The Writing Abbey

A weblog of Jesse Abbot's ongoing reflections about writing, teaching and related activities.

My Photo

About

Recent Posts

  • Populism, Discernment and Writing
  • What is The Writing Abbey?
  • The Down Beat as Deeper Thesis
  • Samples Aisle
  • The Arguments of Dreams: Assignment
  • The Arguments of Dreams: Background
  • Inner Heritage Research Paper: Assignment
Subscribe to this blog's feed
Blog powered by Typepad

Populism, Discernment and Writing

Those who tend to write and those who tend to teaching sometimes coincide.  The writing practitioner-cum-teacher is not a rarity. But in professional contexts in which entrenched institutional writing pedagogies carry the day, the writer-teacher often experiences a conflict of interest, an inner civil war, or some blend of the two.

As a younger teacher, I often found myself at odds with favored methodologies about some static "writing process" (I think the definite article always headed that heading); some preemptive insistence on the requirement of "freewriting" before other segments of such a process; and other questionable barnacles of the rhetoric and composition trade.  Certainly, the elements of such sacraments were not far from me, but to me they were probably more like a painter's rituals of cleaning his or her brush or creating stretchers for the canvas.  Increasingly, I came to understand that the bureaucratic standards of writing pedagogies - particularly in public secondary settings, but also even in higher ed - weren't going to go away -- but also that I wasn't going to capitulate to such offices at the expense of craft.  Not without a fight.

I knew this because the craft is a kind of devotion - one that need not be named or isolated in either secular or religious vocabularies.  I learned about the common ground of the human capacity for delightful devotion in part over a series of phone talks with a secular humanist-inclined friend, who is both a political activist and classical guitarist.  She does not relate to my spiritual questioning, but we both found a common language in a concept of a devotion that transcends mortal boundaries.

So being drawn to language as a teacher comprises for me a devotion and an attentiveness.  It means that the teaching of writing naturally grows out of an appreciation shared with students of written and spoken texts.  Experiencing our lives as page and text is not a figure of speech when it happens (which is not all the time) --though it's admittedly not possible to do this experience full justice through textuality teacher-talk like this blog. 

Nonetheless,  those mutually interperformative encounters mark an amazing intersection of populism and discernment.  Writing is not the province of an elect few or élite class, but within the nuances of witnessing to craft, skilled elders naturally emerge to guide others.  Much as Martin Sheen views his role as that of journeyman actor, any of us who has worked through some of the rigors of apprenticeship under living writers at some point must not deny the call to presume to apprentice others.  It demands a really specific cocktail of confidence and humility, because somehow the masters we have served -- however much we sometimes fought with or resented them in the past -- are always in our midst, demanding a chilling level of vigilance. 

Language is a mirror for the demands of life.  It is not life as such, but also not not life.  A mirror can be used to redirect sunlight, to open ourselves to ourselves, to imitate meaningfully or shamefully.  A mirror may be the beginning of a ceaseless hall of mirrors (what the East Indian theologians term maya, illusion), or it may be the untouched face of reality.  It's my hope that in this forum, I and other interested participants may work with this lens on language.  There is the usual blend of smoke and mirrors everywhere around us, but if we look to the guidance of this basic mirror, we may be able to help ourselves and others see through a bit of the smoke.  That is something I ask us to trust.

December 16, 2005 | Permalink | Comments (1)

What is The Writing Abbey?

"The Writing Abbey" is a cross between a public space and writing retreat in which I will be posting ongoing ideas about writing, teaching and anything that moves me to do these things.

This will be a kind of cross-section made up of my teaching work at the colleges with which I'm affiliated, my private reflections on these matters, and concepts that grow out of my various workshops, seminars and coaching work as they unfold.  Because I primarily work in educational environments, I will initially only accept comments or submissions via email, and material from students will be posted as anonymous messages to protect their privacy. Eventually I'll work out a release form to help ensure everyone is happy in the long view.

The term "abbey" is most obviously a pun on my name, Jesse Abbot.  More broadly it is intended to situate writing as a contemplative activity akin in integrity and mood to the kinds of sacred activities that go on in santuaries throughout the great traditions.

Just to be on the safe side, let me just say here that although I am affiliated with various organizations, secular and sacred, The Writing Abbey is not, and intends the term "abbey" as a vivid metaphor, not as a claim to religious affiliation, authority or doctrine.

Welcome to the Abbey.  I hope this weblog can serve as a reminder that writing is a way of being, and that writing, teaching and being can all be continuous with one another.  A working theme here is that commitment to writing can become the heart of how we learn throughout our lives.

