In Naming What We Know, Heidi Estrem states in section 1.1 that “We don’t simply think first and then write. We write to think.” Through my writing from the previous units, I have come to a conclusion that this is true. When I write, I have noticed that writing about one object or idea may result in new, distinct ideas or insights. I notice that this is common in all of my writings and the writings I have read by others. Estrem supports this as she states “Writers of all kinds… have had the experience of coming upon new ideas as a result of writing.” Furthermore, she says that “writers use writing to generate knowledge that they didn’t have before.” For instance, this occurred unknowingly when writing about our Organic Object and our comparison of Hershey Kisses and Starbursts. I do not believe, however, that all thinking is in language. I believe that writing can also be implicitly demonstrated in thoughts and in forms of art. It does not only have to be explicitly written or spoken. Thinking includes being aware and conscious, which does not have to be in words.
For my Organic Object post, I received a lot of comments unexpectedly. I did not think that people would be interested in my blog post. However, it was the blog post I had the most comments on. Many of the comments related my writing to real life scenarios and themes. Many of the comments also talked about my usage of repetition, diction, and imagery, which were not so apparent to me. I definitely enjoyed their deep analysis and perspective of my writing because they created new insights that I had not thought of when writing my blog post. This relates to a quote from section 1.2 in Naming What We Know that noted, “When consumers of information can… become producers… then it’s hard to tell who is the writer, who the audience.” The comments made about my use of repetition, and many other language devices formulated points that I was not mindful of, which in a way allows the readers to become the writers of my blog post as well.