The teacherless writing class looks at why the reader’s perception should always be taken into account when writing; the feedback of others can give insight into what a reader experiences when he or she reads the work, which in turn allows the writer to write better.
The idea of a teacherless writing class reminds me of a club for people who enjoy something. I can’t help but laugh, a writing “club” sounds funny since it’s so out-of-the-ordinary. The title of the chapter, “The Teacherless Writing Class” also seems a little misleading, since the “class” appears to meet for a fun writing experience. The chapter doesn’t seem clear whether the purpose of the class is to meet for fun or for the growth of a writer through the learned experience. To what end is a writer trying to know how a reader perceives a piece of writing? Additionally, if the purpose is for learning, then ultimately, one’s peers become the teachers.
Elbow does have some good ideas about having a writing class. People who are committed about writing will be more serious about good writing. I’ve always had a phobia of commitment myself. Obviously, a set time and a different people bring stability and diversity to the group. The chairman or even temporary discussion leaders can keep the meeting flowing and running smoothly. Summarizing is good practice for memory, and giving reactions is an interesting show of impromptu skill. Handouts and reading out loud provide practice as well. Patience, listening, courage, and responsibility will benefit the class as well. “Don’t try to understand what people tell you . . . but do try to understand HOW they tell it to you.” (102)
Perhaps is why Elbow is confusing and contradictory. From Elbow’s perspective, how he says what he says is important, and because how he writes is correct, Elbow doesn’t notice what he says. However, what he says by how he says it is often contradictory or meaningless. For example, the subtitle, You are always right and always wrong is logically inconsistent (106). To be wrong implies not being right. Another example, No kind of reaction is wrong (95). Is a reaction of anger and hatred a right kind of reaction? Also, if my reaction to that statement is that some reactions are wrong, then, logically speaking, either the statement that no kind of reactions are wrong is wrong or my reaction is wrong . . . While how someone says something is important, what someone says determines how one should say it. I want to know something that is not an empty truism; I don’t want to know more empty whats because the focus of how something was said is more important than what was said.
No comments:
Post a Comment