This semester has definitely been challenging for me. It wasn't until a few months ago that I even called myself a writer. I always told people I was studying professional writing, but I never actually considered myself a writer. It's so funny, because now, I wouldn't know how to introduce myself without saying "I'm a writer."

Between my advanced composition class and my magazine writing class, I've been pushed beyond my comfort zone. Even though I've been out of high school for close to two years, it's still hard for me not to revert back do the standard 5-paragraph essay. Before this semester began, I had never even heard of creative nonfiction. Now I have two creative non-fiction pieces that I've sent out for publication.

I've been pushed beyond my limits and been forced to branch out. For most of my assignments, I had almost complete freedom. A lot of time, I had so much freedom that I didn't know what to do with it. I would procrastinate and procrastinate just because I was afraid to explore new topics. For me, the hardest part of a project is starting it. I've learned to follow my intuition and not be afraid of failure. As my magazine writing professor would say, "Everybody writes shitty rough drafts."

Throughout the semester, I've been exposed to amazing writing--and I'm not just referring to my assigned readings. My peers are insanely talented and have been bold enough to share some of their work with me. Sometimes I look around my classes and wonder "Where will this person be in 5 years?" There are some people that I know are going to make it, and I can't wait until I can say "I had class with him/her in college!" These people make me strive to be a better writer, but also be who I am. Originality is important.

There's been times when I feel like I could never make it through this semester. Even now, with finals week looming, I still wonder. But looking back, I've realized that I've produced pieces of work that I never would have attempted before. I've tried new styles and genres and perspectives. I've written profiles, and creative nonfiction pieces, and memoirs. I remember sitting in class having my professor introduce montage writing. That day, I thought it was the hardest thing in the world, yet my last creative nonfiction piece is montage. I've always wanted to be a journalist and several times I've found myself thinking that creative writing didn't apply to journalism. But I've learned that all styles of writing overlap at some points.

It's hard for me to be vulnerable and accept criticism. It was one thing to have peer reviews and conferences with my professors, but actually sending my work out was scary. If I don't get published, does that mean that I'm a bad writer? There are literally millions of writers around the world. Some worse than me, some better. The only way to get published is to produce my best work and be persistent. If someone doesn't like my work, then I can send it somewhere else.

This semester, I feel like I've grown a lot. It's no longer about the standard forms of writing. (Actually, I had to write a biography in MLA format two nights ago, and I hated it). I've learned to take risks and be open to new ideas. Inspiration is all around me. I just need to focus on the task at hand and write.

Recently, I read an interview with Nicholas Sparks on WritersDigest.com. Since he has become such a successful author, I was interested in reading about his views on the process of writing creatively.

The editor of Writer's Digest, Jessica Stawser, conducted the interview and asked some very pointed questions. I found that a lot of the questions pertained to the discussions my advanced composition class has had throughout the semester. For example, Stawser asked, "How much do you think about your readers as your write?" Sparks answered by saying, "Not so much as I write, but as I conceive a story, they're certainly in my mind, because I write stories that I want the readers to enjoy. And I think that is probably one of the main elements of writing that young writers will hopefully take to heart. And that is to write what readers want to read, which isn't necessarily what you want to write."

I agree with Sparks' answer. I think it's very important for an author to identify his/her audience. If you're writing for your own personal enjoyment, then by all means, write what you want to write. But if you hope to share your writing with others, you need to capture your readers by writing what they want. Readers need to identify with what they're reading or else they won't continue reading it. Now that doesn't necessarily mean that writers will always be forced to write stories that they would never personally read, but it does mean that the audience comes first.

Another question that Stawser asked was, "When you come out and say that a character was loosely based on someone you know, do you ever worry about how those people will react?" Sparks responded, " No, because there are always differences--what they do for a living is probably different, their age is probably different, you know, they've never been in any of these exact circumstances--so no, I've never gotten into trouble for that."

This part of the interviewed reminded me of our class discussion on composite characters. "Keep It Real" defines a composite characters as "the melding of two or more real people into one." It's a tricky technique because some believe the use of composite characters automatically places the work into the fiction category. One reason for using composite figures is the fact that "friends and family who did not ask to be in your story expect their confidences to remain confidential." I don't think that composite characters are completely fiction. I think they are acceptable in creative nonfiction but definitely not just the nonfiction genre.

