Some creative writing falls into the category of creative nonfiction or literary nonfiction, as opposed to academic nonfiction. Many colleagues, departments, and universities do not consider these as academic contributions to the field and place little to no value on them in regard to the writer's academic standing for promotion, tenure, etc. In many cases the creative nonfiction is written by a scholar basing this work on his own scholarly academic nonfiction. The only difference is that the creative version uses a more accessible (popular) style of language and reduces the academic format to a list of references and perhaps an index.
Imagine, two historians do the exact same research, read the same references, and produce the same book--one in academic language and an abundance of footnotes, the other in standard language with a list of references but few notes. Does that mean that only language level and style and the inclusion of copious notes make one book "academic nonfiction" worthy of consideration for academic rank and the other "creative nonfiction" not worthy of scholarly consideration?
The academic nonfiction will be published in a scholarly journal and read by 50 people. The creative nonfiction will be published in a high quality magazine and read by thousands of literate readers. Which is a greater contribution considering that the purpose of scholarship is "the diffusion of knowledge," the dictum established by the scholars of the 18th-century Enlightenment?
Hello John and Ian, this is an excellent topic as it brings into consideration what can be regarded as legitimate rigorous enquiry, whether it be fiction, non-fiction or academic writing. Last year I met an academic at Latrobe University in Melbourne who described to me how she wrote her physics PhD dissertation. To make it more engaging she utilised the metaphor of a classical orchestra and the conductor. She constructed the chapters in such a manner, and this gave a different interpretive lens as a parallel to the academic content. Very clever, I thought, as the way we read and perceive is not just through the linear presentation of words. Currently I'm writing a creative PhD; a crime fiction novel (and a theoretical exegesis) - my novel's intent is to bring to the fore a landscape that challenges the reader's understanding of, and engagement with discourses of mental illness. I am drawing on complementary concepts within Crime Fiction theory (about the construct and function of the genre's multiple narratives), and the workings of Narrative Therapy. The novel engages the reader in an identification with the heroine who is on a 'recovery' journey. Hopefully, as Cathy Cole claims of crime fiction, that will create a polemical space that both seduces and challenges, and offers the reader “new ways of seeing the sociopolitical world”. Cheers, Cassy
There is a thin line between academic NF (non-fiction) and popular NF! I know somebody who was vacillating between getting a PhD in creative writing and writing a book. She chose the second option and was very successful. However, I must point out that her book was scrupulously referenced (mainly to the newspaper clippings and interviews). Certainly her book has touched more lives than a PhD thesis-book would have done.
If she had documented in a PhD thesis-book how she conquered the difficulties of managing the complexity she encountered, she may have got a PhD. I would then have recommended to her that she try to keep the language level of the PhD down to the level of the understandability of the NF book.
The difference between her book and a possible PhD thesis-book is that the latter would have to have been a significant addition to our academic knowledge-base (e.g., about how to go about writing), whereas the former added to our historical / cultural knowledge. The similarity is that her book and a possible PhD thesis-book would both pass the originality test. So the answer to your last question is no.
Ian, thanks for your response. The case you describe is a good example of the issue. I'm not advocating that academic departments accept creative nonfiction as equal to academic nonfiction but perhaps at least taken under consideration. I think the works of James Michener and Will and Ariel Durant would stack up against any "academic" nonfiction historical work.
Hello John and Ian, this is an excellent topic as it brings into consideration what can be regarded as legitimate rigorous enquiry, whether it be fiction, non-fiction or academic writing. Last year I met an academic at Latrobe University in Melbourne who described to me how she wrote her physics PhD dissertation. To make it more engaging she utilised the metaphor of a classical orchestra and the conductor. She constructed the chapters in such a manner, and this gave a different interpretive lens as a parallel to the academic content. Very clever, I thought, as the way we read and perceive is not just through the linear presentation of words. Currently I'm writing a creative PhD; a crime fiction novel (and a theoretical exegesis) - my novel's intent is to bring to the fore a landscape that challenges the reader's understanding of, and engagement with discourses of mental illness. I am drawing on complementary concepts within Crime Fiction theory (about the construct and function of the genre's multiple narratives), and the workings of Narrative Therapy. The novel engages the reader in an identification with the heroine who is on a 'recovery' journey. Hopefully, as Cathy Cole claims of crime fiction, that will create a polemical space that both seduces and challenges, and offers the reader “new ways of seeing the sociopolitical world”. Cheers, Cassy
Academic writing has some distinguishing characteristics that make it stand out from other types of writing. For example, a FOG number is considered by some institutions as a prime indicator of the quality of an academic piece of writing. It is suggested that it should be in the range of 18-25. However, this is not to say that academic writing cannot be classed as creative. It may well be, but creative writing may not be academic at all, but yet may be classed as creative.
