Craig, I don't have much time before I run, but I do wish to reply quickly. I agree about form. Without a doubt, the best poetry I receive from my students is in response to fixed forms: their lyrics are often banal, while their attempts to write metrical verse usually produce genuinely original replies. As I tell them, if they're surprised as they wrote it, their readers will probably be delighted and surprised by what they've written. The analogy I usually recall at such moments is Frost's description of poetic form in terms of the net in tennis--you don't have much of a game without it. Voice might be the topic where matters of form and freedom collide. I make it very clear to my students that I would like them to use grammatical terms in order to distinguish between different qualities of voice and to use grammatical forms to modify their own voices. As I stress to them, I don't subscribe to the romantic notion of the one true voice, immanent with the glory of paradise lost--the conception of voice which might run counter to grammatical rigor. Michael >Michael, > I can remember students like that--correct, but weak-- from when >I first started teaching in the 70's. My current students tend to >write lively prose that is fairly far from correct. But I like your >exercise and have used variations on it myself over the years. >There's room for a great deal of creativity in punctuation, and that >is hard to teach. > I think form can constrain, and the popular view of grammar is >probably that--a list of acceptable forms that we are limited to. >But form also enables. Meaning doesn't happen without it. So an >attention to form can also be a means toward empowerment, toward >making more explicit the nature of good writing, well beyond the >target of correctness. Correctness doesn't make for much of a goal. > My initial exposure to that view of language was through the >English romantic poet Coleridge. He made the distinction between >mechanical and organic form. If meaning and form are dynamically >linked, then an attention to form is an attention to meaning. > Of course, this can be a rigorous approach, not merely licensing >freedom. I think that may be what Edmond is objecting to, the notion >that freedom is the goal. We think that students should be free to >be themselves, when in fact that may doom them to failure. > >Craig > >Michael Dee wrote: > >>Re: The 'progressive view' >>Yes, I believe I do agree with Dr. Wright's critique. I just wish >>it was aimed at something like Emile rather than progressives. In >>regard to your final question, I suppose the presentation I gave >>for ATEG at the most recent NCTE conference might provide an >>answer. I described my use of the descriptive vocabulary provided >>by grammar to define voice and rhetorical style. Most of my >>students are law-fearing writers: they write grammatically sound >>prose which no one I know would wish to read. So, for example, I >>might distribute a passage written by Orwell from which I have >>removed all the punctuation. They must then punctuate it and >>explain their choices. Inevitably, they produce a range of >>solutions, most of which would pass editorial scrutiny. We then >>compare their solutions to Orwell's own. The exercise usually >>produces an interesting discussion about the artistic deployment of >>punctuation, one which they can only understand and articulate by >>using grammatical terms. At this point they now understand my >>definition for an A grade on writing mechanics: "no errors of >>grammar, spelling, capitalization; transgressions artistically >>defensible." In order to bend or break the rules of standard >>grammar as they write their own papers, in other words, they need >>to identify the rules they are bending or breaking and identify an >>explicitly rhetorical intention for doing so. Our classroom >>exercises inform their practice and their defense of their >>practice. I suppose the encouragement to bend rules would conform >>to a definition of a progressive approach; it certainly feels >>different and progressive to them. And, as I think you'd agree, it >>is not a romantic approach. >> >>Michael Dee >> >> >> >>>Michael, >>> I think the fact that Edmond is writing us from England ought to >>>get him at least mildly off the hook. >>> The progressive movement in American politics has a very proud >>>history, especially in the early twentieth century. I'm not sure >>>many Americans understand that, let alone someone from another >>>country. >>> Am I right that you agree with Edmond in other ways? >>> Can you give us a description of what a true progressive would >>>say in relation to things like "craft," "discipline", and >>>"grammar"? >>> >>>Craig >>> >>>Michael Dee wrote: >>> >>>>In my lifetime, progressive causes have been routinely disparaged >>>>by the logic evident in Dr. Wright's definition: renounce the >>>>general term (and its proponents) by identifying it with an >>>>obviously flawed subcategory or remote relative. If you doubt >>>>the efficacy of this rhetorical strategy, consider the fate of >>>>"liberal." Believe me, my rage at the predominance of >>>>conservative politics in this country can easily match Dr. >>>>Wright's passionate criticism of romantic idealism. Not only >>>>that: I would agree with the criticism, particularly as it >>>>applies to educational principles and practices. And for that >>>>very reason I object to casting progressives as childish >>>>idealists. >>>> >>>>More passion available upon request. >>>> >>>>Michael Dee >>>> >>>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web >>>>interface at: >>>> >>>><http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html>http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html >>>>and select "Join or leave the list" >>>> >>>>Visit ATEG's web site at <http://ateg.org/>http://ateg.org/ >>>> >>> >>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web >>>interface at: >>> >>><http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html>http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html >>>and select "Join or leave the list" >>> >>>Visit ATEG's web site at <http://ateg.org/>http://ateg.org/ >>> >> >>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web >>interface at: >><http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html>http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html >>and select "Join or leave the list" >> >>Visit ATEG's web site at <http://ateg.org/>http://ateg.org/ >> > >To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web >interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and >select "Join or leave the list" > >Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/ To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list" Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/