Earlier, I lamented how I shouldn’t repurpose my old content and have it remain behind the curtain of academia. I based this feeling on my initial reaction to trying to create content solely for its own sake (part of my refinement and evolution process). At the time, I thought and said it was shit. But as I look back at it again to use as fodder . . . er research for my next piece, I realized that it might not be that bad. Not now, at least. In fact, what may have made me so judgmental was when I ran it through Grammarly and saw my text light up like an error-filled Christmas tree. I thought, “That’s how much I need to rewrite?!!”
For those unfamiliar with Grammarly, it’s “spell-check” on steroids. As long as you don’t let it dominate your editing process (like I let it earlier), it’s a somewhat helpful tool. Zoe Bee did an excellent video about the program’s pitfalls, which you can see below.
After relegating it to what I called “run-of-the-mill undergrad fare,” I’m starting to change my mind. Although I still acknowledge that it lacks the polish it would have gotten had it not been written in haste, I think it might have enough substance to stand on. At best, that “nugget of insight,” I believe is still there, is there. At worst, it’s a lesson on how maybe I shouldn’t flaunt my old work as “good.” Nevertheless, it still merits some repurposing.
Whatever the case, here is my new plan. I will again repurpose my old content, use Grammarly (sparingly), and bank on the fact that it wasn’t as shitty as I thought. Worst case scenario, I can use them as examples of the futility of polishing turds.
great publish, very informative. I’m wondering why the other specialists of this sector don’t realize this. You must continue your writing. I’m confident, you’ve a great readers’ base already!