Power, Emotion, and Writing
"Lorraine's Story" makes me hate academia even more fiercely than I already do. This creative case study charges me to do something about the injustice at hand, unlike an academic (and likely dry) case study might. This may be why ethnographic writing appeals to me so much, since it often combines scientific rigor with pathos. But college doesn't teach creativity or individual expression and identity development. It offers a narrow set of tools for falling in line with hegemonic standards. Lorraine was boxed in by her training to reach a narrow, specific, powerful audience. By senior year, she hadn't learned how to flexibly cater to multiple audiences, including her very personal audience- herself.
What bugs me the most about this is that personal statements for fellowships, scholarships, and graduate programs-- all stepping stones to prestige and power, as students like Lorraine seek-- require the ability to write for a wide audience in a distinct, non-academic voice. Without the Writing Center and her Creative Nonfiction class (recommended by an adviser with good sense), Lorraine would have a much harder time winning these opportunities. She mentions that "she loves academic writing, both for the hardball intellectualism it offers and-- in turn-- or the sense of power it gives her" (Goedde 2006, 65). But that power is somewhat illusory, in my experience. Relational writing, telling a story that charms different audiences into handing over their resources in the form of grants, philanthropic donations, and social capital, is the ultimate path to power. When I was a development associate, all I heard about was crafting emotionally appealing narratives. Intellectualism was derided. But colleges don't teach how to "schmooze write."
I was also struck that Brian's long term relationship with this student and the time this gave him and Lorraine both to work on voice and style was an incredibly rare situation. Besides the occasional creative writer, I doubt I'll ever have a student who makes time to develop their writing skills in any way that isn't linked to a project with a deadline.
What bugs me the most about this is that personal statements for fellowships, scholarships, and graduate programs-- all stepping stones to prestige and power, as students like Lorraine seek-- require the ability to write for a wide audience in a distinct, non-academic voice. Without the Writing Center and her Creative Nonfiction class (recommended by an adviser with good sense), Lorraine would have a much harder time winning these opportunities. She mentions that "she loves academic writing, both for the hardball intellectualism it offers and-- in turn-- or the sense of power it gives her" (Goedde 2006, 65). But that power is somewhat illusory, in my experience. Relational writing, telling a story that charms different audiences into handing over their resources in the form of grants, philanthropic donations, and social capital, is the ultimate path to power. When I was a development associate, all I heard about was crafting emotionally appealing narratives. Intellectualism was derided. But colleges don't teach how to "schmooze write."
I was also struck that Brian's long term relationship with this student and the time this gave him and Lorraine both to work on voice and style was an incredibly rare situation. Besides the occasional creative writer, I doubt I'll ever have a student who makes time to develop their writing skills in any way that isn't linked to a project with a deadline.
Comments
Post a Comment