Stawer goes on saying, "You got your big break early in your career, but publishing is always changing. What have been your biggest learning experience? Sparks answered," Every industry is changing, and it's just an inevitable part. That doesn't change the intrinsic human desire to share in good stories. Human nature changes a lot slower than does the business world." He went on to offer a challenge, " I also think it's important to realize that to get published, you're not competing against me, or Stephen King, or John Grisham--we have spent years developing audiences that we bring to the table. So, you have to write better than we do, or more originally, or have more original stories, or work in a genre that has a need."

I found this quote pretty intimidating. How can I write better than amazing authors like that? Maybe I can, maybe I can't. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't try. I can't base my career on trying to mimic other writers. Writing, for me, is about creating the best work that I can and staying true to myself in the process.

After working on several peer edits for second creative nonfiction essay in my advanced composition class, I began thinking about the importance of getting others' opinions on my work. I often don't have a very clear perspective on my writing. Either I feel that it's amazing or that it completely sucks. Sometimes I'm just so sick of working on a specific paper that I totally give up and refuse to finish editing it. That's why I always appreciate having a pair of fresh eyes to critique what I've done.

When I read the New York Times today, I stumbled across an article titled "Aspiring Authors Get Help Online." The author, Julie Bosman, explains how the process of getting published has changed drastically with the aid of the Internet. Instead of dealing with editors and literary agents, authors can now simply post their ideas and writing samples onto a "writing community" website. Specifically, Penguin Group USA has created a new website called "Book Country" for fiction writers to share their work.

Book Country allows aspiring writers to post their work online and "receive critiques from other users, who can comment on points like character development, pacing and dialogue," Bosman says. Personally, I feel like this could go either way; it could be helpful or harmful to authors. Authors will need to use good judgment and discernment when considering suggestions about their work. Just because someone tells you to do something, doesn't mean you should necessarily do it. But on the flip side, authors could receive good advice and improve on their work.

Another benefit of this site is that authors will be able to view comment from complete strangers. Sometimes I feel like I don't get the best advice from people that I know because they're afraid of hurting my feelings. Also, they may have a personal bias. Just because it's me, my friends and family sometimes think that my work is awesome even if it's not. It's nice to get an honest review from a real reader, because honestly, that's who I write for, and that's who I want to like my work.

Going back to the website, Book Country additionally offers information about the processes of "finding an agent, marketing and promoting a book, using social media and handling digital and subsidiary rights." This summer, the site will give novice writers the opportunity to self-publish their books and order printed copies for a fee. The hope for this website is that new writers will be able to improve their work in a safe environment while also catching the interest of editors and publishers seeking new talent.

Molly Barton, the director of business development for Penguin and the president of Book Country reveals, "One of the things I remember really clearly from my early editorial experiences was this feeling of guilt. I would read submissions and not be able to help the writer because we couldn't find a place for them on the list that I was acquiring for. And I kept feeling that there was something we could do on the Internet to really help writers help each other."

To me, this sounds like a really great idea, and something that I might consider doing. It seems like a safe place put my work and receive feedback. In her article, Bosman even answered one of my main questions. What about plagiarism? "To discourage plagiarism, administrators have disabled the copy-and-past and print mechanisms on the site," she informed.

I think a website like this could really help improve my writing, and it would give me the chance to views others' work. It's nice to feel a part of a community and to know that there are struggling writers out there just like me.

Last class, my Advance Comp. professor asked us to write a love letter to someone or something in a perspective that we aren't really comfortable with. I liked that prompt, so I decided to post what I wrote on here. I decided to write my love letter to Virgin Gorda. I visited a friend, who lives on the island, during Winter break. It was an amazing trip, and I really miss it. Now let me clarify that this is strictly a piece of free-writing for me, so it isn't very polished. I decided just to have fun with it. Anyways, here it is.

