Generating Ideas

It seems strange that the focus on the writing process is a somewhat new idea but many past rhetoricians seem to have had the idea tangled amongst their prominent concepts. In Emily’s presentation we learned that there have been many ideas about the stage of invention, and Coleridge was among them with his belief that inspiration flowed through the author. The theory of the necessity of inspiration for writers has been contested by later composition theorists, like Linda Flower. I found that part of our readings included discussions of the writing process. Ann E. Berthoff offers ideas about the writing process at the stage of invention in her article “Learning the Uses of Chaos.” Berthoff’s ideas of the invention stage differ from Coleridge since she suggests that ideas come from language. “We find the forms of thought by means of language and we find the forms of language by taking thought,” (Berthoff, 648). Her ideas, as the title suggests, align with invention from chaos. “…they can find ways out of chaos because language creates them. Language itself is the great heuristic,” (Berthoff, 648). Berthoff does offer a small connection to Coleridge when discussing gaining ideas from the writing of others. “If the authors is saying X, how does that go with the Y we heard him saying in the preceding chapter or stanza?” (Berthoff, 650). This reminded me of Coleridge’s idea of taking two opposite things and creating a metaphor. Finding the connections between chapters and stanzas are generally not that difficult, but I think they both offer ideas about finding connections to generate ideas.

It also seemed that Coleridge may have shown some concern about the suppression of voices that didn’t fit what would have been considered standard. I think Linda Brodkey offered ideas on the same subject in her article “On the Subjects of Class and Gender in ‘The Literacy Letters.’” Brodky examined the correspondence between middle-class teachers and working class students in an “Adult Basic Education” class. What Brodkey noticed was some of the teachers struggled to steer the correspondence and avoid topics that seemed uncomfortable to them. “Don’s response is characteristic of the kind of discursive uneasiness that arises whenever one of the students interrupts the educational practice deems such working-class concerns as neighborhood violence irrelevant,” (Brodkey, 638).

Brodkey’s findings seem to suggest a concern for the isolation of the writing classroom from the real world. She states that the teachers weren’t trying to be crude, but were presenting “…a view that insists that the classroom is a separate world of its own, in which teachers and students relate to one another undistracted by the classism, racism, and sexism that rage outside the classroom,” (Borkey, 645). I have heard many teachers tell their students to leave their personal issues at the door so it doesn’t interfere with their education. This is faulty because even if they can keep their world out of the classroom it still affects their learning. This relates back to our discussion of gender and cultural studies being forced together and possibly still marginalized. As Brodkey states, “What is ultimately challenged is the ideology that class, and by extension race and gender differences, are present in American society but absent from American classrooms,” (Brodkey, 645).