Harris observed the differences in composing behaviors of one- and multi- draft writers, one of which is the time the writers decide it is time to “transcribe.” One-draft writers expressed the need to know a direction for the piece before they start writing while multi-drafters begin writing before they know what their topic is.
Because self-proclaimed multi-drafters like Karen and Cindy can complete “formulaic” writing drafts once, it makes believe multi-drafting is a creative process (181). I think it’s interesting to think about how purpose affects the writers tendencies to create one or multiple drafts in different situations. I have traditionally been a one-drafter but recently I have been working to change my writing process. Now in some situations I create multiple drafts because I started writing early before I knew what the topic was and the specific piece I am thinking of had other, work-related significance. The kind where I needed it finished by the deadline but it still needed to be a quality story. Not all of my school papers get the same attention. I share the tendency of one-drafters to start writing when I have a clear direction in mind, but if I am being honest with myself it is because I’ve had unreasonable expectations about my writing. I am discovering a process to let go of those expectations and begin to view writing more as exploration. I need to be less boring about it!
Although they make some of the same points, I personally liked Murray’s writing style a lot better than Harris’ because it is more conversational and the academic research is more subtle. Murray begins with a delightful and compelling baseball analogy by writer Neil Simon to make his point about the positive views of revision renowned writers have. One similar point between Murray and Harris is revision is a key part of the writing process but “one of the writing skills least researched” and one that students are not introduced to in early writing classes (Murray, 121). Since revision is integral to good writing because it is the very process of discovering what you intended to say, I wonder why it has been so commonly understated in university writing classes. Perhaps it has something to do with external constraints like time since students often take other classes and maintain a balance of homework between them all. I think that is why purpose matters when discussing composition behaviors because they can differ greatly depending on purpose.
Hi Addie,
ReplyDeleteOne of the things you'll discover when you're introduced to the field composition studies in grad school is how central Murray was to the development of the discipline and how largely marginalized his approach to scholarship is now. As you say, he is such a pleasure to read. But now he'd have a hard time getting published, which is a shame. I once had this interesting conversation with Murray in the mailroom at UNH, and he showed me letter from a journal editor rejecting one of his pieces. The editor complained that the article was too "Murrayesque." Don found that hilarious. but I also think it was telling.
I'd like to read/hear more from you about this transition you're making from one to multi-drafting. As you imply, I do think it's decision that depends on the writing situation, and it would be interesting to tease that out a little more. What are the conditions that make multi-drafting a bad idea?
Addie,
ReplyDeleteI'm right there with you in terms of feeling drawn to one piece over another. Murray is exceptional in targeting the audience, however the information that Harris offers I think is really valuable.
I think you bring up an interesting point about why revision is understated in university classes, I too have wondered why revision theory seems to be often glossed over when it comes to academic writing courses. I think purpose plays a part and external time constraints but I've also wondered if it comes down to the lack of formal educational information directly related to revision.