Dear Virgin Gorda,

I wish I could see you now, your deserted beaches, your crashing waves, your crystal clear water. I miss your long winding roads that I used to travel in the dark, the moon shining, guiding my way. I cannot see your sky here. The city lights overtake the stars and the planets. It's rainy and cold here, nothing like the warm, sunny days where you are. Your secret forests and private caves are always on my mind. With you, I had no worries, no responsibilities, only life. You filled my days with peace and happiness. Now, you fill my dreams every night. Deep in slumber, I dream of returning to you and starting where we left off. Back to the days of falling asleep to the sound of your tides rolling in. Back to the smell of fresh flowers, the feel of your sun on my skin, and your sand between my toes. Your seashells lie on my dresser, making me long for sunset strolls along your shores. I want to climb your house-sized rocks again and watch the boats as they come into your marina. I can still taste your salty air and your soft breeze blowing through my hair. You never placed any expectations of me. You accepted me whether I showed up in shorts, a t-shirt, and flip flops, devoid of makeup and hairspray, or if I was dolled up in a dress and heels. Even when I just rolled out of bed, you made me feel beautiful. You made me believe again--in God, in love, in nature, in myself. You helped me smile again. Laugh again. You taught me to overcome my fears and step out of my comfort zone. You taught me independence, but you also made me realize the importance of friends and family. Without you, I feel like a part of myself is missing, a part that I never knew existed until I met you. When I was with you, my thoughts were clear, and I was passionate about life. Now, I'm not so sure anymore. It's hard to know that pictures and shells are all that I have left of you. One day. One day, I'll see you again. Time is a powerful thing, but eventually the waiting will end, and we'll be together again. I have a feeling our reunion will be sweeter than I can even imagine. Life has a funny way of working out. Positive thoughts are the only way I stay sane anymore. I hope you know that my time with you changed me forever. My only regret was leaving you.

Until we meet again,

Becca

Facebook, Twitter, Google- web companies and social networking sites have become major sources of concern. They are so complex and detailed that many users fail to realize what exactly they're signing up for. Although there are pros and cons to almost anything connected to the Internet, the larger Internet companies consistently take a lot of heat for having hidden loopholes and storing, as well as using, users' personal information. The media has caught wind of situations where these sites have become dangerous and potentially harmful to users. We've all heard of stories of cyber bulling and cyber stalking, but does allowing these web companies access to personal data actually help more than it hurts?

As a member of Facebook and a frequent Google user, I try to be cautious. I don't add strangers to my friends list. I don't put my phone number in my status'. And I don't put my address in my profile. But that doesn't mean that I'm completely safe from the outside world. Personally, I don't obsess about the fact that some of my personal information is floating around in cyber space, but I know many people that do. With stories like "The Craigslist Killer" and the several reports of teenage suicides involving cyber bullying, users have a right to be hesitant about giving out their personal data, but they must also realize that companies use that information for good reasons too.

In an article on Slate.com titled "No More Privacy Paranoia," Slate's technology columnist, Farhad Manjoo, points out all the benefits of web companies collecting information about people. Often times, the data that is collected can't be traced back to an individual. For example, when conducting a search on Google, your word or phrase often appears before you finish typing it. This is because Google keeps tack of popular searches from around the world. Also, Google corrects spelling mistakes. Manjoo uses the example of Rebecca Black. If you type in "Rebeca Blacke," it will still lead you to the right person. "Since Google has stored lots of other people's search requests for Black, it knows you're looking for the phenom behind 'Friday'," Manjoo explains. In addition, Google has the ability to recognize synonyms. It knows that the words "murder" and "homicide" have the same meaning. Not to mention that Google can detect large-scale security threats aimed at Web servers, create real-time traffic reports, and monitor the flu epidemic.

I'm not a Twitter user, but I do use Facebook. I know that I've personally connected with a lot more people by sharing simple things like my favorite books and movies and my school. I've found friends from high school, friend from when I was little, and family members half-way across the world. With three of my best friends stretching from Illinois to Florida to Berlin, it's hard to communicate without Facebook. I would rather share a little information (which is rather basic) than be socially isolated. Okay, I know that sounds pretty exaggerated (I tend to do that a lot), but seriously, Facebook makes life so much easier when it comes to keeping in-touch with family and friends. Manjoo points out that "every year or so, the media and activists get exercised over some new and alarming slight by the social-networking company. Yet our actions belie our concerns; while we all holler about how much we hate Facebook, none of us quit it--and, in fact, hundreds of thousands more keep signing up."

