Working in Progress: The Creative Theory

Madison Nelson-Turner
Rising Senior, English-Creative Writing Major
Hampton University
April 25th, 2015

Introduction
The Creative Theory, operates under the central aspects of three traditional teaching
pedagogies: the Expressionist Theory, the Social-Epistemic Theory, and Paralogic
Hermeneutics. The Expressionist Theory provides the foundation for the Creative Theory.
Writing is primarily an expressive activity; my students will create their own voices via this
expressive medium. Paralogic Hermeneutics forms the middle layer of the Creative Theory.
Once these voices are created, my students will be encouraged to engage in open-ended and
dialogic discourse with readers and other writers. Lastly, Social-Epistemic Theory forms the
apex of the Creative Theory. Once these conversations are created, they will then converge and
collaborate to create meaning for the written composition. Supplementary practices of the
Creative Theory include multiple first drafts, my theory of revision, and low-stakes writing.
The Creative Theory primarily applies to creative writing courses, but the goal of the Creative
Theory is to introduce and integrate the concept of the Scholar Artist, teaching students that all
writing is, and should be, creative.
Authenticity > Perfection: Creating Voice
Nothing is more crucial to the writer than his/her voice. People, environment, and
situations potentially influence a persons voice; these components create an authentic voice.
Writing, I would argue, is the most authentic voice anyone could ever develop. Ultimately, the
writing must stand for itself; the writer wont always be present to explicate the writing, nor is it
their sole responsibility to provide that clarification. The reader is equally (if not more so)
accountable for their understanding of a written composition. As a writer, Im still defining and
refining my voice. While I dont believe my voice has an ideal form, it will always be just that:
mine.

Unfortunately, writing is often plagiarized, yet subtle quirks tell the true story. Just as no
two people are flawless mirror images, no two writers acquire identical nuances which
distinguish one from another. An individual could possess the most superior mastery over
grammar and mechanics, but if their voice isnt loud enough (that is, if it isnt their voice), that
individual wont be heard (indistinguishable from the rest). Educators are inadvertently a
contributing factor to a weak voice. Donald M. Murray shares this belief for Too often, our
students have not been allowed to speak, and when they have spoken no one has listened
(Murray 118). In the midst of requiring numerous sources, students may feel their opinions are
invalid and overshadowed by the words of a prominent, more knowledgeable authority figure.
Its the educators responsibility to promote an environment in which students feel comfortable
exploring their voice.
Writer-based prose, i.e. freewriting and journaling, will be instrumental in helping my
students create their voices. These practices remind students that their intended audience may be
an audience of one, for their eyes only. Freewriting promotes students to simply write. Anne E.
Mullin echoes similar sentiments concerning freewriting. According to Mullin, freewriting
provides thought clarification and emotional releasegiv[ing] students the opportunity to
play with ideas, try out various voices and different arguments become more fluent, [and] get in
touch with what they really want to say (Mullin 141). Lacking the cookie-cutter constraints of
traditional writing, students are given the opportunity to freely write whatever theyd like and
not what they think the educator would like. Journaling offers many of the same benefits.
Maintaining a journal for the writing assignments provides students a space in which to express
frustration, confusion, revelation, and (hopefully) elation. These techniques will prepare them for
multiple first drafts.

Talk with Me: Creating Dialogue

Revision (especially concerning creative writing) can be the most difficult stage in the
writing process. Once upon a time, I was the writer who wanted the first draft to be the only
draft. Many students encounter the same temptation, as evidenced by Sheridan Blaus invisible
writing experiment. According to Blau, Several students [expressed] that their usual pattern in
composing was to interrupt the flow of their thought frequently to edit and amend the language,
syntax, or mechanics of their developing text (Blau 299). I found this practice to not only be
tiresome, but frustrating because I didnt give myself the opportunity to fully develop an idea. As
my writing proficiency matured, I recognized multiple drafts allow me to compare multiple
angles to consider for a particular composition. Multiple drafts create conversations between the
writer and the writing: How does this information support my thesis? Do I retain, remove, or
revise this sentence? How can I connect the ideas of these paragraphs to one another? Thus, I
revised my revision method to break down this ineffective, all-in-one solution into more
manageable segments. Additionally, this method promotes the collaboration of educator and
student through incorporating feedback from both parties.
As an educator of writing, it is my responsibility to provide my students with good
quality feedback on their revisions. Good quality feedback prepares regular writers to become
critical readers. My questions and observations should promote further questioning and
observing. Thoughtful commentary inspires a different approach to the next draft. Concurrently,
peer reviews should reflect these same principles. As an educator, it is also my responsibility to
teach students how to revise. Here, Ive included what I like to call The Revised Revision
Method:
1. The first draft is not the only draft
2. Commentary is written from the readers perspective, not the educators perspective

3.
4.
5.
6.

