Response to Adler, LaMott, and Bradbury

Just as in the Power of Civility assignment, the goal of this paper was to respond to 3 sources by arguing an idea that they all share. Using Mortimer Adler’s “How To Read A Book”, Anne Lamott’s “Shitty First Drafts”, and Ray Bradbury’s video autobiography, I wrote an essay titled “Dirty Blueprints.”

This assignment received very little commentary.Screen Shot 2015-12-08 at 4.03.58 PM

I received a great grade on this assignment as well. (9.66/10) Screen Shot 2015-12-08 at 4.04.49 PMScreen Shot 2015-12-08 at 4.05.02 PM

In most categories, this paper met expectations for an A. The only excellent grade I received was in “Evidence of Close Reading of the Sources.” That being said, the overall goal of this revision is to analyze the mistakes the teacher may have missed and “self-grade” myself. Maybe this revision will change all the categories to an excellent status.

The first paragraph is only 3 sentences! I feel that this introduction isn’t really introducing the reader to my paper.

Here is before:

Screen Shot 2015-12-08 at 4.12.25 PM

And here is after:

Screen Shot 2015-12-08 at 4.21.27 PM

Believe it or not, I stuck to three sentences! Sometimes, short and to the point is the way to go.

The first problem I saw was the expletive construction of the first sentence. In Rhet 105, I learned that the use of the words, “there is” and “there are” just takes up room and has no need in a sentence. To get the gist of what I’m saying here’s a quick tutorial:

Video taken from

Next, I noticed that the authors were introduced in the first paragraph but not their works. Lastly, I changed my title to an easier analogy that can carry on the rest of the paper: “perfection takes time.”

This is the self-grading of the first paragraph. To see more, read the rest of my essay below: