Kinneavy's article first sent me into a worry-some state over the use of the word "discourse" in the article title. The word "discourse" used to make me uncomfortable--what is discourse anyway? It is a term I have heard tossed around quite frequently since I have started graduate school, and have heard several definitions. I was glad that Kinneavy articulated his own definition of it almost right away, saying "discourse here means the full text, oral or written, delivered at a specific time and place or delivered at several instances" (129). Once that was established, I felt more comfortable approaching the text.
One of the things that I found interesting overall in the article was when Kinneavy wrote about the consequences of restricting composition to expository writing and the reading of literary texts (137). He writes:
The neglect of expressionism....has stifled self expression in the student and partially, at least, is a cause of unorthodox and extreme forms of deviant self expression now indulged in by college students on many campuses today. (137).
I wondered what Kinneavy meant by "deviant" forms of self expression...is he talking about deviant as in "different" or having a much more sinister notion. The truth is either connotation of the world deviant brings with it further implications. I am not sure what these implications are, but I would like to look into them as a future teacher of writing.
Furthermore, self expression has been an issue for me lately, and although I am not deviant (atleast I think im not ;) ) I think for the first time I am seeing the results of neglect or stifling of self expression in my own writing. I consider myself a very "formal" writer, and as I further my education, it seems the "rules" of writing have become lax. This has resulted in my desire to want to free myself from these rules which have bound me, but ultimately leads to a writers block of some sort.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment