In the Emig reading, I really enjoyed the section about the accounts by and about established writers regarding their writing style and methodology. Though I believe somebody has commented on the actions of writers such as Hemmingway, who deliberately lie when asked how they created their works, I found Peter de Vries quote managed to sum up the point very clearly: "Don't ask the cow to analyze milk" (229). Though I feel that writers should be capable of analyzing how and what they right to some degree, de Vries comments made a key point, as it seems that good writers are good many times because they are very natural at it. Additionally, I think it's difficult as a writer to know, remember, and pinpoint what thought, spark, or feeling set up portions of your righting. Obviously if it's a key issue in your righting, you'll understand what motivated you to write it, but the small moments, the feelings and ideas you felt/had on every page seems to be something that seems very unconcious. In my own experiences, I would say that oftentimes I couldn't recreate, or pinpoint my exact feelings, thoughts, or processes that provoked some of my best writing. Maybe that's what makes composition so difficult to teach, as there is no scientific absolutes, and students do not come with a manual.