I just realized something

So, I was shamefully reflecting on how dissappointed Shipka was in the way the writing activity from last class turned out...
when I remembered what was going through my mind as I was writing, and it turns out that my little story about having the teenage boy back into the mailbox was my attempt at humor.

This is why I don't try to be the class clown.

formula

Honestly, I'm still not quite sure what to make of these readings. Two of the same essay, only viewed differently. Clearly the essay itself is fabricated, a caricature of itself. The real critique, then, seems to be on how the essay is graded.
I'm having trouble taking this seriously, mainly because I'm still trying to get past how fabricated the essay is. Somehow, the A-graded comments are almost too gushy. They exaggerate how well the formula was followed, and completly ignore content. The more critical comments on the other version of the essay much better reflect what is actually happening in this "essay."
I thought it was interesting that the title of the "essay" was "how schools suppress creativity in students." I was trying to figure out if maybe the two ways the essay was graded are there to demonstrate the suppression of creativity. Following a formula of writing doesn't always allow room for creativity, if the writer isn't confident in her abilities to begin with. The "essay" doesn't really say much at all, and what is said is repeated over and over again. And yet, it follows the formula. The grammar and punctuation are good. So, one "teacher" gives it an A and actually compares this writer to John Grisham and Danielle Steele (I cringed when I saw those names dropped in this context). The other "teacher," I think, gave the "essay" a much more realistic reading.
But, that might just be because I'm looking at content, and so maybe that's what my standards are. So, I'm still not sure what I was supposed to learn from reading these texts, but I can certainly say I was made aware of what I value in an essay.

PoMo Blues

Carroll's essay discusses the roles that students and teachers have come to define themselves in over the years, and they way the post modern movement attempts to deconstruct these roles. She says the student is traditionally seen as "infantilized" and that this is just a social construction. The "staff" that teaches this student is also socially constructed. I was reminded of the Bartholomae/Elbow debate, because both of them as well as Carroll seem driven to help validate student texts. But Carroll points out this obstacle: if the roles of student and teacher have been socially constructed and engrained in the classroom environment, then it is no surprise that the student essays themselves will follow the same patterns, the same social constructions. Every story has to have a happy ending, or some character building reason for turning out bad.
I recognized my own college essay in the categories that Carroll listed. These are what we think will get us into college, and what is reinforced for us when we read books and magazines on getting into college. We are told to play the game and follow those rules. Sticking with the mainstream and doing what our high school teacher said got us into college, so it feels a little strange to now be told to think for ourselves. Or, at least, when I read this essay, that's how I felt. It's a little unsettling to see someone else write about why I write what I write about.
I think Carroll is dead-on when she says that "the stories we tell are the stories that are culturally available to us to tell." And it's not just what we tell in our stories, but how we tell them. They are told in politically correct language and always have to have some degree of humility. Even a story of being raped is culturally acceptable at this point in time, as long as it follows the rules. With these constructions in mind, I think Carroll's problematizing assignment is a good one, and expanding on it further will help many writers realize where their voice ends and the culture's voice begins. If there is any distinction at all.

academic

Bartholomae says that "there is no writing done in the academy that is not academic writing" but then Elbow raises the point that the attitude behind the writing can change depending on who the writer is. An academic writer, according to Elbow, sends the message that his writing has something important to say. On the other hand, the unseasoned first-year comp student often says with his writing, "is this what you want me to say?" I think there is a good reason for this. The fact is, most first year comp students are just 18 years old. They aren't experts or authorities on anything, so of course they're going to turn to the professor to make sure they're doing their assignments the "right way."
I thought it was interesting to read about the argument that Bartholomae and Elbow are having, since in the end they are just finding different means to the same end. Both want students to become more confident in their writing. They just approach this diffrently. Elbow seems to place a lot of confidence in student writing, wheras Bartolomae feels a need to guide their writing more. While reading Elbow's side, when he discussed turning his students into writers, I thought of the activity of journal writing. This allows students to practice writing, but can be separate from the formal papers that would be required in the writing course.
There is one comment that Elbow makes that made me wonder about the whole argument. He says that he hopes that he is "helping students achieve their goals" in the long run and to "gradually relinquish their conditioned assumption that their job is to accomplish our goals." I wondered about what makes one of these goals better than the other. In a way, I think, there is absolutely nothing wrong with having a teacher be the one to determine the goals. Not all students want to be writers, but for a semester of their first year of college, they have to be. Perhaps the teacher can help guide students with their goal-making; few first year students really have any set goals. And what kind of goals are we talking about here, anyway? Writing goals? Goals as students, in general? Straight A's? Doing a minimum amount of work to pass a course? College is the place where young adults start to figure things out for themselves, but they still do need some guidance.

