June 20…Back to Becker and Writing
How does Becker’s book match
up to your expectations for a book claiming to teach you how to: “start and
finish your thesis, book, or article?” Keep in mind that in spite of this
negative-seeming prompt that I find the book to be worthwhile enough to assign
it!
Despite my previous critique of Becker (I didn’t think it was that harsh, c’mon!), I believe his book is a useful guide for writers who are too caught up in their thoughts and insecurities to simply begin. It’s also a helpful thing, perhaps for students in particular, to have a book that they can pick up and read in lieu of beginning their work. I promise that’s not a joke. When I feel like I’m not writing well (or if I’m simply not writing at all), I read. I read whatever I choose to read, it could be Dostoyevsky, or a research paper, or a graphic novel. But then again, I read anyway. If I’m a decent writer, it’s probably because I choose to spend a lot of time reading. Fiction seems to work well because it doesn’t evoke the self-consciousness and exposure that we, as students, associate with academic or scholarly writing.
ReplyDeleteI have always been suspicious of “How to Write” books. We are all different in our approach to writing, and sometimes I wonder if trying to figure out “how writing works” isn’t part of the problem. I don’t want to know how it works, at least not in a prescriptive sense. I don’t want to be conscious of the mechanism at work. I don’t want to consider the action of the machine. I suspect that writing works differently for everyone, though I am sure there are plenty of commonalities to the experience we share when attempting to write well. Writing sucks, it’s really hard. David Foster Wallace was considered one of the genius writers of our time, he won the MacArthur grant. He used to wear a bandanna wrapped tightly around his head while writing in an effort to stabilize the maelstrom of his thoughts and ideas. Whatever it takes to get it on the page, I suppose. But maybe the biggest part of “the writing problem” is the pressure we put on ourselves. We tell ourselves that to write, is to be judged.
Some readers have chastised Becker for relying so heavily on personal anecdotes in his book, rather than providing the young scholar with a technical “how to”. But I find the personal aspect to be one of the more comforting when I’m having trouble writing, because it tells us that we are not alone. I found Becker’s chapter on “risk” to be quite helpful, although there is very little of Becker in it. The entirety of the chapter is given to one of Becker’s former students, Rosanna Hertz, who relates nightmares of being outed as stupid and a fraud. It’s telling, I think, that Rosanna’s fears are projected onto those with whom she should be able to relate with most, her colleagues. There is something about the hierarchy at play here, wondering “how we stack up”. As students we read “the titans” in the field, and while we are taught to read critically, we are implicitly compelled to lionize them. It strikes me as a bad habit, not least because we hold ourselves to a false standard. The titans also struggled. Becker would likely consider Dewey’s sometimes inscrutable writing as a flaw. But did it make him any less viable as a philosopher? Or, on the contrary, more impervious to critique? Embracing critique as a presupposition of writing seems to be an effective way to mitigate the writing problem, which is simply to begin.
If it wasn’t through Becker’s book and our class discussions, I wouldn’t be aware of the “economics of writing” that situates many social science writers in the dilemma of choosing a classier or a simpler writing style. Becker advises that one should refrain from using pompous and pretentious language to impress readers, but shall focus more on a clear and direct way to get the point across; while others argue that the scholarly community is judgmental on the art of language, and the use of sophisticated language is expected and is perceived more intelligent.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with Becker that the core value of a book/paper/article is to convey certain point of views with clarity to avoid causing unnecessary misunderstandings of the readers. I also feel quite relieved by Becker’s endorsement in a more succinct style of writing, not because I think “less is more”, but because I feel this is the only way I know how to write – partly because I have a limited repertoire of expressions in English, and maybe also partly due to my training in math which formed me a habit of writing concisely to a point that I wish I could just itemize all my arguments. Therefore in this perspective, I disagree with the assumptions behind Becker’s suggestions – that one has the ability and choice to write in different styles and can easily switch between these different styles.
I appreciate the book’s authentic tone as well as its attempt to advocate for well-crafted prose. It offers some practical suggestions when trying to work through various stages of the writing process, and I found the idea of starting an idea in a file and then leaving it be if it doesn’t immediately take form into a more complete work to be of great value. It also caused me to reflect on my own writing habits I tend to have this obsession with finishing tasks, so between Dewey’s assertions about the nature of inquiry and Becker’s anecdotal advice regarding his approach to research and writing, I found myself pushed to think beyond the conclusion. This has helped me rethink my approach to this program.
ReplyDeleteThe chapters regarding the publishing process as well as the editing process were particularly refreshing. It’s something I teach often: the need to invite criticism and sit purposefully with rejection. I’m reminded as I face it myself, though, that it remains a fairly lofty request of the typical 17-year-old (not to mention the 35-year-old who pens these words… Jacqueline, I tried to not use “I”, but alas I failed!). Every reader can offer insight as to how they received my words, and since I know my ultimate aim in writing, I should welcome feedback that allows me insight into the areas where I missed the mark. I have heard of the so-called imposter syndrome that can cripple faculty members or stifle strong projects, and I want to avoid it. I can’t learn, though, if I don’t put myself out there and embrace the potential discomfort that comes from critique.
All this to say, the text’s accessibility strengthened its message. I admit I wanted to amend a part here and a part there, but I think if Becker believes in his own message, he would welcome any conversation that could lead to a stronger sentence.