Many people who know me would agree that I suck at making decisions. I prefer to stay neutral. So of course, in this argument, I can't exactly pick a side. I agree that many web companies exploit people, but these companies can also use their powers for good. I guess the only solution is that people need to be cautious when giving out personal info (use common sense), and web companies need to be monitored by the Federal Trade Commission and other authorities.

In my Advanced Composition class, there has been a lot of discussion about how to market books, the credibility of authors, and the overall authenticity of pieces of writing. Specifically, the topic of memoirs became a subject of debate. How do readers feel when they read a book labeled as a memoir only to find out that it's actually fiction? Does the author lose credibility in the eyes or the readers? Do readers feel that the book has lost its value?

Some answered "yes." After finding out that the "memoir" is not real, they lose interest in the book and respect for the author. Yet others answered "no." They feel that good writing is just that, good writing. They believe that it doesn't matter whether the book is fiction or nonfiction; if it's a good story that draws them in, then it's worth reading.

While flipping through The New York Times, I found an article addressing this exact issue. In the article titled "A Reality Check for Steinbeck and Charley," written by Charles McGrath, John Steinbeck's book, "Travels With Charley: In Search of America," is put into question. New evidence has surfaced suggesting that a large amount of Steinbeck's journey across the United States may have been made up.

The book was marketed as a nonfiction account of Steinbeck's travels across the country with his sole companion, his French poodle, Charley. Steinbeck was thought to have stayed at campgrounds, slept in his camper, and talked with locals in hopes of "reconnecting himself with the country." After the book was published in 1962, it quickly became a best seller. Even today, it is still regarded as an American classic.

Apparently, some readers instantly noticed that the dialogue in the book seemed "stagey" and "wooden" not unlike his conversations in his works of fiction. Even Steinbeck's son agrees that parts of the book were fake. "He just sat in his camper and wrote all that [expletive]," John Jr. tells McGrath. In facts, a former journalist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Bill Steigerward, attempted to retrace Steinbeck's American adventure and found the Steinbeck spent the majority of his time in motels or luxury hotels. And apparently, his wife, Elaine, accompanied him during most of the trip.

Since this information was revealed, many people have expressed differing opinions on Steinbeck as an author and the book "Travels With Charley." Susan Shillinglaw, and English teacher at San Jose State University and a scholar in residence at the National Steinbeck Center, said, "Any writer has the right to shape materials, and undoubtedly, Steinbeck left things out. That doesn't mean the book is a lie." Jay Parini, the author of a 1995 biography of Steinbeck, agrees with Shillinglaw. "Does this shake my faith in the book? Quite the opposite...if you want to get the spirit of something, sometimes it's important to use the techniques of a fiction writer."

In contrast, Steigerward was surprised that Steinbeck scholars had little to no reaction to his findings. "Other than the fact that none of that is true, what can I tell you? If scholars aren't concerned about this, what are they scholaring about?," he asks.

In any case, some Steinbeck readers felt betrayed while others looked past his indiscretion. Readers form their own relationships with the books they read. These kind of discoveries happen all the time. It's up to each individual reader to decide whether the book (and the author) is worthy of praise or condemnation.

Last week, I was attempting to write an opinion editorial for my Advanced Composition class. Of course, due to my incessant procrastination, I started it at 10:30 pm the night before it was due for peer review. Honestly, I thought it was going to be a piece of cake, but once I started, I realized that it was a lot harder than I expected.

My editorial was on international adoption fraud, but the whole time I was writing it, I just kept feeling like I was writing a research paper. After discussing my work with my professor, I realized my "opinion editorial" had absolutely no opinion in it. When looking at the rhetorical triangle, it was obvious that I had achieved the logos, or logical, portion of the paper. It was filled with quotes and statistics. I even had the ethos (credibility) part down. But I had no pathos, or emotional appeal.

I'm not exactly sure what went wrong, but I thought I would have been good at writing opinion editorials. Of course, I haven't had much practice, but how hard is writing what you think? I learned that it's pretty tough. For me, it was tricky to balance each part of the triangle.

