(1) When
I entered college, the notion of inserting creativity into each piece of
writing was completely foreign to me. To
define my terms, I believe creativity to be creation/discovery outside of the
usual boundaries that genres can accommodate. I was used to the compare/contrast format of
essays as well as style analysis, which is generally reliant on a set of rules
or a formula. Following rules in writing
has always been a way to attain the highest grade, but not necessarily a
stepping-stone to achieving one’s own full writing potential. In my opinion, potential is reached by trial
and error and experimentation outside the confines of rules. I do believe that rules are important when it
comes to research writing, so that the formats among research articles are
similar enough that a reader knows how to find what they’re looking for. That being said, it’s generally when the
rules are broken well that a piece of
writing becomes intriguing. An example
of breaking the rules well would be the novel House
Of Leaves by Mark
Danielewski, where the rules of page layout and font color are broken, among
many others.
TL;DR- Coming into
college, writing could only be ‘good’ if it earned the highest grades and
followed the teacher’s rules. Leaving college I’ve learned that a writer best
develops their own gift by experimenting outside of the rules.
(2) The
role of personal opinion in writing is conveying an idea that a reader may have
also experienced, and instilling a sense of closeness and trust from the reader
to the writer. With this trust, the
writer can lead the reader on and do bolder
things than before that credibility was bestowed. Opinion is a very difficult thing to omit
because as humans we’re compelled to vocalize and share our thoughts. Human knowledge advances almost entirely due
to differences in opinion that inspire us to find a definite right answer. Places opinions don’t do well are science
articles, research articles, literature reviews, and most academically rigorous
types of writing that is used as a tool to gain information. Opinionated writing does thrive in context of
a debate, where the victor is the person who articulates their opinion in the
most eloquent manner. Also, novels are
single authors opinions disguised as fictional characters’ opinions, so I have
to credit opinionated writing for all of the writing that I actually enjoy
reading. I’m sure there are genres where
opinion isn’t allowed, but chances are that in those genres the opinion is just
extremely nuanced, enough so that it doesn’t muddle whatever the facts may
be. An example of writing that should be
as objective as possible would be religious texts. We’d hope that we’re just getting the facts,
but for each biblical event there were multiple interpretations, and therefore
multiple opinions. I’d say religious
texts are the only type of writing I can think of where ALL personal elements
should be entirely nonexistent, whereas other genres probably have at least a
little wiggle room for opinions, disguised or otherwise.
TL;DR- Opinion in
writing is meant to establish a connection with the reader, writing that deals
primarily with facts should have little to no opinion, creative works as well
as debate thrive on opinion, religious texts should be entirely void of
opinion.
(3) I’ve
always drawn a line between the creative writers and the academic writers. Creative writers draw from personal
experience and personal opinions, while academic research writers draw from
other’s experiences and interpretations while omitting their own biases. Creative writers are more the
day-dreaming-novel-reading type, whereas academic writers are more the seminar
attending, textbook reading type. I
associate the creative writers with starving artists and/or rockstars (pretty
broad spectrum), and the academic writers with ‘the American dream’ lifestyle. Creative types are the ones you want to bring
to bed; academic types are the ones you want to bring home to your parents.
When someone from an older generation asks about my major and I say writing,
they tend to scoff and say something along the lines of, “What…are you going to
be a novelist?” This question is always
accompanied by a vocal inflection that sounds similar to, “Are you fuckin’ shittin’ me?” which illustrates the view of
creativity as a joke. Because of this,
when I’d rather not engage in a flame war, I say that I’m interested in
becoming a grant writer, or a technical writer, and then my future isn’t so
dismissible.
TL;DR- Creative
writers nourish the soul and starve the stomach through opinion based writing, academic writers
silence the soul but nourish the stomach by omitting opinion.
Oh man, so many things I appreciate about this post. For one, you effectively answered each question with aptitude and honesty regarding your self-representation. I fuddled around with narrative and soap-boxing (writing at 6:30 a.m. isn't my strongest point), but I appreciate the synthesis, encapsulation, and cohesion of your piece.
ReplyDeleteSecond, I love this line, "Creative types are the ones you want to bring to bed; academic types are the ones you want to bring home to your parents." It's racy, evocative, and genius. I'm not sure if I've ever understood or perceived creativity as sexy, but when you write that, it's spot-on. There is untamed beauty, a restless and relentless spirit that drives creativity, something another knows cannot be gentled, but longs to experience. Yep, sexy.
Additionally, this part spoke to me: "Following rules in writing has always been a way to attain the highest grade, but not necessarily a stepping-stone to achieving one’s own full writing potential." Whether it is learned the easy or hard way, college students soon realize that they are writing to their professor. Many proctors are generous and open to creativity and opinion; but in the end, our writing must be shaped and funneled for a specific mind.
Here's my thought: writing will never be completely limitless. Whether it is a professor, a job, an academic structure, etc., we will always write in some sort of shape. So, what shapes are the best? What enables creativity, and can we teach inspiration to exist even inside a fence? Can that wild stallion still exist, although it will always be bridled in some way?
Hmmmm.
Thanks for writing,
Anjeli D.
“To define my terms, I believe creativity to be creation/discovery outside of the usual boundaries that genres can accommodate.” Based on these parameters, could not academic writers also be creative writers? We might even point towards this blog post as an academic piece of writing, and yet we can see that it is also highly creative—making use of video, blogging format, and unconventional analogies/phrases—since it steps outside the “usual boundaries” of an academic reflective essay. And by the same token, cannot the novelists or the writers in the fiction genre be non-creative? Part of the reason we can tell a poem from a fiction novel is its appearance; even the writing we perceive to be “creative” usually adheres to the boundaries posed by its genre. Maybe I bring this up is because I feel like I’m more of an “academic” writer than a “creative” writer; this way, I’m trying to validate myself. ;-)
ReplyDeleteI hadn’t thought to include religious texts among objective writing, but now that you bring it up, I completely agree with you! However, I’d like to point out some factors to consider. You wrote that, “We’d hope that we’re just getting the facts, but for each biblical event there were multiple interpretations, and therefore multiple opinions. I’d say religious texts are the only type of writing I can think of where ALL personal elements should be entirely nonexistent.” I think we should differentiate between what a text teaches and what it records. For example, the Bible may record multiple people’s interpretations of events, but this is not the same as what it teaches to be the “true” meaning of an event (i.e., what God declares it to be). But without a specific example, I’m not sure if that is what you meant or if you had something else in mind. Nonetheless, we might discuss how a text can be inherently “objective” while still recording the subjective views of several people; we even apply this idea to our “ideal” form of journalism.
Very well-written post; you hit on tons of great ideas—thanks!
I just like reading your posts. I believe you and Anjeli will go places someday; you both write with passion and write well— nice combinations to succeed in a "are you fuckin' shittin' me" kind of discipline! I’m just glad to have met you so I can say, “hey, I know this guy,” some day.
ReplyDeleteI just have to let you know, though. The older you get, the worse that “shittin’ me” comment will affect you. You can try to shrug it off, but people will press it home— “Do you think you’ll specialize in curly fries or those big fat ones?” I always like it when people ask what kind of writing you do, like they might be interested somehow. Here’s how it usually goes:
“You’re a writer?”
“Yep”
“What do you write?”
“Stuff with words mostly.”
“I like reading Rush Limbaugh…”
“That’s nice.”
“Do you write like that?”
“Like I’m retarded? No…”
“What’d you say your name was?”
Sounds of bar stools being moved, gulping of beer…A door opens quickly as muffled cursing dies away…
Get used to it. Stay calm. Write on.