You can reach me at thewritingabbey@gmail.com

November 30, 2005 in Home | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Down Beat as Deeper Thesis

There is a funny history to the word thesis.  Originally signifying the ictus or poetic stress / beat in classical Greek verse or music (literally, "putting one's foot down"), it later came to designate the down beat, with another term, arsis ("lifting of the foot"), stepping in to assume the role of the main beat.*

Later, of course, this index finger of higher culture took on various rings, shades of polish and calluses in its range of rhetorical and academic expression.

Is there a real gap between the prosodic and musical ambiguity and the word's incumbent status as a staple of academe?  Hardly, for a primitive folk etymologist like me.  But I read magical valences out loud  when words whisper their pedigree proudly from the subway or libretto .  Some questions persist for me:

  • Is there not perhaps some built in initiatory mystery connected to finding the soul of the thesis in an essay?  Can we seek in the subtler bouquet  of the text's down beat its true source and inner vein?
  • Does the word thesis itself exude what poet George Quasha refers to as liminality - a dipole joining the musics and rhetorics of open force and silence, of skyward battle and earthen receptivity?

Such dipoles made up of language's music and its mission seem crucial to grasping the salvational character of writing and writing-driven performative teaching.  Even encoded in the sound-field of, say, reggae, the down beat can help teach us what's up.  .  . and what's up to us.

[continued soon]

*I almost typed "upbeat" here, but restrained myself.

November 29, 2005 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Samples Aisle

Over time, I will arrange new ways of archiving the different documents I post here.  For now, I will be grouping the next several posts under the heading "Samples from my Teaching."  These will mostly consist of assignments and various hands-on activity sheets from classes I have taught and continue to teach.

The aim is to build, over time, a web-based environment for housing various materials I regularly make use of.  As I arrive at the best "fuel blend" for what I call the balance between the "plugged in" and "unplugged" portions of life, documents may be radically added to or subtracted from this blog.

November 24, 2005 in Samples from my Teaching | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Arguments of Dreams: Assignment

Assignment Sheet: “The Arguments of Dreams” Paper (Essay 7)
English Comp. and Lit. I • Abbot • Spring 2003

This unit is dedicated to the teacher and thinker Frederick Beckham, whose seamless love for arenas as diverse as the poetry of Wordsworth; European political history; wilderness education; thought in medicine; hockey coaching; and photography has permanently changed the face of teaching at the High School in the Community (HSC) of New Haven, CT and The Kingswood-Oxford School (West Hartford) – and helped inspire a friendship and exchange that has been indispensable in my own work as a teacher, writer, and more recently, as a “life coach.”

ESSENTIAL FACTS:

What the Paper Is (Overview): As addressed in my email letter of last weekend, this paper is an essay, speech, letter, editorial, or other work of argumentative / persuasive writing that demonstrates you are the “right person for the job” – that is, for a career position; important task in your life (or in history!); place in the entering class of an institution of higher learning (for example, a graduate program, or medical, dental, or law school, etc.); political office or public role at any level; or some other important calling that you envision in your possible future. This can be scheduled for three, five, ten years in the future. . . or any upcoming moment in your lifetime that you find realistic and relevant.

Due Date: Tue., May 6, 2003

Background to This Concept I’d Like You to Have: Please see the attached short piece, “Background to the ‘Arguments of Dreams’ Paper.” Anyone interested in discussing this or posing questions as to what this is all about is encouraged to see me during office hours. I provide this piece because I believe that the teaching and learning processes are continuous and intertwined, and therefore you are entitled to know much of what is going on “behind the scenes” in the unfolding of the course.

Required Length: Four to five pages (4-5 pp.) At least five to six strong, well-supported paragraphs.

Main Requirements:

• Overall adherence to the rhetorical structures discussed to date in class and in your text – e.g., the “A-B-C-D-E” acronym/mnemonic device; the incorporation of coverage – and dismantling – of the opposition’s argument(s) throughout your text?; the conscious application of inductive and/or deductive reasoning, Toulmin logic, and other reasoning strategies as needed; the careful avoidance of logical fallacies; a strong conclusion that does not merely reiterate your introduction verbatim but rather “echoes” and further reinforces it – as Nadell, McMeniman and Langan suggest – strengthening your audience’s motivation to act and approve your candidacy.
• Use of, and citation from, your IHRP as a reference / source relative to your core values: an important aspect of your candidacy. (Include a photocopy of the relevant sections from your IHRP with your draft materials in your submission folder.)
• Use of MLA format throughout for all citation and in general. Works Cited page required.
• A one-page letter to me clearly explaining the logical / reasoning strategies you used in writing the paper – as well as an account of how you managed to avoid logical fallacies, to the degree this came up in the writing process. Also discuss the specific ways in which you incorporated emotional or dramatic appeals. This letter should also clearly address the revision process (as usual); and discuss strengths and weaknesses you perceive in the submitted work (also as usual).
• A thoroughly completed Peer Review Sheet. Make sure your peer reviewer included not only responses to the checklist but also several practical suggestions for improving the essay.
• Any and all rough material and drafts you would like me to consider.

