ADD

Continuing to add onto this section will further support my statements as well as make it easier to connect to the Miller and Jurecic theoris. Evidence has been identified and just needs to be added.

Revisions being kept to a minimum was often a product of the author’s style as well as the climate of access to literary appliances. Drafts of publication were kept to a minimum due to the price of paper and the incommodious process of riding by horseback to procure a print draft. “In the age of Shakespeare and Milton, paper was an expensive luxury; blotting out a few lines was one thing, but producing draft after draft would have been quite another” (Fehrman).

 

CHALLENGE

Not a significant amount of challenging currently resides in my paper. I think adding some regarding Hemingway practices or Miller and Jurecic on Obama and Great Gatsby application could deepen my paper and provide some contrast.

With the new mass production of material, came a new wave of mass revision. “… writers like Hemingway and Eliot insisted on not having just a second chance, but a third, fourth, and fifth” (Fehrman). During this period of literary renaissance Hannah Sullivan describes writers splitting into two groups, those who “reduced their work massively, and [those who ] expanded it massively” (Fehrman). These technological advance allowed writers to make a multitude of new moves during the revision process. Miller and Jurecic highlight two of these major moves as being “rethinking” and “restructuring”.