 |
|
As a believer in the National Writing Project's motto, "Read to Write," I totally support creative writing as a valid critical and intellectual response to studying great literature. After reading a hundred pages of Jane Eyre, I was moved to write the first short story that I published. Of course I got no academic credit for that significant professional achievement. Literary study must be interactive by inviting participation in the inspiration/ drafting/ audience awareness process. Let great authors become mentors of great students who will create the next generation of poems and stories. Yes, students are capable of writing brilliant literature -- what would we read and study if we didn't cultivate new authors? Furthermore, a student who has gone backstage and tried to write a villanelle or parable is far more likely to become a close reader, an appreciative audience, a more skilled thinker, and a more aware person -- observing the world for the stuff of insight, patterns, and imagination. Passive learning only reinforces the death march of televised viewing, of detachment from a sense of personal power to create a world we want to live in. Adulating authors as superior beings beyond our capacity is unhealthy and false. How many potential great writers have been lost because they were never encouraged to try their hand at a hidden talent? How many creative minds have been invested in advertising and marketing rather than contributing to a higher cultural environment? Are the Twains and Dickinsons of tomorrow spending their energy cramming for SATs and GPAs? Will literature die off from neglect and lack of nurturing? Sharon Olds recently said that her favorite poems are often by her own students. I couldn't agree more. The thrill of what young (or old) minds produce in response to reading a traditional, anthologized piece is the greatest reward of my job as a teacher. If ee cummings can play with language and out-of-the-box possibilities, why can't all of us experiment with new ways to use language by following his lead? The deceased authors we teach could have no higher honor than sparking strong literature of the present and future. They would be thrilled to see their works as part of a family tree of inherited creativity. We must include more creative writing as a necessary partner in the study of literature, in business, and in our lives. This marriage of right and left brain, the yinyang of balanced wholeness -- may help us overcome the divisively hierarchical problems of our civilization. The value of an individual voice writing and rewriting about what matters -- as part of an artistic responsibility in relation to experience, memory, dream, and community -- is essential to the development of compassion, mutual respect, open-mindedness, and democracy. Let's end this squabble between critics and creators -- they are equal partners in what should be our evolution, not a civil war. English Dept's need marriage counseling, with CW the wife who is undervalued although she gives bith to future authors. I believe that English classes should include Writing Labs, as done in the Sciences -- learning about literature by creating literature and analyzing/experiencing the creative process as well as the product.
JOIN THE DEBATE
|
previous response
Copyright © 2002 by The Chronicle of Higher Education