After writing Essay 2.2, I knew I had to find a topic that engaged my interest; I did not want to encounter writer’s block again. In the brainstorming exercise, one suggestion was to pursue an emotional response. For some reason when I read The Woman Warrior, it elicited an uneasy feeling that eventually turned into an angry objection spelled out in my book response assignment. I never felt such negativity towards a piece of work, so I was very curious what instigated me – and apparently other Chinese-American students – to feel that way. When I read Frank Chin’s criticism though, I did not agree with his school of thought, which told me I was approaching the work from another angle. Professor Hardy recommended reading Wong’s essay first to get some ideas. When I read Wong’s argument, it offended me very much. And from there, I knew I wanted to counter her argument.
I believe in Essay 3.2, I actually met most of the goals mentioned in my midterm reflection. Writing this essay seemed to come naturally; I never had difficulty wording my ideas. I was also cautious with the use of block quotes – I only included a block quote if it was necessary and supportive to my argument. And because Professor Hardy really pushed us in the pre-writing stage, I had enough time to brainstorm and formulate my thoughts so when it boiled down to writing, I knew the topics I was going to explore. However, I still believe there could be more improvements. Although I did not use block passages, I noticed that I still rely on a good number of quotes. If given more time, I would have tried to expand more on some of my explications and evidence. Also, I would have restructured my introduction. After feedback and re-reading my work, I realized that I took a very long time to get to the point of my essay, and I should have stated it much earlier to guide my readers. Yet, overall, I must admit that I am very proud of Essay 3.2 because I chose an engaging topic, and the research project really challenged my writing abilities.