Bird By Bird: School Lunches & Polaroids

School Lunches? Why on earth would someone who is trying to teach others to overcome writers block and become a better writer want to tell her audience about school lunches? Because Ann Lamott realized that there is so much there to write about. She picked a random subject for her students to write about and discovered that there was too much material. "...taking short assignments and then producing really shitty first drafts...can yield a bounty of detailed memory....characters lurking in the shadows". In the first two chapters, she mentions that a person should just keep writing and not worry about any errors until they are done writing. I have to say that this suggestion, along with the statement of short assignments producing more material then we could have thought there to be is bizarre. On the other hand, the fact that she thinks about it and breaks it down, contradicts what she is suggesting. She first tells us to sit down and write everything that we think of, yet she herself does not! Lamott, at first does, but then she realizes that she has too much material, so she sticks "with the contents" which is to say the least, any of what she could have written about. I know I am not one to say whether or not what she could have written about would have been better, but there is no way to know now, because she opted out writing what was going on through her mind, which could have been great. She later realizes that she cannot remember why raspberry jam was not well suited for a P.B.J. so she calls a friend. They begin talking and she realizes so much more that she hadn't thought of, which as she puts "came back with horrible clarity". Just a page after this- page 37 the first paragraph- she states that there's no way to know if any of her material is usable, but she just needs to keep writing and get it all down. Didn't she just contradict herself again

Okay, I realize that everybody contradicts themselves all the time, it is inevitable, but it is one of those "do as I say, not as I do" concepts that our parents teach us and we of course disregard. But the point is, why is she contradicting herself in a manner where she knows that if her readers are paying close enough attention, will be able to notice? I had no idea at first why she might do this, then I realized what Lamott might mean by this, if it was not a mere accident; it was something that was unimportant, but she would remember it in the event that she wanted to use it. Is that not the point? If you most definitely will remember it, there's no need to write it down. On the other hand, is it really that important...I suppose it is not that big of deal if the writer leaves something ridiculous out of their first draft, even if they are to be writing everything that comes to mind.


Which brings me to the chapter "Polaroids". We will not actually know how our first draft is going to turn out, until we have completed, regardless of how we envisioned it to turn out. Lamott goes on to discuss one situation that everyone hates, having to write when you really do not want to and absolutely have nothing to write about, but it sounds somewhat interesting. So you think about it, take notes as they come insight, knowing you still have no idea what you will be writing about or how the finished project will look like. But in the end, you find it, you reach your finish line, much like the young girl on crutches who is determined not to give up and keeps going until she reaches the finish line, even as the members of the crowd are starting to leave.


I think this has a lot to do with how we as students, progressing our writing, tend not to write. We do not generally write everything that comes to mind or that is important. We as writers tend to write until our brain runs out of ideas and we then stop. We reread, edit, erase, and add more right then and there, versus waiting or talking to a friend. Instead, we continue to write in circles about something that may or may not be important or that great to write about, leaving us to write in more circles. Though Lamott contradicts herself in saying to write everything, to continue writing down all of our thoughts, yet leaves out some of hers in writing about sandwiches, she's making a very impertinent point: If it really is useless and only has a little to do with the subject at hand, then save yourself the trouble of writing in circles and leave it out.

Which brings me to my last point, "thank you!" as you are shouting with your head and hands thrown upwards, that Lamott has proved her point. At first we think there is nothing to write about, but in the end, there is an endless amount to write about, with me being a prime example.....