Commentary is vague; dont say revise without offering strategies on how to revise
Commentary on the first draft focus on development of content
Commentary on the final draft focus on editing mechanical errors
Writing is holistic; think about the composition as a whole, not sections
The second point is crucial to student and educator alike. Students are often stressed by

writing assignments because they are conditioned to focus on what they think their instructor
wants. Voice is sacrificed in the name of grammar, mechanics, and an inappropriately elevated
vocabulary. Writing isnt about following rules and sounding smart. Its about personal
exploration, conceptual development, and continuous communication. The mixture of
commentaries provided by student and educator promote this conversation because it prompts
the writer to continuously question their own writing and the writing of others. Because great
writers are first critical readers, these conversations generate the purpose of writing: meaning.
It Comes with the Territory: Creating Meaning
I remember a particular exercise I did while taking the Creative Writing course with Dr.
Randolph Walker at my undergraduate institution, Hampton University. Our prompt was to
construct a narrative in which a character dealt with the death of a close friend. The catch: we
werent allowed to create the character. Instead we were given a list of characters to choose from,
whose ages, genders, races, and background stories varied greatly. I chose the 70-year-old,
Nigerian male priest-turned-atheist. While Dr. Walker told me I accurately captured the
character, I felt completely out of my typical 20-year-old, Black female, liberal arts college
student comfort zone. Still, this exercise allowed me to broaden my range of characterization to
create more authentic stories because it forced me to incorporate perspective outside of my own.
This exercise represents the epitome of writing. It was my task to give the character
meaning with the little information I had. I couldnt ask Dr. Walker why the man had denounced
his priesthood; I had to create the reason myself. Not only did I create the reason itself, but I had

to give the audience a reason to question the characters existence. Why would the reader want to
know about someone different than themselves? How would the reader relate to the character?
What does the character represent to the reader? Walter Ong articulates the difficulties with
navigating audience. According to Ong, the writer must construct in his imaginationan
audience cast in some sort of role[and] A reader has to play the role in which the author has
cast him (Ong 12). The purpose of the writing is to give the audience a reason to stand for it,
against it, or indifferent it. The purpose of the audience is to understand what the writer wants
them to gain from the writing. The intersections of these purposes create the meaning of writing;
the relationship of the reader and the writer whether harmonious or in discord.
Audre Lorde said it best: I have come to believe that over and over again that what is
most important to me must be spoken, made verbal and shared, even at the risk of having it
bruised or misunderstood. Misinterpretation comes with the territory. As a writer, I believe my
writing is a representation of me. When I write for an audience, I put myself on display.
Consequently, I believe the fundamental purpose for reading is to interpret the writing. As I said
before, we are unified by our humanity and individualized by our human experiences. Multiple
perspectives allow me to write from multiple vantage points. Often times, this diversity improves
my writing because it gives me the opportunity to view my writing outside of myself. People are
not aware of their disadvantages unless indicated by someone else. Am I offended when I dont
receive the intended reaction? Not at all. All critique should be taken with a grain of salt. I must
be satisfied with my writing even when no one else is.
Conclusion
The Creative Theory seeks to create three things: voice, dialogue, and meaning. Voice
creates dialogue because it is willing to speak; dialogue creates meaning because it is willing to

listen; meaning creates voice because it is willing to respond. Freewriting and journaling create
voice. Commentary and revision create dialogue. Reading and rereading create meaning.Without
writing, voice, dialogue, and meaning would be irrelevant. Whether characters or worlds,
suggestions or doctrines, writing creates.

Works Cited
Blau, Sheridan. Invisible Writing: Investigating Cognitive Processes in Composition. College
Composition and Communication 34.3 (1983): pp. 297-312. Print.
Mullin, Anne E. Freewriting in the Classroom: Good for What? Nothing Begins with N: New
Investigations of Freewriting. Pat Belanoff, Peter Elbow, and Sheryl I. Fontaine, eds.
Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991. pp. 139-147. Print.
Murray, Donald. Finding Your Own Voice: Teaching in an Age of Dissent. College
Composition and Communication 20.2 (1969): pp. 118-123. Print.
Ong, Walter. The Writers Audience is Always a Fiction. Publications of the Modern
Language Association, PMLA 90.1 (1975): pp. 9-21. Print.