The notion that academic writing takes just one form or genre does a great disservice to academic writing as well as to creative non-fiction. We need to recognise that the academic article or essay is a particular and constrained form of writing but that other forms may be equally scholarly - the long-form 'popular' book is an obvious example and may be an essential means for scholarly ideas to gain widespread acceptance - Darwin's Origin of Species, for example. Review papers, book reviews, essays, experimental (IMRAD) papers, scholarly personal narratives, qualitative research, case studies, text books etc are all different, yet legitimate forms of scholarly writing. We need to have a much clearer understanding of what is scholarship, and not just rely on writing form or convoluted technical language as a marker for scholarship (when in fact, it often disguises poor scholarship). Unfortunately not many academics understand how writing works or how they write within their own genre.
So what are the hallmarks of scholarly writing? I'd say (obviously) an original contribution to knowledge, but also an explicit acknowledgement of how that contribution fits into our prior knowledge base (the literature). Creative non-fiction doesn't preclude scholarship by any means but I would argue that a demonstration of scholarship does require the acknowledgement of source material. Excluding references is just a publishing convention (I include them in detail at the end of my creative nonfiction books, but not within the text). This is why creative theses require an exegesis - to provide that demonstration of scholarship - although I can't see why creative non-fiction necessarily needs an exegesis since it may be able to demonstrate scholarlship within the text itself and shouldn't always need a secondary piece of scholarly writing. And then there is peer review - which is essential for short form scholarly writing but frankly does not apply in long-form. It's an added marker (but perhaps not as essential as we think) and one that could be beneficially applied to short-form creative works in academic journals to add weight to the argument that these should be considered scholarly works.
Nice to see some interest in this topic!
Danielle
Creative writing should definitely form a part of academic writing. This is because, research is the brain child of an individual, based on his interest and caliber. The more creative the researcher is, greater would be the acceptance from the community.
The statement that creative writing is a step higher as academic writing would be more acceptable as creativity knows another source.
As I could read 'creative writing may be classed as creative' shows another position. Creativity can't be classified it is even not understood. For the moment there are two ways, crossing here and there, this will be more crucial for the future.
Form and content are one in high qualitative work. And again the qualitative factor and the quantitative factor are not easy to link.
There are different features counted for academic writing such as writing which is produced in an academic context in response to academic learning in a formal setting. It should support theories in literature and the structure should be a formal one too. Academic writing carries a formal academic tone, which targets intelligent people, then the style should be fully formal and high sensitivity of grammar and choosing words should be in the focus of consideration by its author. However, most of creative writing do not own the characteristics mentioned above.
Interesting discussion indeed. We have seen this topic popping up quite often in the field of artistic research. It may come as no surprise that artists, investigating their own artistic processes (it doesn't have to be that though) find it difficult to accept academic writing as the only means to document and reflect upon their work. I personally don't have a strong opinion for or against but I do find it interesting that the question of academic or non-academic writing, is getting more interest than the question of the quality of the content. Now, obviously, the formal academic writing is partly a system for assesment, a way to efficiently evaluate the quality of a paper. But is there any one topic that could not equally well be described in academic writing as well as creative?
As for our own field, artistic research, I believe my problem with creative writing is that it tends to make the reader expect the text itself to be an artwork. This may not be a problem in some cases, but if we have a composer documenting his artistic and creative work and publishing his results in creative writing that asks for an artistic interpretation nothing has really been gained in terms of knowledge about composition. Whether academic or fictional, I believe that a distance between the modes of descritpion and that which is described is useful. Which initself is an argument for using creative writing in the social and natural sciences!
I think the quality of the content expressed in creative ways or not will define whether the writing is academic. I also think the person in the example about writing a PhD or a book, could have done both. That is, she could have completed her PhD and then published a book from that source or a series of articles which would mean her authorship could reach a range of readers academic or not. I write this not to undermine what eventuated but to point out other possibilities. Personally I am very influenced, as an academic author, by the work of Laurel Richardson, Carolyn Ellis, Art Bochner, Andrew Sparkes to name a few who write creatively in their academic work.
