Hello readers,

Throughout my time in ASTU100 thus far, I have learned a significant amount about academic culture and writing that has altered my view regarding what it truly means to be an academic scholar. I have learned what it means to be critical in scholarly writing, and also how to address scholars without being disrespectful towards their works. In a recent ASTU100 lecture, Professor Luger noted the difference between what most students think of when they hear the word criticism, and what criticism means in academic writing. Professor Luger stated that in academic writing, criticism is “expressing or involving an analysis of the merits and faults of a work of literature, music, or art.” I have come to the realization that it is important to be respectful towards other scholars in academic writing for a variety of reasons; mainly due to the fact that writing takes time, and it is important to show one’s respect for the amount of time and thought that goes into writing various works. An example of positive and negative criticisms that comes to mind for me is when I was in high school and we began to learn how to conduct a debate, and criticize our opponent’s argument. My teacher always enforced the fact that when we make our rebuttal, it is important to speak articulately, with respect towards our opponent. My teacher wanted to stress the fact that when you criticize respectfully, both the audience, and your opponent will respect you and listen to your argument much more intently. Thinking back on this lesson that I learned in high school during debate lessons, I have concluded that this rule of thumb applies when critiquing authors of scholarly writing as well. Sometimes it is difficult to express opinions that we are very passionate about, without coming across as offensive, however academic writing is a good practice for critiquing carefully and thoughtfully, with solid arguments to back up said argument.

Criticism can sometimes be less obvious than expected. An example of respectful critique can be identified in Matthew Bolton’s, “Well-Told Lie.” In this scholarly article, Bolton states, “Thus, in addition to concerns that Ondaatje has not sufficiently met the responsibility his ethnicity creates, Christopher’s account of Lalla’s death and his alternative depiction of Mervyn raise concerns that Running is factually inaccurate as well.” (Well-Told Lie)

Another lesson that I have learned about academic writing is that before writing a summary, it is always important to follow a series of steps. Before doing anything, it is vital to read the abstract while taking notes, which is the basic “gist” of the work, or essentially, the summary of the work. What surprised me most about preparing to summarize, is that it is expected of the writer to read the summary before summarizing. Another point that I found interesting is that it is also assumed that the writer of the summary will read the work at least two times before determining what the the main argument is and how it is being argued.

To conclude, I have accumulated a significant amount of knowledge regarding academic and scholarly writing so far in ASTU100, and I have realized that academic writing is a completely new world compared to the writing that I was familiar with conducting throughout high school. Academic writing is an art that cannot be learned overnight, but it takes thoughtful practice, and dedication towards following the many complex rules of academic writing, such as critiquing scholars and their works respectfully, and preparing to summarize, to name a few.

 

Works Cited:

Matthew Bolton (2008) Michael Ondaatje’s “Well-Told Lie”, Prose Studies

Hello readers. In this blog post, I will be discussing how “Running in the Family” by Michael Ondaatje has altered my view of what a memoir truly is. This book was a very challenging read, and I was initially even more perplexed by Ondaatje as an author when I discovered that this book is in fact a “fictional memoir.”

More often than not, when we hear the word memoir, we think of a first person’s account of a memory and life event. However, Ondaatje chose to manipulate what he knows as his family history, and change certain events and characteristics to adjust the story to how he wanted the events to unfold. He also chosen to fill in some unknown gaps by writing his own take on what might have happened. In Matthew Bolton’s “Well-Told Lie,” Bolton highlights Ondaatje’s alterations on the truth when he mentions that his “historical accuracy has also come under attack, both from academic circles and from within his own family.” (Well-Told Lie) In Bolton’s scholar, Ernest MacIntyre states that Running is “a triumph of poetic truth.”  (Well-Told Lie) That being said, Ondaatje’s brother, Christopher Ondaatje, has written his own biography of their father, and in this biography he states that contrary to what Michael Ondaatje states, their grandmother Lalla did not die in a flood but she actually died of alcohol poisoning. (Well-Told Lie)

So, is “Running in The Family” a true memoir? What feels slightly unauthentic about Ondaatje’s memoir, is the fact that memoir’s are supposed to be linked as close to the truth as possible. I feel that it is unfair to call something a memoir if one has blatantly manipulated history and altered major events in a piece of writing that is actually supposed to be mostly factual. That being said, I think that Ondaatje’s creative perspective on this “fictional memoir,” has proven to be a beneficial way to link family history and Ondaatje’s vague connection to it. After much analysis of the book, I have concluded that Ondaatje has written a metafiction: a story about telling a story. Throughout the historiographic book, Ondaatje makes up for the fact that this is a “fictional memoir” by including authentic photographs, maps, and shifting the dialogue and conversation so that the reader can get to know the perspective of other family members. These sources and different mediums make Ondaatje’s book a much more reputable source for the history of the Ondaatje’s.

