 |
|
Dialogues@RU is published
annually
by the
Writing Program at
Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey
Volume Three
Spring 2004
Finding “Being” through “Non-Being" - Page 6
by
Rachelle Wander
Response
by Rachelle Wander
My editor, Dixita Patel, has made some vital points in revising my paper that has allowed me not only to streamline my project, but also to push me into critically rethinking many of my ideas. Particular useful points are those she made on my lack of explanation on certain points, such as my thesis, Woolf’s technique of disguising her identity in others, and the meaning behind Woolf’s juxtaposing “being” with “non-being.” Patel has forced me to look closely at my project to find instances where I convolute my words or shift my focus.
However, there are times when I feel as if Patel did not quite grasp my meanings, which only pushed me into revising my writing. In the final draft, there were still some concepts Patel did not seem to read clearly enough. When she discusses my main focus for the paper, she cites two sentences from early on in my project. Patel seemed to think that there is a difference between proving “that true identity formation can only be established after realizing the ‘non-being’ is necessary for acknowledging the ‘being’”(Patel 2) and “’how Woolf’s concepts on her own existence and identity formation act as an archetype to anyone who seeks self-affirmation’ (Wander 1)” (Patel 2). The former is just another way of explaining the latter. Woolf’s concept that identity formation happens after determining the “being” and the “non-being” act as a paradigm for those who seem self affirmation. Also, when Patel questions how I show the way Woolf “masks her identity in the form of others” (Wander 4), I illustrate this point in the following paragraphs by explaining that “Woolf only discusses how her family acted towards her in order to show the powerful influence those close to her had on shaping her person” (Wander 5). Then, I supply a few examples of key influencers, Stella, Vanessa, and Thoby, and how they affected Woolf’s identity.
As for Patel’s question on what moment of “non-being” led her to realize the “being” is an interesting suggestion and one that would add complexity to my paper. However, that was never addressed in Woolf’s autobiography, so to address it in my paper would have been stretching and twisting Woolf’s words. Furthermore, Patel had other questions about interpreting “being” and “non-being” moments that are subject to change person by person, in my own opinion. Nonetheless, as Patel suggested, I could have used a more dialogic approach to working with the many other authors I chose to cite within my paper. But I was attempting to streamline and create as concise a paper as possible.
Dixita Patel was an effective editor and thoroughly examined and questioned each point I tried to make. Her suggestions and points were actually the best ones anyone has ever given to me about my writing. I thank her for her time and I hope she received as much insight from me as I did from her.
Page One - Page Two - Page Three - Page Four - Page Five - Page Six