The nature of the discipline in which a candidate pursues a degree should determine the literary genre permissible. For instance, a music performance degree could allow a recital to be a Ph.D. final exercise. A book of short stories could become a Ph.D. thesis for a creative writing Ph.D. For the most part, however, I would favor a traditional thesis structure, because scholarly articles tend to follow the deductive structure (given a hypothesis, provide specific arguments with examples to prove it). An outlandish thesis structure having nothing to do with eventual research formats is counterproductive. Let´s not idealize creativity and forget the purpose of a thesis. That would be like throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Nelson, I would hope that a PhD candidate who is doing a creative project would be adequate versed in the current theories, generic conventions and research relating to their project to ensure academic credibility. For my project i need to write an exegesis to inform the reader of the creative work's theoretical intent - which I'm content to do as a additional writing exercise, however, I also believe it would redundant if my creative work is substantial. The scholarly value of a creative PhD ought to be evident in the quality of the writing and the ways that it demonstrates a contribution to its field.
The problem will always be that the creative writing doesn't follow the same logic as the academic writing, anyway the gap itself is interesting. This is the same discussion as the problem of causality and black holes in the physics. To 'write' is the best for it.
If we can agree that 'academic' writing is a style typically used in a thesis or an article in a scholarly journal, then I think it must include detailed sources by which reviewers can check claims made. However at the same time I would like to see writing that is lucid, clear, well argued and a style that is engaging, fluid and a joy to read. In this latter respect I'd want to call the writing style 'creative' as it reveals attention, effort and often conscious innovation on the part of the writer. On the other hand writing that is labelled 'creative' per se does not seem to me to necessarily conform to accepted academic standards purely on its style merits alone. However i suspect that people from 'creative writing' departments may disagree.
Another aspect of this question is the degree to which creative writing “counts” towards one’s promotion and tenure review, which is usually department and discipline specific. For example, faculty members in creative writing programs are generally expected to continue to engage in “creative activities,” as part of their overall scholarship. However, it is sadly unlikely that a junior faculty member in a Philosophy Department will win tenure by publishing philosophical dialogs in the vein of Plato and Berkeley or that a faculty member in a political science department will win promotion by writing a novel comparable to Robert Penn Warren’s “All the King’s Men.” Such a state of affairs is indicative of how restrictive some of our disciplines have become.
Dear John
An interesting question, my own doctoral study was academic but also drew on more creative writing in parts; and referenced literature as well as more traditional sources. However, in my publishing I try and bridge academic writing and poetry, I feel that academic writing can be a bit dry sometimes and in order to connect with audiences at an affective level and get the message across in a different way, I have included a poem within or at the end of a more academic submission. There is probably a general resistance to this but I have managed to publish these articles in Qualitative Inquiry, Families, Relationships and Societies and recently the Journal of Corporate Citizenship (see below) - so I think the academic publishing world is becoming more open to mixed and more creative forms, which I feel in a good thing
best wishes
Dawn
Mannay, D. 2014. Story telling beyond the academy: exploring roles, responsibilities and regulations in the Open Access dissemination of research outputs and visual data. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship (10.9774/GLEAF.4700.2014.ju.00010)
At my institution (in Australia) certain creative works are counted as academic achievements, so that's an advance on traditional scholarly practice. I wrote a creative non-fiction play and got extra points because I wrote a published article on the difficulties encountered presenting 'fact' as 'fiction'. You have to develop a case for eligibility and partly because my play attracted interest through the ABC (public) media and had reviews, including in a prominent daily newspaper, and was endorsed by a teacher in the screenwriting course I did, it was accepted for some points. BTW I am a social science scholar and it was in that capacity, not as a creative writing practitioner, that I received points for the play and associated analyses.
There is good writing in poetry, fiction, plays and essays. There is also bad writing on these areas. Poetry and fiction can alter syntaxis and may be ambiguous in semantic content. Scientific writing should be clear, concise and with convincing ideas or experiments. However the creative mechanisms are similar. A lot of academic writing is highly creative. Sciences keeps always a historical line. Fiction, not necessarily.
As a writer of fiction and science I find common things among them, particularly in mechanism of creation. It has been said that art is invention and science is discovery. I think both are inventive and the two try to discover something.
In my latest book ("Lorca in Tune with Falla," 2014), I tried to bridge literature with music in a creative fashion. My writing was often academic, but my reasoning aspired to a certain creativity. At every step of the way, I documented every assertion. I hope that reading my book will inspire others to be creative in linking letters and music. Time will tell... and so will the book reviews!
Hi John,
Your question is really interesting. We always encourage everyone (students, academics, researcher) to be creative in terms of expressing ideas, opinions, any kind of findings and so on. Creative writing does not mean it could not be academic as well. However, there should be some criteria that creative writing should satisfy so it can be accessible for everyone. Same thing goes for pure academic writing. Readers need to digest the give information regardless the different types of writing (creative or academic). My personal opinion about giving references is- it puts extra weight and win readers trust. I would definitely go for a piece of writing with references (if it is not solely original piece). But, that is just me.
