The conversation in class today with Rev. Dr. Katharine C. Black was eye opening for me, however it left me with two distinct things to think about...

First, how should one truly end an autobiography? If it is supposed to be the story of one's life, then when should someone write it? Should it be ended at a point to leave the reader thinking? Should it be ended at a point to leave the reader satisfied? I understand this is a bit rhetorical, however when Rev. Black was speaking about he "Hate Letters Narrative" she said that she may never get to finish it because the torture may never end. In my mind she should still publish what she has, however it wouldn't be a complete story without a conclusion.

Second, there was an inteserting conversation between Jackie, Ann Page, and Rev. Black about how being a well read individual makes it harder to write. Therefore, if one is to become a writer, would it be easier to write without being well read. Would one write better without being acquainted with Virginia Woolf, because to be honest, duplicating Woolf's brilliance is an adventure not worth pursuing, one would fall short. I guess the answer best came to me when Rev. Black said, "Other writers can't write my story." That is why we write for ourselves, because no one else, no matter how talented they are, can write what we have gone through. In my mind it can only benefit a writer to be well read, it will open their eyes to different styles. The only problem lies when the writer tries to "become" who they have read.

Ann Page, thank-you for bringing in Rev. Black. It was fascinating to see how much writing has changed the life of someone who is not a writer by trade. It goes to show that anyone can benefit from this form of art and that we are all better off being English Majors.

Feel free to respond because lord knows I might have completely missed the boat with this...