Once I really started to think about it, I realized that my writing is like my personality in many ways. I am passionate about international adoption, but it didn't show in my writing at all. I think sometimes in life, I'm afraid to share my perspective on things, because I'm think people will judge me. Often times, I either keep my feelings to myself, or I try to prove my argument with an abundance of facts. I feel like no one is going to listen unless I have tons of evidence to prove my point. This way, I can't possibly be wrong.

I know that it's important to write for your audience, but I've learned that you also have to write for you. Sometimes, I just need to let go. I can't worry about people not liking what I have to say. My opinion is my opinion, and if someone doesn't like it, well that's their right.

Emotion is a key element to every piece of writing. Writing involves revealing yourself to your audience. You need that connection with the audience to draw them in and keep them hooked. Readers need to find the piece relatable. For writers, it's kind of scary. But I've found that it's also freeing. I get to say what I want to say, and it's almost therapeutic in a way.

I'm still working on my opinion editorial, but I can confidently say that it's a lot better than it was. I added a bit of sarcasm to my writing, which helped get my opinion across, but almost made it fun. I'm hoping by the time I'm finished, my op. ed. will not only show my opinion on the topic of international adoption, but will also inspire others to really think about the issue.

When I read the writing of some of my peers, I'm appalled. It shocks me that college students don't know know the difference between "there, they're, and their" or "to, two, and too." Some refuse to use commas, while others disregard grammar completely. When it comes to writing, I have many pet peeves, and I admit that I am guilty of some writing mistakes, but I think it's important to follow some of the basic rules of writing.

Recently, the argument that the English language is declining has gained momentum. With books like Lynn Truss' "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" and Robert Lane Greene's "You Are What You Speak," writers adress the problems of punctutation, slang, pronunciation, along with many other issues. But the question is: Is language truly dying or is it simply changing naturally with the times?

The way a person speaks or writes, in essence, defines who he or she is. Certain slang terms and dialects represent an individual's culture. Let's be honest, most people these days don't speak like Shakespeare, but that doesn't mean that people don't respect his work. Language can become an accurate reflection of a specific time in history.

In a post on the New York Time's website, Robert Lane Greene explains that Latin was once considered a crumbling language, but eventually transformed into French, Italian, and many other valued languages. Change isn't always bad.

Although we may not like how others are using language, since the late 1800s, illiteracy has decreased from one in five people to almost nonexistant. Almost all Americans have access to education. More people are reading and writing than ever before. Albeit, many people are simply reading facebook messages or writing texts. But who's to say that's wrong?

It's a fine line to straddle. There must be rules and regulations for every language, but there also must be room for change. The Oxford English Dictionary has been known to add upwards of 4,000 news words each year. It's hard to find a balance between maintaining originality and embracing new ideas. If you think about it, the same problem exists in every aspect of life.

Even while I'm writing this, I can't pick a side to this debate. I understand why people are upset, because frankly, I'm upset, but I also understand that change is inevitable. Without change, creativity would be impossible.

My friends and I are always coming up with new words or phrases. Somehow those words almost define our relationship. When I think about those words, it helps me remember certain memories that I've had with my friends. People outside of our friend group often how no idea what we're talking about, but that's what makes our friendship special or even "exclusive." It doesn't mean that we disregard the use of "proper English"; we just have fun making up words.

Greene's perspective on the topic is that "we may just be seeing more of language’s real-world diversity – dialect, nonstandard grammar and all – in written form, whereas 150 years ago those same people would never write. That’s something to celebrate, not to complain about."

As most of my friends already know, I am obsessed with National Geographic. Ever since I saw the now-iconic photo of the "Afghan Girl", I've been hooked. If someone asks me what my dream job is, I will always say "being a photojournalist for NatGeo." Since my magazine subscription is sent to my parents' house, I'm often found searching nationalgeographic.com for interesting articles or pictures to feed my obsession.

Last week, while surfing the website, I stumbled across an article titled "Disappearing Languages: Enduring Voices- Documenting the World's Endangered Languages." In many of my writing classes, as well as my French classes, my professors always teach me how important language is. In reality, language is essential in all aspects of life. It's not only how we communicate with each other, but it is a symbol of our heritage; language is a key element to our culture. In many ways, language defines us as a people.

