Hey Bartholomae... what's the deal, man?

Every time I read David Bartholomae's "Inventing the University" I always get instinctively defensive. I just don't entirely agree with his values, as I understand them. My initial opinions are very similar to Elise's in their most recent post, pretty much. I also think he has a judgmental tone, and the way he talks about his students sets me on edge. Maybe we're biased because we're writing center consultants. Maybe I'm biased because I was first exposed to this piece in Melissa Keith's argument class... and Melissa is our writing center director. We didn't tear "Inventing the University" apart in that class too much, but we definitely poked fun at Bartholomae a little. Writing center consultants are passionate, opinionated people, and we care a lot more about content and ideas than grammar and structure. (Even though those are important too.) We get a little heated about this kind of stuff.

I do understand that this piece prompted a lot of important discussion about writing courses at the time. It was kind of groundbreaking, from what I understand, so I completely respect that. He clearly cares about writing and I think he wants what's best for his students. His language just makes him seem so detached from them, which really grates my cheese. That might just be how he writes academic papers, but it still makes me uncomfortable. Maybe he's trying to remain objective, but the way he dissects student writing here feels cold. It feels like an actual dissection, and not a gentle investigation.

I don't even think his ideas are that bad, mostly. They're a little confusing to interpret, though. For example, on page 10, he says that "Leading students to believe that they are responsible for something new or original, unless they understand what those words mean with regard to writing, is a dangerous and counterproductive practice." His whole argument sounds kind of shitty at first, like he's trying to stifle student creativity. For the most part though, I think he's just trying to say that students should be taught standard genre conventions so they can better navigate the world of writing, instead of focusing entirely on freedom of personal expression in writing.

As someone who loves freedom of personal expression in writing, this offends me, but I also kind of get it? I think I understand why he's saying stuff like this. He's trying to give student writers, especially "inexperienced" student writers, the tools they need so they can do the fun stuff later. For me, the fun stuff has been a big part of learning writing, and I believe it helps students become less scared of writing as a process, but I understand where Bartholomae's coming from.

He seems like one of those strict writing instructors that always give you harsh criticism - not because they're entirely an asshole, but because they believe in you and stuff. I've definitely had writing instructors like that in the past. My English teacher in junior high was kind of like that, except he actually was entirely an asshole. One time he got so mad that no one finished the homework (which was admittedly pretty confusing) that he screamed at us and threw a stapler at the wall, shaking everyone into silence. I don't know a lot about who Bartholomae is as a person, but I'm hoping he's not the kind of guy who would throw a stapler at the wall in English class.