I believe that the most important reason to write, contrary to famous author George Orwell's reasons to write, is to discover one's self and to challenge one's assumptions. This belief effected me because I mainly write about space to ensure the risky path I am on is the right one. Despite a low number of rocket launches, 450 or more people have died while exploring or supporting the exploration of space. I owe it to these people to ensure that my impact on the space community is a positive impact. I owe it to them to fully understand what space will mean for humanity. Writing helps me understand the pro-space argument.
I also have emotion driving my motivation for writing. Consider the following quote from Carl Segan:
A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way (Segan)
After hearing these words, I can write an essay about space easily. I feel inspired after reading or listening to the famous space leaders. You can see this in my essay The Spirit of the ISS: International Cooperation in Space where I begin “[o]n a clear night, look up at the night sky. You will see countless numbers of stars and celestial objects. But often, if one waits long enough, they will see a new, bright star suddenly streak across the pre-dawn sky”. This is an invocation of space, similar to the way Homer would invoke a muse in The Odyssey. I see this in all the literature I've read. This invocation drives pro-space argument: this sense of wonder is in heart and soul of all works on space, no matter how technical that work is. I use this writing style because I want to share how I, and many other members of the space community, feel about space. I want to share my tears of joy at seeing a rocket launch or the raw emotion I feel when hearing Carl Segan's words. But, I also write to see if there is more substance behind my motivation for a space faring society other then emotion. I would find it strange to risk human life in space based solely on emotion.
Moving on, my interest in space also drives another reason that I write about space. George Orwell gave 4 components that, in varying degrees, make up the reason why people write: political purpose, historical impulse, aesthetic enthusiasm and sheer egoism. I write mainly for political purposes. I write “to alter other peoples' idea of the kind of society that they should strive after”;a space faring society. (Orwell)
It was this reason that caused my first essay to fail. I walked into the class University Writing with the objective to write all my papers about space; I had a political purpose. So I wrote about space in a political sense when it wasn't the right forum for that discussion. I realized that the critic I was examining during my first paper had a good argument, yet, I wouldn't back down from the pro-space argument or even change my exhibit topic. It became my mission to disprove Stross' arguments in The High Frontier, Redux through a paper whose focus was to reflect on the nature of criticism. Thus, my paper failed, but I learned to not hold to my guns so tightly.
I also wanted to develop my ability to discuss space in a way that could convince the public. I wanted to develop my understanding of the pro-space arguments and gain the ability to present those ideas in a clear way. I feel I achieved that in some ways, I did not bore my classmates to death with my writings, but someone in the class told me they skipped over the Carl Segan quote included towards the end of Space Settlement, American Exceptionalism and the Fear Behind the ITAR. Thus, I wasn't that successful because my goal when I included that quote was to share emotion.
But it is for the best. I found after reading my works that I invoke the wonder of space when my arguments starts to stall. The second to last paragraph of Space Settlement, American Exceptionalism and the Fear Behind the ITAR is an invocation of space which serves as a segway to my conclusion. I need the invocation in my essay or else it seems to be unfinished. However, I can not overuse the sense of wonder I feel for space because my invocation will be less powerful. When the masters of the space field invoke wonder, it seems to me, they use it to finish or introduce an argument that can stand alone on technical or logical merit. Their invocations are extremely powerful and emotional.Thus, I feel George Orwell missed a reason when he listed his 4 reasons why people write. People also write to share emotion. Whether it is happiness or sadness, victory or pain, emotions are powerful and need to released. Writing is a way to release this emotion and channel these emotions to enhance the Orwell's 4 reasons. It is my mastery of this enhancement which I need to work on the most.
But sometimes my political reasons for writing override my emotions. I hate when pro-space arguments run into doomsday scenarios and how we need to get off Earth to survive, but I did this in Space Settlement, American Exceptionalism and the Fear Behind the ITAR in the first paragraph. One of the most stunning examples is when I said “[t]he chaos generated by lack of water will be orders of magnitude greater then the struggle over oil”. I felt bad writing that line but I believe that it is true. One the surface, it would seem this emotion of fear is only in the previous paper in the set of my whole writing, but it is also in my paper The Spirit of the ISS. In the paper, I basically imply that if we stay on Earth we will die because of war. For example, I said “[t]hat is what the ISS defies, the endless cycles of war that humanity has been in since the first time a rock was thrown in anger”. I struggle with trying to not force my reader into accepting my view with fear. I avoid fear based arguments at all costs; I would rather use wonder any day of the week. Once again, the masters of the space field deal with fear of extinction well in their arguments, to the point that it becomes something we shouldn't fear. Yet, I use fear to convince my audience.
Thus, I come to my final reason I write about space. I write about space to understand the topic more. My current essays are streams of my thoughts as I try to understand everything I know about human space activity and everything I discovering now. I really don't know what I'm doing when I write, I write to explore. I started writing The Spirit of the ISS without knowing the outcome of my argument. I had faith that the ISS was sustainable because of the space communities support of the ISS, but I haven't proven it to myself. Thus, when I “conclud[ed] that the spirit of the ISS isn't dead, it was never born”, I was troubled. I just destroyed something that makes up my identity, something which is depicted on a huge poster on the wall in my room. So, I pondered, I traced back my arguments. I stared at my poster for a long time, I watched that famous Carl Segan video again. In the end, I was able to find a way to revive my support of space instead of continuing the essay in the same direction. But, it is these struggles that will greatest honor those who died in the pursuit of space.
Works Cited:
Segan, Carl "Cosmos: The Lives of the Stars." Web. 29 Apr 2010.
Orwell, George. "Why I Write." George Orwell. N.p., 24 July 2004. Web. 27 Apr 2010.
Photo