personal writing

The piece by Conners on personal writing pulled me in surprisingly quickly. I got absorbed in the talk about days gone by when students were disciplined enough to read text after text and use those texts to describe abstract concepts. Then we get to the nineteenth century, and something changes. There is pressure to let students "express themselves." Individualism begins to overshadow imitation. According to the article, the Romantic movement had a lot to do with this. And then, all of a sudden, Conners keeps on talking about what kinds of topics students write about now, compared to what they wrote before. "Mountains" versus "A Tramp to the Mountains." This is the beginning of the modern composition course. So, I was reading this and then it occured to me, who decided that writing about one's own life experiences was better than basing one's writing on previous authors? I'm not saying it was a bad move, I just like to know who came up with this stuff. I really wondered, why was there a change in the first place? Was it the student's idea or the teacher's?
I can't help thinking about how cultural changes affect education. At one time the typical American family ran a farm and produced their own food and clothing. It was a lifestyle similar to the Amish way. In fact, now that I think about it, the Amish still pretty much learn in the way of the classical tradition. They are given text that they are told to imitate when writing up their reports. Personal writing is discouraged and runs counter to the values of the society. But now, with individualism being the big thing, and everyone seeking personal fulfillment, it makes perfect sense that writing should become egocentric also.
But while we're all out there, exploring ourselves and describing our life experiences and learning what makes us tick, I think it's important to remember that in some way, shape, or form, these stories have been told before. I love to write, I love to tell stories, and I like to think I will eventually find a new way to tell an old story. But I've read Shakespeare and Austin, among others, and I know that there's nothing that I can think of that those two probably haven't already written about. This isn't a bad thing. I'm all for personal writing, and journaling, and what-not, but I also think it's important to read the works of those who came before us. That way, when we, and our students, are writing about that day when we lost our first tooth, or when we finally got that A in Math we struggled for, we can see that we are not the only ones this has ever happened to. And this should unite us, and remind us that in spite of what our individualistic culture likes us to believe, we are not alone.

I get to write THIS!!!

So, yeah, don't even get me started on what I get to write.

The title isn't sarcasm, it's more like the conclusion to the thoughts running around in my head right now. As has been established in class, and somewhat in this blog, my favorite writing is fiction. I look forward to time that I can spend with my notebook and a pen or my laptop and just write until my hand cramps up or my eyes water from the bright screen. This rarely happens, though. For several reasons, most of them having to do with other obligations, and an RPG (video game) addiction. These days, my marble composition notebook has been spending a lot of time at the bottom of my desk drawer. As I'm writing this, I'm considering carrying it around with me again. But anyways, when I do have the time to write for fun now, I pull up the Word document of whatever story I'm in the mood for, and write whatever pops into my head.
And the point of the title of this post is that, in addition to the writing itself, I absolutely love to tell people about what I'm working on. Especially when I have a new idea. The history of my fiction writing is long and sometimes personally distressing and I won't go into it now, but the last few years have been dedicated to overcoming writer's block. These days, my plan is to just pretend there is no writer's block. It has resulted in the occasional really boring scene, in which my heroine just sits around in the kitchen, drinking coffee and reading a magazine. I embrace the writer's block and try to write through it. Because another thing I love to do is re-read some of the things I've written and see if there's anything in there that actually might be universal and true to all. The truth within the constructed story... that's why I love fiction. I'm not quite there yet, but I can't stop writing, so I'm sure I'll get to it eventually.