Required Sources:

• The IHRP
• Books, professional or industry journals, and other publications (on- or offline) which clearly discuss the requirements of your chosen task or job. There can be a few of these sources, as needed.
• 2 Letters of Reference (real ones and/or full-length future mock-up letters created solely for use in this project). Include photocopies of these with your final submission.
• Some other writing you have done which provides some further basis for your candidacy. (This can include portions of expressive papers that led up to the IHRP.)

As we discussed in class, you may realistically find yourself citing parenthetically your IHRP, letters of reference and/or other sources without otherwise mentioning such sources in the body of your essay. That is, it would be confusing and/or illogical to come out in the middle of your argument with the initials “IHRP” – and yet that document highlights defining beliefs that can be very helpful to your case. The parenthetical citations and Works Cited page will alert me to what you are doing; it doesn’t have to stand between your text and its imagined audience.

Suggested Resources (Including Helpful Background Work):

• A (brief) interview that you conduct with someone who currently holds the job (or performs the task, or attends the school/institution, etc.) toward which your essay is directed
• Careful review of several argumentative essays, editorials, transcripts of political speeches and other texts composed in this mode. You have read several in Chapter 19 of The Longman Writer; strategic searches on the Internet will also yield some good results. The more you spend time with these types of essays, reading them aloud and absorbing their logical and emotional strategies and cadences (rhythms), the more comfortable you will feel in the mode. Try subjecting these other essays to the peer review / revision checklist on pp. 464-465 of Longman. Do the arguments hold up? Are there logical fallacies? This kind of task is an excellent background exercise for your own piece.

Weighting of Final Grade: Essay’s efficacy and coherence as a whole: 35%; Sufficient coverage and dismantling of the opposition / opposing views: 15%; Evidence of strong research: 20%; Appropriate and accurate in-text citation and documentation, using MLA format: 10%;

Submission of, with substance in, all required supporting materials (reference letters, drafts, letter to instructor, peer review documentation, transcript[s] of any interview[s] [if any], etc.): 20%

Other Important Dates:

Thu., 4/24: Due: first very rough draft of essay (checked off)
Tue., 4/29: Due: strong draft of essay (bring three [3] copies: one for your peer, one for you, one for me). Peer Review workshop. Grammar & Mechanics Module: “Punctuation and the Poetry of Prose.” (background reading: Wallace Chafe essay)
Thu., 5/1: Revision workshop (be prepared to show that you’ve made three significant changes based on your reviewer’s suggestions). Also, some likely wrap-up of peer review work.
Tue., 5/6 Final class (paper due). (Also, portfolios accepted.)

November 24, 2005 in Weblogs | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Arguments of Dreams: Background

Background to the ‘Arguments of Dreams’ Assignment

As I’ve put thought, over the years, into what my version of “Freshman Comp.” should look like, I have generally scheduled the more expressive or ”creative” writing exercises to move toward and anticipate what is really the climax of the course, the expository and research work that has evolved into the Inner Heritage Research Paper (IHRP; see previous materials). The IHRP has then served as a resource class members can utilize to remind themselves of their core values, so that such qualities can inspire them to take a stand on an issue that is important to them.  That stand has assumed the form of an argumentative paper on the issue selected.  This semester at

Hillyer

 

College

, several factors have moved me to re-think an alternative conclusion to the course.  Without addressing here all of these factors, I’ll note that they collectively tie in to a concern that has developed over the years: that this final issue paper constitutes as much another major research paper as it does an argumentative piece.  Given the exhaustive research required for the IHRP, what has sometimes happened at the end of the term is that the effort and time required for strong and diversified research, on the one hand, and effective argumentation, on the other, vie with one another – and argumentation often loses that battle.  So, this “alternate ending” asks us to build a case for our own lives and worth, rather than a case on a specific issue.

