If the student was just trying to shock or be funny, and the vulgarity had no real reason for being in the story other than that, I'd hand it back and tell the student to rewrite it.

If the student was expressing something in the only way it could be expressed--in the student's mind--I'd look at it a little differently.

After all, what would CATCHER IN THE RYE be without the vulgarity (relatively tame as it is considering the way many students talk nowadays)? That's the way Holden Caulfield expresses himself, and it's part of his "sturm and drang" to say things that way.

It doesn't mean I have to like the story or want to see more like it, but I would be willing to allow a little leeway if I could see that the vulgarity was integral to the story.

It also doesn't mean that I wouldn't try to encourage the student to find less vulgar ways to put the point across, just because it could be an exercise in vocabulary development as well as an exercise in style.

Having been a military brat I was a bit more world wise than my friend who grew up on a farm.

We wrote a "love" story. Her story was filled with vulgar words. While I wrote about the same subject I didn't use "dirty" words.

I got an A, she got an F. We also got a note about not proper content ect. I was about 16.

As a teacher I try to look at content and context. But I know many teachers who freak at the smallest thing. But they are the same ones who stress over a sentence begining with because.

I hear more high school and middle school kids swear than any other part of the population---heck most of the music they listen to is filled with it---so teachers have to accept that it will be in a story that those same students write.

Unless as said, it was done for shock value--but even then I would most likely grade it on the grammar and same standards as the other papers. Not being shocked would solve the problem.

Shawn

You issued your students a creative writing assignment that has no real guidelines but school appropiate (no sexual or extreme violence). You look at someone's writing that includes a sentence that states.

The woman stared at the man's eyes and could smell the hint of perfume flowing from his jacket. She knew it was not him for she had not even met him for the first time since that morning. "D**n you Jack!" she shouts. "I love you!"

Besides that, the situation isn't explained.

Yes, I'd request a rewrite, but not because of the swear word.

quote:

---

There's a saying that goes something like this: Profanity is the result of a feeble mind trying to express itself.

---

I agree with that one hundred and twenty-seven percent, Kolona, (despite it's mathematical impossibility ) but which is the feeble mind here? The writer's? Or the character he/she's trying to write about? I mean, yes, you shouldn't use profanity if you can avoid it (like, in narration, for example, unless the story is in first person POV, and said person is not very refined or educated) but when trying to portray, say, a gangster from Los Angeles trying to intimidate someone else (and here, I apologize to all Los Angeles gangsters ), then I imagine quite a bit of profanity would be used.

It all depends on the character, really.

Glad I could help (if I did at all, I mean),
Chris

PS: In my own stories, I try to shy away from swear words that take the Lord's name in vain. Everything else, I use freely, believing that they are common words that became dirty over time. (Fer example, did you know the f-word is an acronym? It's true.)

Rita Mae Brown, in her book on writing (I don't recall the title right off, sorry) spends quite a bit of time talking about word choice in dialog as an important tool of characterization.

Educated characters will tend to use more multi-syllabic (she calls them Latin-based) words in their dialog. (I submit that you can show a character is uneducated and presumptuous if such a character uses big words incorrectly.)

Uneducated characters (or those who want to appear that way) will tend to use more one-syllable (she calls them Anglo-Saxon-based) words in their dialog.

English is such a rich language, with many ways to say something, with plenty of one-syllable words to say the same thing as the multi-syllable words, that you can show the reader how articulate and/or educated a character is every time that character speaks. Whether that character uses swear words (most of which are Anglo-Saxon based) or not.

Sometimes I’ll draw from my on life as well. Like others on the this thread I won’t use the Lord’s name in vain—“JC” and “GD” or two of my least favorite expressions. So, I say things like “Gee whiz” or “Gosh Darn.” Now, this is only funny because I have no problem using every other swear word in the English language. It’s especially odd when the phrase, “Gosh f—king darn,” leaves my mouth.

I’ve been in a similar situation as the aforementioned student. Honestly, I don’t think the word, “damn” warrants a rewrite or parent/teacher conference or anything. If four letter words were flying around every other sentence, then I would definitely ask for a rewrite. The way I got around this problem was I edited myself, similar to what I did above. If the word couldn’t be said in a PG movie, I would just do the good ol’ f—k, or s—t, or whatever. You get your point across, and only mildly offend people.

JOHN!

I spoke at the 2001 Kaiserslauter Young Author's convention in Germany. A group of high school and middle school students had signed up for the one of the "one on one" speak to an editor session I did.

When Enders Star said, "Good ideas suck grammar." I thought of a question I asked.

I asked, "How much time do you spend on rewrites?"

I got blank stares and one smart young man said, "I run spell check and grammar check." Thank the deity of writing that he at least did that much.

This led to more discussions about an editor's job. These young people seemed to think only losers had to do re-writes.

I told them, good writing is re-written. They did not agree.

I understand that while in the "zone" --that time when ideas flow fast and furious and your writing is golden, that it seems those sentences are perfect----often the ides are gold during that time. But a simple re-write can clarify those ideas so everyone else can see the gilded sunshine as well. The story is in your head and it’s hard to see the imperfections.

As to the sample sentences--- I more than agree with Kathleen--I would not ask for a rewrite based on the swear words, but because the sentences make little sense grammatically.

Every writer needs to realize that grammar is their friend and not some monster teachers made up to terrorize them.

In the program guide to the 2001 Kaiserslauter Young Author's Conference ---I said---I am often asked if good grammar matters. I always say, No, it doesn't---not unless you want to see your work in print.

Shawn

quote:

---

a simple re-write

---

though i suppose good grammar is a part of the editing process more than anything--at least when the juices are really flowing and you have a great idea to get down. i know if i stop to make sure my prose is pretty i can lose track of where i'm going.

TTFN & lol

quote:

---

though i suppose good grammar is a part of the editing process more than anything

---

Suppose? I hope you were being facetious here. A check-up in any field starts with the basics, like vital signs in medicine.

quote:

---

--at least when the juices are really flowing and you have a great idea to get down. i know if i stop to make sure my prose is pretty i can lose track of where i'm going.

---

Pretty prose is not synonymous with good grammar. Technically accurate prose can be quite unpretty and pretty prose can be grammatically incorrect. The former can be very formal and stilted and/or boring and the latter the result of artistic license.

Artistic license is not a starting point, however. A writer must know the rules before he can bend them in a plausible way -- maybe like an architect needs to understand stuctural concerns before he can actually design anything. (I'm not sure that's a great example since I'm not an architect, but it sounds reasonable to me. )

Getting ideas down on paper without concern about grammar or other technicalities is a legitimate method many writers use to capture inspiration. They know, though, that what they're writing is only rough, first draft material that will need polishing, if not a complete overhaul.

A writer with no idea of proper writing techniques will hardly be able to improve what he wrote while his "juices" were flowing, and may even convince himself that because of that exhilarating flow, what he has written doesn't need editing.

Bottom line: There is a discipline to writing that provides inspiration its best and greatest stage.

Again, I say, grammar is not some awful set of cement shoes. You must use good grammar in your writing---rough draft in that pouring out flow is fine, but on re-write you must fix it.

i agree. i thought that in the context of my post it was understood that i was speaking of grammar. at any rate, still a good point to keep in mind, along with your bit about artistic liscence.

"If you use good grammar everyday, and know it well, then when the juices are flowing it will come out."

well, yes and no (for me anyway). i get picky. and if i start getting picky while i'm trying to get a thought down, i get discouraged.

TTFN & lol