When I'm writing, it's not a pretty picture. A good caffeine/sugar buzz is typically required, therefore the half drunk mugs of cold coffee litter the desk, sharing space with whatever horrible-for-you treat is in season: candy hearts in February, jellybeans for Easter, now it's peanut butter patties - aka "tagalongs" if you know Girl Scout cookie lingo. I promise you I have clothes on, but trust me it could be the rattiest jammies/sweat pants combo.
And I talk to myself - ALL THE TIME.
Doctorow's schizophrenia comment makes tremendous sense. I'll jump up to throw in a load of laundry, empty the part of the dishwasher my kids always ignore, type some more, let the dog out, feed the cats, type some more, etc. I view these things - along with the coffee & sugar - as an integral part of my writing process. I'm not blocked when I do these things - I'm "processing."
So when Britton and Flowers/Hayes tackled the concept of discovering how a writer shapes their ideas, how they make meaning, I tried very hard to join them, and think of my own process, my own "discovery" methods. I came up with nada, zilch, question marks galore. It just seems to "happen" - or so I thought.
But then a few insights this week's authors offered made sense: Brand said "the thought process involved in the editing process is one of inclusion vs. exclusion." Yes! Exactly! I'm always asking myself, how do I refine this, tighten it, make it sharper? The cognition/emotion link - the very last line of Brand's essay - describes my gut reaction perfectly when I know a sentence works. As Brand wrote, "It is in cognition that ideas make sense. But it is in emotion that this sense finds value."
In other words, if I don't feel a legitimate emotional connection to what I just wrote, it has no value to me. It goes back to that honesty issue with Macrorie. But the focus isn't just on my emotional reaction, I'm constantly focusing on what I predict my audience's emotional reaction will be - and then adjusting in response. As Flower & Hayes notes, experienced writers write for their audiences, struggling writers just want to get the job done and move on.
While my first attempt to understand how I mold an idea into written form seemed like a failure, ironically, by coercing myself to sit down and write about this topic, I gained insight into my own process. Or as Flowers/Hayes observed: "Writers don't find meanings, they make them." But the million dollar question is, how, as a teacher, can I identify the optimum ways to pass on to my students what I know works for me when I write? I'm pretty sure the school would frown upon the coffee, sugar and jammies approach. 
Very well said! I, too, want to know the secret to passing this information on to my students. I've tried the up front approach and the "find your passion" approach. I think it is just difficult for most students to find their emotional connection to writing until they are mature enough to make meaning out of it. Some can do this earlier than others. Some may never find that connection (as we discussed last class).
ReplyDeleteI think part of it is respecting students and their differences--realizing that not all people write in the same way. I used to require prewriting with all writing assignments, but sometimes even I don't prewrite . . . with a computer, it's so easy to compose as you go.
ReplyDeleteI think it depends on the assignment, the student, the class . . . freedom and choice is key. Hard to always have in a classroom, however.
Our approaches to writing are quite similar. I don't know if I should find solace in that or not!
ReplyDelete