The “Arguments of Dreams” work aligns itself with both the coaching and school-to-work, or more accurately, “school-to-life” models of education. The latter is the case generally because the assignment supports a direct link between the student’s academic / critical work and his or her ongoing and future aspirations. As to coaching, that approach ultimately affirms the student’s role as his or her own teacher and agent in the world.  Here, recognizing the student’s capacity to grow requires honoring his or her subjectivity.  Just as the coaching orientation values the affective (or emotionally grounded) side of existence and learning as much as the cognitive, the concept of integrating personal vision (“dream”) with an argument or case demands that the writer join subjective experience and passion with objective, provable fact.  While admitting the relationship between the subjective and objective spheres, thinkers in writing and rhetoric sometimes reserve the category / subgenre of persuasion for discourse based in dramatic and emotional appeals and argumentation for communication rooted in logic and reason (Nadell, McMeniman and Langan 444-445).  But as the philosopher and teacher Herbert Guenther notes,

[i]t is more than doubtful that .  .  . a separation between cognition and emotion is practicable or even, from a holistic point of view, wise to try.  Emotions enter the picture whenever interpersonal relationships prevail, whenever something happens that affects the individual in his encounter with the environing world.  Emotions not only “move” the individual out to a multifaceted world of concerns, but also establish a feedback link by which a very personal relationship even with the material world is established.  Cognition, wrongly reduced to, and subsequently identified with, rationality, is predominantly geared to a static universe that, it is believed, can be adequately described or “known” in quantitative terms.  But emotion with its fluid affective nuances is geared to a qualitative world that is appreciated either positively or negatively in a way that deeply involves the individual.  Maybe the very attempt to separate the “rational” from the “emotional,” to reduce a living person to a set of unrelated and isolatable compartments.  .  . [can] foul up and pollute the working of the total system (52).

The task of recognizing the extremes of passionless logic and irrational, melodramatic emotion­ – and avoiding these extremes – remains with the student writer.  But my experience as a working writer and poet is that when I forget the subtle interplay and tension between the subjective and objective realms, I do so at my own peril.  I have often found myself simplifying this interplay in the classroom with characterizations such as “logic is the vehicle that moves the argument forward, and emotion or passion is the fuel that should be used up cleanly and efficiently in the process,” but that doesn’t completely do justice to the mystery of this tension.  My experience is that both vehicle and fuel are used up or transformed to create the gestalt – the music or the poetry – that is strong argumentation.  The fact that I very often compulsively count the number of syllables in an important sentence for a persuasive piece I am writing reminds me that I cannot ignore such poetic or musical dimensions.

The most mysterious and alluring tension for me as a coach/teacher, is that between inspiration and the practical, between ideals and the nuts-and-bolts measures required to get things done in the immediate world.  It is my hope that when I fall short as a teacher, it happens within the practice of trying to straddle this tension and wrestle with its implications.  To ignore inspiration is to ignore the very heart of life, the core of our possibilities.  And to forget the concrete, pragmatic tasks is to guarantee that ideals will remain only distant possibilities.

In the preface to her ESOL writing and rhetoric primer Writing As a Personal Product – a work whose theme and implications, in my opinion, probably outstep the accomplishments of the book itself – Laura Donahue Latulippe writes “[t]he product is as important as well [in addition to viewing writing as a process].  The desired product will be clear, effective writing that accomplishes students’ intended purposes.  In addition, these products will represent the thoughts that students have and the conclusions they reach about topics that are personally important to them” (xv).  Ideally, athletic coaches also inculcate in their charges an appreciation for both the process of training and the product: the fruit that can be witnessed in a sporting event.

Today it has become commonplace for coaches to ask athletes to visualize future successes clearly, concretely and in detail – with the understanding that clear vision can become flesh, reality.  The integration of clarity of expression and investment in own’s own life and future is a parallel strategy I am recommending with the ‘Arguments of Dreams” paper.  Since The Arguments of Dreams is also the title of my current manuscript of poetry, this title reflects a particular stubborn bias and orientation I have regarding the central places that imaginative interpretation and the argument  for meaning and purpose hold in my life.  It is my wish that my students may collaborate, if they desire, in the work and pleasure these kinds of thinking and writing afford, and that such investigations may bear fruit for all who participate.

                                                                                                            Jesse Abbot

                                                                                                            Hillyer College

                                                                                                            April 2003

Works Cited

Guenther, Herbert V. From Reductionism to Creativity: rDzogs-chen and the New Sciences of 

        Mind. Boston & Shaftesbury: Shambhala, 1989.

