My space

Paper 1 Draft

Chelsea Stuvel

English 319

Happy Medium

I have had many English classes in my life, but not one of them went over the art of writing.  Most of my teachers would give me a book and tell me to write a paper o one of the main topics.  It was already known how they would want the paper; MLA format, no “you” or “I”, quotes to support, and so on.  When coming into this class I never expected it to be much different, but I was wrong in thinking that.  This class has  really made me think about how I was taught vs. how I would like to write.

        When I think about writing I think of it as free expression with pen and paper (or keys to key board, etc.).  Everyone should be able to write and have it be accepted.  I have found that the main difference between being a writer and being an academic is the intended audience.  It doesn’t always matter if everyone understands it, as long as the anticipated audience understands it.  Both Elbow and Bartholomae repeatedly talk about the audiences of writing.  Bartholomae believes that the main audience of writing is a teacher and the academy, while Elbow believes the audience should be anyone.   Elbow wants his students “to have readers actually interested in what was on their mind, what they intended to say, reading for intention.” (p75 Being a writer vs. Being an academic).  At the same time he wants his students to be able to say, “I’m not just writing for teachers or readers, I’m writing as much for me.  Sometimes even more for me” (p. 77 Being a writer vs. Being an academic).  Although, I believe it is important to be able to put your voice on a paper, I still believe in structure. 

           This contradicts Elbow and brings Bartholomae into the picture.   Bartholomae talks about teachers and how crucial they are to academic writing.  He states “there is no writing done in the academy that is not academic writing.  To hide the teacher is to hide the traces of power, tradition and authority present at the scene of writing.” (p.63 Writing With Teachers: A Conversation with Peter Elbow).  The teacher (in way) represents structure and helps students to write in a manner where the audience is the academy.  I

think it is crucial for a teacher to be in a classroom not to assert power, but to manage the classroom, offer guidance, and provide different ways of writing.  Through this, students are introduced to a type of writing that would make things smooth and flow easier.  My only problem with the academic discourse is there is no definite voice.  When I write I try to put “me” all over the paper, but I sometimes find it difficult with the standards that the academy has set.  I don’t like that they expect to “hear” your voice in the paper when you cannot even refer to yourself.  Because is that not where your voice comes from? 

            This is the point where I believe the academic and the writer should come together.  If a writer is only taught how to be a writer and never introduced to academic discourse then that person will never have the opportunity to reach audiences of higher thought.  The reason for this is because the writer will not be able to add structure to his/her writing, and the writing would be 100% personally based.  The problem with this is that we live in a society that likes to hear the facts.  So, by adding the structure, a few techniques from the academy, and by bringing voice into a piece of writing, I believe that a person can create the great piece of writing.  Just by bringing in the voice a person can help to establish that the writer is more human and easier to relate to.  If a student strictly uses academic discourse in a paper, it makes the writing hard to “want” to read.  As a result less people will read a persons writing if it is found to be “too much”.  What I mean by this is that no one likes to feel dumb, meaning if someone writes in the academic discourse “too much” then only a few will continue reading because it would be too dense for the majority.

          (Need help with a transition sentence) I have always been taught academicdiscourse and told never to stray from it, but I don’t like the idea of conforming my writing to a form that will inevitability become something so dense that you cannot even sense a voice.  Bartholomae feels that we are keeping tradition alive by teaching academic discourse, but at what cost?  Bartholomae states, “You cannot write or teach or think or even read without imitation, and what you imitate is what another person has done” (p.25 Against the Grain).  Through this statement Bartholomae makes it seem that no matter what you do you cannot create anything that is of the individual.  I disagree, I believe that a voice in a paper is what makes it more individual and no one can copy that unless plagiarized.  As writers we can take ideas from others but our opinions are our own.  Through a mixture of academic discourse and being a writer we can achieve individualism if given the chance to.