Links
Archives
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
MAKE A PAPER DOLL OF IT Last week, in the Chronicle of Higher Education, a pseudonymous writer attacked people who don't write pseudonymously. This morning, in The New York Times, a formulaic writer attacks people who write formulaically. The Times piece follows the established journalistic formula for contrasting the free spirit of art to the imprisoning grip of the state: First, narrate a marvelous exciting personal story describing what it's like to leave your stultifying bureaucratic public school and fly like a bird in a creative writing seminar:
Exciting, mind-stretching, eye-opening, calling the voice out -- fabulous. And she got an A! But -- how newsworthy is the A? What do you figure the grade range was in this course? ... Non-formulaic question. Second, draw the obvious moral: "One of the major points was, good writing is good thinking. That's why writing formulas don't work. Formulas don't let kids think; they kill a lot of creativity in writing." Rule-bound activity kills creativity, the opening of the voice, the expression of the self, personal freedom, excitement... Third, insert bogeyman: And so, when Ms. Karnes returns to Allendale High School to teach English this fall, she will use the new writing techniques she learned and abandon the standard five-paragraph essay formula. Right? Well, if the public schools aren't about helping real estate values, what are they about? Fundamental knowledge in building an argument - precisely the knowledge the New York Times writer acquired in order to get his job - is just a cynical exercise imposed upon innocent children by a mercenary state even as those children struggle to find their authentic voice. Fourth, strengthen your "It's all about money" argument by marshalling evidence: In Michigan, there is added pressure. If students pass the state tests, they receive $2,500 college scholarships, and in Ms. Karnes's middle-class district, families need that money. "I can't see myself fighting against MEAP," she said. "It would hurt my students too much. It's a dilemma. It may not be the best writing, but it gets them the money." Damn straight they lose points for one-sentence paragraphs! I trust they also lose points for cliches like "law of the land." Anyway. As the article continues it becomes clear that we have a category confusion going on. When the state test says "writing," it means making coherent arguments in prose; when the teachers interviewed say "writing," they mean telling stories in prose. The teacher of the creative writing course explains:
Paper dolls, pairing up -- we're quite a distance from a polemical essay. To be sure, we're in a warm cooperative creative space; but this is not where we're supposed to be. |