Composing Paper #1 and Paper #2

Difference in formats and subject were jarring, to be blunt. Paper #1 was a narrative, a short story with a message at the end, whereas Paper #2 was a research paper, discussing a subject, my position, and a call for action. The first was a study on farts, where the second was a study on the death penalty. I can whip out a paper like nobody’s business, but I enjoy creating narratives much more than debating topics in reality. There’s no real way to question the story I present, nothing to fact check or research besides my other works or myself, depending on how well you know me to start with. In a research essay, there’s everything that can go wrong when presented to an audience. Someone may have evidence refuting your points, have a great lead, first-hand experience, or maybe smarter than you. Narratives are fun to compose because there’s no formulaic way to compose them. If you want to look broadly, you can see a rough line of where to head, but each story is presented differently. Individuals live separate lives, learn different ways of writing, structuring sentences, describing scenery. In a research essay, Paper #2, there’s a pretty obvious composition formula required for presentation. You can use fancy hooks or attempt to flip the reader on their heads, check if they’re reading or skimming, but you always need to format your paragraphs in the same way. You can only make your research so entertaining before you hit the walls cemented in MLA papers, then it’s up to the reader to keep going or not.