I have to admit Becker grew on me. Maybe it's the conversational tone, or the straightforward examples...it is a welcome tonic - Kool-Aid in a Martini glass. Whatever the case, I appreciate that his book has given me some latitude to reflect and consider opportunities to grow/expand/reflect on my writing. I do think that it is perhaps because of an article I read on art education by Carpenter and Tavin titled, "Drawing (Past, Present, and Future) Together: A (Graphic) Look at the Reconceptualization of Art Education" that I was able to see how my field invites the use of the visual medium within its journals (this is written as a graphic novel, and another example are visual essays).
ReplyDeleteWhat I have also enjoyed is the discussion in class - whether filleting Becker for pontificating from a perch, or yesterday's debate on the use of "I". Becker brought that out of us, and PERHAPS it is because of the frankness within the reading.
This is also a good read because it helps to move back the metaphoric curtain to reveal that the wizard is just a man with smoke and mirrors. The writing we do has power in its simplicity, in its transparency, and even in revealing what did not work as much as what did. That's pretty powerful.
I have to add this, as I did not actually answer the question! The book's claim was not something I really considered until this post. I guess I rarely believe that something I read about something do or don't do will change me. I need to get it in my bones. The book is a way of opening my eyes, but it has actually made it worse for me to start and finish my discipline paper. I've become too meta...thinking about every word and overthinking the clarity. As we discussed, he is not offering any one way but rather the flexibility to do what it takes for me to get it done. I do know that tension helps me to write, as well as noise. I have to focus in that condition. Otherwise, I get too flowery...too purple prose.
DeletePosted by Jacqueline
ReplyDeleteI found Becker to be practical as well as motivational. However, at times I felt there was too much non-usable autobiographical content that lead nowhere. Once I was able to move past those areas, I was able to pull out a few beneficial take-a-ways. Though there are issues with Becker’s call for simplified writing, I do see the need in my own writing to reduce unnecessary words. I homeschooled my children and all of them have complained about having to learn cursive. My response has always been, ‘If you want to read cursive, you have to learn to write in cursive.’ I feel the same applies to writing. Though there is room for simplification, there is also a definite space that requires the reader to have a grasp of complex constructions. Despite, Becker’s decades old advice, I still must muddle through complex and overly wordy articles. I contend the best way to traverse these articles is to have some practice in this type of writing.
Some of the more practical advice included becoming an editor as a means of becoming a better writer, knowing your discipline and understanding the rules of engagement, and surprisingly the advice to not begin with an outline. For me, chapter nine offered the most beneficial information for the writer. Becker echoed most that I had been taught in my master’s program regarding theory which offered me the opportunity to review how much of this sound advice to which I continue to adhere and practice. Advice, on page 137, reminds us to be weary of overreaching in the application of a theory. I found this to be somewhat foreboding for me since I have identified the theoretical framework for my dissertation. I am reminded that I should continue to expand my theory knowledge base. Currently, I passively notice other theories, but I will now be more deliberate about filing them away.
The greatest motivational advice—just start writing! Following, would be the reassurance that critiques and rewrites are simply a part of the game—get used to it!
I like Becker’s approach to breaking down the process of writing. I also appreciated his conversational tone in the book. I agree on his point that “...writing needs reworking and thought. But how much? The answer should be sought pragmatically, not in fixed attitudes.” (p. 131, Kindle version). We should keep an open mind about making changes and editing our text, but in practical way that still helps us to move forward and finish the product or writing project. He encourages the writers to organize the information in a way that helps the readers make sense out of it and to make it manageable. He points out that as writers and researchers it is important to make precise statements and avoid making any false statements. He states that “getting ideas in local order requires a keen eye for fallacious arguments” (p. 133, Kindle version). I also agree with his point about researchers/writers thinking about the specific questions that we want to answer and to review the classic works within our fields.
ReplyDeleteI’m glad that we discussed how each doctoral student/researcher in our class, has different ways of organizing the research and sources of information. I found out about Zotero a research tool that helps students organize, cite and collaborate. Thanks!
- Vivian
Becker’s book intrigued and bemused me in its claims to teach one how to start and finish a thesis, book, or article. This publication referenced completion whereas completion does not pose the challenge in my experience; rather, what poses the greatest hindrance in written works is the result of having created a meaningful, well-structured, valuable work that contributes emphatic worth to a dialogue with multidimensional avenues of importance. While the title teased as a how-to manual, creating a written body of work often does not follow a formulaic series of laws that guarantees completion nor quality.
ReplyDeleteIn a previous assignment, I noted that as educators and students, we learn and teach writing beginning with recognizing the utensils that can be utilized to scribe, whether it is a fat pencil to fit small hands or a finger in sand or paint. Proper hand grip and finger placement must be reinforced to many, as is clear instructions on what can and cannot be marked and in various contexts. Humans then forever manipulate writing and marking for seemingly infinite purposes; it can be used to inform, warn, insult, explain, entertain. For a practice that bears endless possibilities and approaches, rarely does a singular book or voice (in this case, Becker) hold the ability to act as the linchpin to an individual completing a work; rather, it acts as one of the contributions that culminates towards realizing and actualizing the tangible goals of finalizing a thesis, book, or article.
Becker’s book reminded me of a book I used (not just read) when I first began long-distance running and trained for my first full marathon. It provided information in personal and science-based contexts, and parallel to Becker, claimed to teach me how to run and finish a marathon. I don’t doubt that this book likely sat and gathered dust on many would-be runners’ shelves, as the book, like any other tool, merely rests inanimately until its intentions are carried out by the user. I hold the belief that perhaps the greatest value of Becker’s work will prove more helpful and relevant to me at a later date when I may dig up the book for reference.