed to Failure: Learning from Students We Can't Help." Although this title seems to suggest that some students are incapable of learning solid writing skills, he argues just the opposite. Instead, he states that our failures as writers actually offer an opportunity to learn coping skills and resilience.

Referencing Lamott's "Shitty First Drafts," he encourages those who work with student writers to help them "accept failures that come during the early stages of writing" (Sherwood 53). Good educators, Sherwood suggests, are those individuals who become emotionally invested in their students' success, but are also able to see the potential opportunities for change in their students' failures by understanding that "if we ignore our shortcomings, we risk perpetuating them" (52). Lamott's acceptance of her own.