Theory of Writing
As stated by Marty Stuckey in The Basics of Business Writing , “Good writing is not about formats, commas, or even specific words. At rock bottom, the whole issue of writing well---is about time” (Stuckey). Mr.Stuckey, an expert in business writing argues that it does not matter what type of writing piece you’re working on, the time you spend in constructing your writing piece directly reflects the time others will put into comprehending the writing piece. Even though this applies to business writing, the argument seems logical and relevant enough to apply to all forms of writing. Like time, there are many variables that encompass the theory of writing, so there is no exact explanation as to how writing can be defined. We are aware that it is a craft that must be mastered through countless trial and errors, but we also know that it must contain a balance between structure and individuality. I think it’s fair to say that the theory of writing is complex and personable, even going beyond correctness on a grammatical level. So, for that reason, each of us should have our own perspective of the theory of writing.
The way I began to develop my theory of writing was simply through experience. Like I referenced prior, it is a craft that must be mastered. And like any craft, it requires dedication and patience. At first it might be normal to feel overwhelmed by all the intricacies and protocol that take place in writing, but with practice it will become second nature. By being trained to write correctly and not efficiently, students tend to miss out on undervalued opportunities that expand understanding of writing. I would also point out that even though it sounds a bit radical, I think students are taught to silence their voices by following protocol, thus limiting their personal creativity. We students tend to saturate ourselves with all the structure associated with writing, but keep in mind that the only way your piece of writing will stand out is by showcasing originality through personal ideas and experiences. Just as Emily Strasser asserted in her article, “Students do need to learn the mechanics of writing, yet without the personal, emotional, and the exciting, writing will never mean anything” (Strasser 149). Our educators must teach us to love the craft of writing by approaching it through a less technical, structured lens. Yes we are aware that writing must include certain principles no matter the circumstance, but we also know that each mindset is different. So my take is, educators should really focus on a rubric that still addresses main components of writing, but that also advocates for expressing our individual voice and make us feel empowered about writing, no matter the topic, prompt, theme, etc.
I believe that the rhetoric surrounding the theory of writing or the writing process, has become so politically correct on how language is judged, that any opposing view regarding the subject can’t be viewed as credible. As Linda Christensen argued, “asking students to memorize the rules without asking who makes the rules legitimates a social system that devalues their language” (Christensen 40). The system on teaching writing has become so legitimized that people are afraid to critique it so that leads students to internalize their blame instead of blaming the system for its flaws. Which bring me to another point I would like to make, that the theory of writing should become a topic where all perspectives are welcome, and educators shouldn’t be ruling by the books but instead welcoming different viewpoints that will enhance our understanding on writing as a whole. Educators should be experimenting with trial and error just as students do when crafting and perfecting their drafts.
They should begin to implement an outlook where the writing process can have room for amendments, on how it is instructed. For instance, adding or removing steps within the writing process or even prioritizing some, such as revision. Also, welcoming students to incorporate personal stories that might be relevant to the chosen theme. By doing so, teachers are building their own foundation, through different adjustments made along the way.
Circling back to trial an error, students tend to benefit more from this notion than teachers. As a student myself, I can recall many times when I would be writing a paper and abruptly stop writing. Whether it was because the sentence didn’t seem logical enough, or the grammar needed work, or my vocabulary was poor, it always led to stagnation in my writing. It had become a habit for me to spend half of the time allocated to fixating and modifying text rather than expanding my writing and saving all the editing for last. After identifying this pattern, I realized we shouldn’t be striving for perfection, especially in our first draft. The more we procrastinate about our unfinished piece of writing, the farther we will be from completing it. If we were to focus more on the substance rather than the structure behind in, especially in the first phases of writing, it will allow the writer to create far more character within their writing as well as expressive context. So, I think we students engrain in our mindset, that the only way we will achieve a thoughtful and coherent piece of writing is by accepting our countless errors throughout the process and build upon those mistakes.
When addressing structure within the theory of writing, policing language from an academic stand point can have numerous benefits for students, especially when focusing on the grammatical component of writing. But it can be difficult for us to share the same mindset and verbiage that is required from us students when writing on a same topic. Educators and even pundits must realize that us students are entitled to voicing our own language, thus allowing our writing to build an identity. By bringing forward the element of individuality into writing, students are feeling like they finally have a voice within their writing. It allows us to feel more empowered and by doing so, we students tend to feel motivated when crafting our writing piece.
It is safe to conclude that the theory of writing from my perspective, is a complex network of ideas and techniques that have shaped the way we grasp our understanding of writing. I’ve come to realize that is no legitimate definition of writing and there shouldn’t be. Writing should be looked at through an individual perspective, while maintaining an open mindset on the structure and technical aspects of writing. The theory of writing shouldn’t advocate for a perfect piece of writing but one in which the writer feels a true connection to his piece, a sense of inspiration. It should be about bringing forward a creative component in writing, instead of a conventional one. So all in all, students should remain humble to themselves and experiment with various writing techniques that can aid in organizing or transitioning our ideas, and use every writing piece as a learning experience that will eventually perfect the craft of written communication.
WORKS CITED:
Christensen, Linda M. “Teaching Standard English: Whose Standard?” The English Journal, vol. 79, no. 2, 1990, pp. 40.
Strasser, Emily. “Writing What Matters: A Student’s Struggle to Bridge the Academic/Personal Divide.” Young Scholars in Writing, vol. 5, 2008, pp. 149
Stuckey, Marty. “The Basics of Business Writing”. AMACOM, 1992. EBSCOhost,
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=3983&site=eds-live.