For example, on page 145, Ondaatje inserts a photo of his parents together when they were younger. Ondaatje describes this photo that his Aunt has shown him as “the photograph I have been waiting for all my life.” (Ondaatje 143) Although Ondaatje was not there when the photo was taken, he is using information that his Aunt has given him, and also making assumptions and observations based on the actual photograph. This is an example of what we discussed in class, the notion that history is passed along and pieced together, and some pieces are maybe lost and or found along the way.

 

Another example of Ondaatje’s use of different mediums is on page 77, when we are introduced to the poem The Cinnamon Peeler. This poem is clearly about marriage and love, and it describes the wife as cinnamon by describing “in detail, which areas of the woman’s body would smell of cinnamon dust,” for example. (Poetry for Students) The poem links back to Ondaatje’s Sri Lankan roots, by describing the “yellow bark dust” that originates from the bark of a Sri Lankan evergreen tree. (Poetry for Students)

Ondaatje also incorporates dialogue from other characters, to make this book much more rich with history. On page 155, the chapter called “Dialogues,” is introduced. In this chapter, Ondaatje is discussing his father, except he uses texts from other characters, presumably his siblings and relatives, to allow the reader to gain another perspective. By hearing from other characters, we can learn what certain people thought about Ondaatje’s father. An example of this is the contrasting dialogues, “I remember when Daddy lost his job. He had just been sacked and he was drinking,” compared to “To us he was an utterly charming man, always gracious.” (Ondaatje 156-57).

In an article in the Irish Times called “Why I love: Michael Ondaatje’s Running in The Family,’ by Rosita Boland, she highlights the fact that Ondaatje “interviewed whatever family members remained, about those who were dead: ‘I wanted to touch them into words.’” (Why I Love: Michael Ondaatje’s Running in the Family). Boland also notes that Ondaatje “travelled the railways his family had taken, went to the houses and race-courses and harbors they had been at. His own wife and children came from Canada and joined him for part of the time, and he walked with them in heat and monsoon, trying continually to return to a place where no one can ever go – the past.” I think that this statement proves a lot about what kind of an author Ondaatje is, the dedication that he had to writing this “fictional memoir,” and his motivation to write the most accurate and creative depiction of his family history as possible.

Lastly, Boland mentions that this book is a “liberation from the academic world,” (Why I Love: Michael Ondaatje’s Running in the Family) inferring that Ondaatje’s creative spin on a memoir is refreshing, and allows for more opportunity for reflection on the reader’s part. I would have to agree with this statement, because although not all of the information in this book is factually correct, this book is a whole new take on a family memoir. I stated earlier that I initially thought that this book was unauthentic, however it is authentic for the fact that Ondaatje has gone to great lengths to compile all of the facts that he could. By incorporating creativity to make up the rest of the unknown, and using various medians to express this history, Ondaatje has crafted a wonderful memoir. This memoir is authentic because it highlights the fact that memory is often blurry, and sometimes we don’t have the luxury to know all of the answers. This memoir is special because it has a great deal of Ondaatje’s emotion attached to it. Sometimes the unknown allows for opportunities for creativity, like Ondaatje has been bold enough to explore. Throughout “Running in The Family” Ondaatje is saying, “This is what I know, and this is what I don’t know. This is what I think might have happened, and this is what I wish would have happened.” And for those reasons, that is why “Running in The Family” has proven to be such a captivating read.

 

Works Cited:

Boland, Rosita. “Why I Love: Michael Ondaatje’s Running in the Family.” The Irish Times. N.p., 13 Nov. 2014. Web. 14 Oct. 2016. http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/why-i-love-michael-ondaatje-s-running-in-the-family-1.1999679

“The Cinnamon Peeler.” Poetry for Students. Encyclopedia.com. 12 Oct. 2016< http://www.encyclopedia.com/arts/educational-magazines/cinnamon-peeler

Matthew Bolton (2008) Michael Ondaatje’s “Well-Told Lie”, Prose Studies

Ondaatje, Michael. Running in the Family. New York: Vintage International, 1993. Print.