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/