Knowing this, I was surprised to learn in this article that throughout the world, a language dies every 14 days. What's even more shocking is that it is estimated that more than half of the world's 7,000 languages are expected to disappear by the year 2100.

Often times, words or phrases in a certain languages cannot be properly translated into other languages. Also, some cultures rely solely on oral communication; customs, traditions, history, and overall knowledge are only passed from generation to generation in oral form. With no written form, when languages become extinct, an entire culture may be lost.

In an interview with K. David Harrison on The Economist website, the reporter asks Harrison what we lose when we lose a language. He answers with a quote from his 2007 book "When Languages Die": "When we lose a language, we lose centuries of human thinking about time, seasons, sea creatures, reindeer, edible flowers, mathematics, landscapes, myths, music, the unknown and the everyday."

Language allows freedom, creativity and individuality. Each language has it's own unique aspects. For me, language is a way to express myself. The meaning and the placement of words help me to relate my thoughts and feelings to others in my own way. I believe that language brings people together.

Harrison goes on to make an interesting analogy. He says, "We would be outraged if Notre Dame Cathedral or the Great Pyramid of Giza were demolished to make way for modern buildings. We should be similarly appalled when languages—monuments to human genius far more ancient and complex than anything we have built with our hands—erode."

Why are we only willing fight for the history that is tangible? Language is the basic element of every culture. Not to sound cheesy, but "variety is the spice of life." Diversity is what keeps the world interesting. If everyone everywhere spoke the same language, life would be pretty lame. Although we may not be able to physically touch a language, that doesn't mean that it's not worth fighting for. Language is a part of a person's identity. Sadly, at this rate, many people and their cultures are bound to be lost forever.

As a sophomore Professional Writing major, I frequently find myself wondering about life after college. I know I haven't exactly chosen the most stable career path, and some say being a writer isn't "practical", but doing what I love is more important to me than financial security and social acceptance.

That being said, I recently read an article by Neil Genslinger, a staff editor for the New York Times. Titled "The Problem With Memoirs," the article addresses the ridiculous amount of "nobodies" who believe their lives are worth writing an entire book.

As a writer, it concerns me that people, who are far from qualified, are capable of getting a book published. Why am I going to school to learn about writing, when any random person off the street can write a book, get published, and actually sell their stories?

Luckily, most readers know good writing when they see it. Those "nobodies" may be able to sell books based on fancy cover art, but the text is what really matters. I agree with Genslinger when he points out that "Memoirs have been disgorged by virtually everyone who has ever had cancer, been anorexic, battled depression, lost weight. By anyone who has ever taught an underprivileged child, adopted an underprivileged child or been an underprivileged child. By anyone who was raised in the '60s, '70s or '80s, not to mention the '50s, '40s or '30s. Owned a dog. Run a marathon. Found religion. Held a job." It's ridiculous the amount of people who live quite ordinary lives yet feel the need to write a book. No one wants to be bored to death.

Genslinger goes on to offer four pieces of advice for those thinking about writing a memoir. First, make sure your life is interesting. Again, no one wants to read about an average person with an average life. If there's nothing special about you, then don't write a book.

Second, don't write a memoir for the sole purpose of gaining pity or compassion. Most readers don't want to drown in your misery. Wanting attention and sympathy is not a good reason to write.

Third, don't be a follower. It's easy to make a cheap imitation, but it's more challenging and rewarding to be original. Readers appreciate creativity.

Finally, Genslinger suggests "making yourself the least important character" in your memoir. It's important to learn about your self and others through the writing process. Your story shouldn't be all about you.

People should really think about their motives before writing a memoir. The first question that you should ask yourself is: "If you were someone else, would you want to read about your life?". If the answer is "no", then it's pretty obvious that you shouldn't expect others to want to either.

I believe that writing involves skill and passion. It's not about becoming a best-seller or wanting people to know your name. Not everyone is cut out to be a write, and that's okay, but those that are truely committed to the art of writing should have a chance to showcase their talent.