In a nutshell, the composing process is insane.
The 4 articles assigned for us this week each highlight
what I just called insanity through personal experience, student observation,
& empirical data.
I don’t know how to talk about this. Actually, I don’t know how to write about
this. At this moment I’m at the DH bar
on my laptop typing out my thoughts while attempting to come up a with a
visually and structurally accessible way of portraying my ideas so that 1)
you understand 2) I make clear as possible what my thoughts are 3) I do it in a
manner that I am neither embarrassed or bored with.
I am failing at all 3, especially because I don't even believe myself or what I just wrote, even though I wrote it and think it and believe it :(
Thinking about you and me and me and you and us and me
and you and we and them isn’t difficult, or I should say, it isn’t a labor for
me. Remember how student example Tony
was said to be extremely repetitive and recursive in his process. I don’t know how that supports my point or
what my point was, but yeah.
This isn’t working for me.
Rather than touch on the concrete examples
and points of these articles that stood out to me, I am going to jump to the “bigger picture”/”epiphany”/”light bulb” moment in my head that I imagined and created. Some of it is directly
related, some more of a choral connection type of comment.
So you may or may not get me, but when does
anyone ever get or not get me…
What was repeated, what was recursive?
What is the same, and what has changed?
Our psychological association with writing is
intense.
I keep reading “ingrained” and
“internalized”. That seems to be one of
many difficulties with the composition process, that each individual has to 1)
come to an awareness of it’s existence within their lives 2) take that
consciousness and then play with “process”… for the rest of… life…kinda, sorta.
“People who have little or no tolerance for ambiguity
perceive ambiguous situations as sources of psychological discomfort, and they
may try to reach conclusions quickly rather than to take the time to consider
all of the essential elements of an unclear situation” (Harris 184).
Words, specifically written, have this distancing,
seemingly objective effect.
As a reader, there they are- they hang
and live and are and as I read them and think about them and
become influenced or not
I can control my self and the way I feel-
sometimes I can’t control my feelings and this lasts
anywhere from a second to a lifetime.
As a writer, there it is- I create and construct
and even when I think I am limited (prompt, grade, shame,
guilt, “unskilled”, stupid)
it is a feeling-
sometimes I can’t control my feelings and this lasts
anywhere from a second to a lifetime.
Words, specifically written, have this associative
effect- identification.
As a reader, I inhale ink and find comfort in moments of
justification
for what is relating to another, fictional, real, or
fantastical
but a chance to feel validated that you are not alone
As a writer, this potential when made manifest is…
empowering.
When I read that quote, and as I contemplate the various
perspectives on the psychological aspects concerning the relationship between
writing and an individual, my reality became/becomes a link for understanding
as I, like Tony (Perl), strive to create direct personal relationships to the
topics I am faced with in an attempt to make concrete meaning out of
abstraction (the generalization, majority, or controlled facade).
For us, at this moment, this topic is the composing
process.
Along with the psychological association with writing,
there are many others. Shen is the
quickest example of this as he highlighted the ideological influences inherent in writing. We can talk about the economic, social,
cultural, etc.
So I wonder, am I supposed to then help students become
aware of each of the factors? Or privilege some?
I bring this up because, ironically for me, I get to
witness and participate in the use of writing for therapeutic uses. And that, is more along the lines of… well,
not a composition course in the traditional sense.
I say ironic because this purpose for writing is more or less associated with the expressionist click and with my multimodal pedgagocial stance I seem to get pitted into this dark hole of arts and crafts and self-indulgent bullshit that I completely understand because I am both a multi and single drafter so my mediation of extremes in every aspect of my life has left me dancing in the void sustained by analytical, rationalism and divergent, what the fuckism.
However, what struck as me as fascinating about this kind
of writing (therapeutic, cathartic, for a purpose, relevant… wait, this sounds familiar) is the individual and communal aspects it encourages and utilizes (wait…that sounds familiar to).
Let me be more specific.
My brother and mom are going through their 12 steps right
now. So it’s all about AA meetings, and their sponsor, and themselves.
Community, companionship, and self. This
is all via conversations and writing.
They must write a lot. A lot, a lot.
But this writing… they WANT to do…And when they do it- it
is free. As in- completely free. The
psychological constraints, among many, were bypassed momentarily… not because
they weren’t present, but because they were apart of the content in conscious
and unconscious ways that allowed for… “truth”?
I read some of their stuff and encountered:
1)
multiple genres i.e. prose, lyric, short hand, narrative, charts, data, other stuff that I don't know what to call
2)
complete sentences as well as fragmented thoughts
3)
cohesive sentences & paragraphs as well as
stream of conscious type ramblings
4)
variety of brainstorming, prewriting, drafting,
and editing strategies similar to those mentioned in any of our 4 readings
5)
structure, organization
6)
critical thought and meta-reflection
I don’t know why this is bothering me or sticking with me
or making me think and re-think the way it is, but there is something about
this…whatever it is…that is getting to me. IDK.
No comments:
Post a Comment