Latulippe, Laura Donahue.  Writing As a Personal Product. 

Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice Hall

        Regents, 1992.

Nadell, Judith, Linda McMeniman, and John Langan.  The Longman Writer: Rhetoric, Reader,

        Handbook. 5th ed.

New York

: Longman, 2003.      

November 24, 2005 in Samples from my Teaching | Permalink | Comments (0)

Inner Heritage Research Paper: Assignment

Assignment Sheet: The Inner Heritage Research Paper (IHRP) (Essay 5)

English Comp. and Lit. I · Abbot · Fall 2005

ESSENTIAL FACTS:
What It Is (Overview): As previously discussed, The IHRP is a mid-length research paper that integrates autobiographical writing with research into cultural, spiritual and ethical histories.

The paper should set forth and build upon a three-part structure:

• First: the IHRP should present a brief summary of the cultural, religious, and ethical backgrounds that were central to your upbringing – i.e., the elements in these areas that one or more “elders” in your life passed on to you•;
• Second, the paper should state what you have done in your life to examine and sort out these and/or any other essential threads of your personal history;
• Third, the paper should comprehensively address (i.e., in several substantive paragraphs) the decision making process around what cultural, spiritual and/or simply ethical qualities, beliefs and traits are indispensable to who you are such that you will pass some form of these on to the next generation: i.e., your own children, and/or other younger people on your current or future life (e.g., nieces and nephews, students you may have or younger people working with or for you, etc.).

Final Due Date: Mon., November 28, 2004 (MW class), or Tue., November 29, 2004 (TR class)

Required Length: The main text of the paper should be six to eight (6-8) double-spaced pages. Please also note the additional required material, listed next, below.

Other Requirements: Parenthetical in-text citations in MLA format throughout; MLA format overall throughout; Works Cited page; Bibliography; numbered pages; cover page. (Additional pages are not included in the required length of the paper as given above.)

Included with your submission:

• Your regular Peer Review Documentation;
• Letter to Instructor (addressing the strong points in the essay and those that still need work, along with an extensive discussion in this case of the research and writing process for the IHRP);
• Copies of two (2) interviews conducted with “elders” (see below);
• Any and all rough draft(s) (more than one is not unusual) and related research and background material you wish to include for my consideration.

Submit via the regular procedure of the stapled hard copy packet and electronic backup submissions (described on the last page of the Calendar portion of your course syllabus).

Required Sources:

• In the words of C.G. Jung, your “memories, dreams, reflections.”

• Significant use of and citation from at least three (3) current books of 100 pages or more in the
areas of cultural history, religious history, and/or ethics and the history of ethics.

• Use of and citation from three (3) or more online databases available at the University library

• Use of and citation from at least two (2) interviews conducted with “elders” in your life, within
and/or outside of your immediate family.

• Use of at least two (2) academic journals (with citations). If you have a question regarding
whether one you wish to use qualifies as “academic,” ask a reference librarian or me.

• Three (3) websites, cited, from the Internet / “Open Web.” Make sure you can demonstrate to
me that they are authoritative, per our class discussions. Again, consult me or a librarian if you
are unsure of this.

• Optional use of one (1) or more “serious periodicals.” Examples of these include such
publications as Smithsonian, Scientific American, National Geographic and Parabola, to name a
few (again, consult a librarian or me if you are stuck).

• Optional use of one (1) article from a major newspaper or magazine. Do not use “junk mail”
such as a tabloid or Tiger Beat.

Weighting of Final Grade: Holistically graded according to the following scoring dimensions:

• Essay’s efficacy and coherence as a whole;
• Evidence of significant personal and academic research/inquiry;
• Appropriate and accurate in-text citation and documentation, using MLA format;
• Submission of, and substance in, all required supporting materials (drafts, letter, peer review documentation, interviews, etc.).

Other Due Dates:

Mon., 11/7 (MW class) or Tue., 11/8 (TR class): Present evidence that you have found at least two (2) of your three (3) required books and made use of one or more online databases and one or more academic journals;

Mon., 11/14 (MW class) or Tue., 11/15 (TR class): bring in rough draft – at least 50%, but preferably around 75% – of your IHRP;

Mon., 11/21 (both classes – due by 4 p.m. on this day): Email me evidence (following electronic submission procedure used previously, and sent to both abbot@hartford.edu and abbot@alumni.brown.edu) that you have conducted at least one of your two required
interviews.

November 23, 2005 in Samples from my Teaching | Permalink | Comments (0)