David Bartholomae address exactly why academic writing can be so difficult for students. We simply have not been taught how to do it. He first explains that successful writers "can write from a position of privilege... They must be equal to or more powerful than those they would address" (515). To be a good writer, you must act like an expert, talking to a group of experts. In order to become an expert, you need to practice sounding like one. In other words, you must "fake it 'til you make it." Although students new to a field may not have the actual experience or knowledge, if they develop their writing skills, they will already have that strong authoritative voice when the knowledge part finally can back up their statements. However, many students have never been taught how to exercise their academic voices.
Bartholomae illustrates where teachers go wrong and how they can help students develop a more mature writing style. He uses the example of a writing assignment where a students are asked to "write about 'To His Coy Mistress,' not to for your teacher, but for the students in [their] class" (515). This type of assignment, which requires the student to write for an outsider, does not reflect how the academic community works. To better prepare students for writing academic discourse, where writing is addressed to an insider's circle, they should be required to write about "To His Coy Mistress" for a person who is already an expert on it. With this type of practice, students will be better prepared for entering the academic conversation.
Looking back, I can see how my writing teachers in high school molded me into a stronger writer by following Bartholomae's recommendation. I was taught to write from a position of authority. For example, here are two versions of an excerpt from a paper of mine in high school:
The mistreatment of women, primarily Chaucer’s portrayal of women as mere afterthoughts of men, is evident in “The Clerk’s Tale.” Chaucer deliberately undermines the essential worth of women, and in doing that, destroys the fundamental freedoms which come with humanity.
In earlier drafts, this statement began as
It seems as if Chaucer portrays women as mere afterthoughts of men in "The Clerk's Tale." It could be argued that the essential worth of women is undermined. When women are disregarded, it threatens their place in the world as human beings, along with the fundamental freedoms which come with humanity.
Although the two excerpts have similar substance, the first one is much stronger. In my original draft, I wrote "It could be argued that the essential worth of women is undermined." It "could be" argued? Why don't I argue it right now? In my later draft, I changed this to a bold accusatory statement, claiming "Chaucer deliberately undermines the essential worth of women." I was taught that I can and should take control of my writing like this; I'm an expert, aren't I? Like Bartholomae says, by acting like an expert on this topic, I am qualified to write to an audience of inside experts.
Amen!
ReplyDeleteAgreed. I think for a lot of writers, writing for "experts" can be daunting. Even still, whenever I write for professors or even e-mails to my boss. I want to sound like I know what I'm doing and sometimes I'm afraid I don't come off as such. But you argue that through Bartholomae's essay that to write well, writers need to write with authority. Even without the use of impressive jargon, students can write with authority as long as they write purposefully, that is, form an argument they believe in and defend it with evidence. This is the part where Frankfurt's essay comes in: writing bullshit may look impressive because the writer works hard to seem authoritative, but writing with sincerity guarantees that the writer expresses his or her own beliefs (with evidence, of course) and each writer is the authority of his/her own beliefs.
ReplyDelete