In Anthropology, there is a narrative approach which is much like creative writing in reporting on a researcher's experiences of observations as a participant in a culture. Some anthropologists write their reports much like novels, though this is an accurate account of their observations and reflections on the experience.
An excellent debate between Howard Gardner and the late Elliot Eisner formed around this very topic at the AERA in 1994; questioning whether or not a novel could count as a dissertation in education.
The lines of argumentation centered around contribution to knowledge, authenticity, mediation, verification and judgement of the work produced. Initially Gardner was merely an audience member who commented at the end of the debate but then joined Eisner and other panellists to debate it once more a few years later.
At the 1996 debate Eisner argues that researching for a novel can be every bit as systematic, analytical and thorough as researching any other problem. He points to the knowledge and understanding gained resulting from the novel rather than how true to form it describes its subject:
"My conception of research is that the ultimate function of research is
to enlarge human understanding. I do not define research as a species
of science. I define science as a species of research. And there are many
ways to do research, of which science is one. "
Gardner argues more along the lines of what constitutes the disciplines, about time honoured traditions, academic canons, truth and objectivity:
"There is no Ph.D. in the novel, in film making, or in painting. And
for good reason. Those are not disciplines in the same sense. They aren't
part of the systematic structure of knowledge to which one contributes.
I would argue that a work of art is inherently not translatable. . .Not only is art not true,
it makes no effort toward truth."
Eisner goes on to argue:
"The test of a novel as a contribution to knowledge requires that
we relinquish the notion that scientific disciplines are the sole forms
through which human understanding is advanced. Ultimately whether
knowledge, what I prefer to call understanding, is advanced through a
particular novel resides with the judgment of a critical community - as
it does now in science. "
Gardner then turns his argument to how we assess these works:
"It's easy to make me look like an old fogey and a conservative because
I defend the disciplines. But when I say they're hard-won victories for
better or for worse, it's because over decades we have developed some
agreed-upon criteria, about how to decide what's acceptable and what's
not. And that's why I get lost because I don't know how to judge those
novels. "
The debate continues with the other panellists joining in and is well worth reading with lots of interesting questions raised.
This is an excellent topic, indeed. My current research field is on academic discourse, namely on academic genres (such as PhD. dissertations, Master theses, journal articles, etc.). And relying on what I have been studying, I can honestly say that genre is a dominat factor. I mean, when you select a specific genre, you are also determining what you may say and the way(s) by which you can state that.
In fact, when you start writing an article or a PhD dissertation, you intuitively follow (sometimes more, sometimes less) the patterns of other articles and PhD dissertations that you have already read. And generally the vocabulary, the syntax and the reasoning of an article is very different from the vocabulary, the syntax and the reasoning of other genres (creative genres or not).
Also, the area of knowledge may allow creative writing, for a certain extent at least. If you are a Humanities reasearcher (literature, arts, art history, among others), then probably creative writing is allowed and may be even welcome. I believe that if you are a reasearcher in physics or in industrial engineering that will not be the case.
To sum up what I have just said, let me just give you this example: there is a Portuguese top-level extraordinary literary-cultural essay writer (Eduardo Lourenço) whose style is simultaneously clear, accurate and literary-like. I believe that this is an unusual example of someone who merges academic pre-requisites and creative writing in his texts.
There are distinct levels of quality in non-academic writing and I regard a lot of the better writing in this category as good or better for social sciences class discussion, as well as the development of analytical and critical skills, than more academic text laden with references that distract from arguments and make unnecessary intellectual detours. A writer like Uruguayan Eduardo Galeano has written journalistic, academic non-fiction, creative non-fiction and fiction. In fact many writers are not constrained by writing in one genre or style or for the same audience.
One of the problems with academic discourse is that the initial effort of even situating a fresh line of thinking can be thwarted by the need to frame an argument within the existing literature. This always feel like you're automatically in a hole trying to scramble out. It is as if the past is privileged over the increasingly significant, challenging and really new future. When posed with this kind of problem I usually start with a question and show how existing literature in one or more disciplines fails to given an adequate answer to the question.
Creative non-fiction is a wonderful way to introduce multiple layers of meaning/views. Rather than being 'softer', 'weaker' and less relevant, I would argue quite the opposite!
Creative non-fiction is an effective way to make needed information available. For example, faculty often write articles for publications of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI). Faculty should be recognized for these contributions.
I would take the discussion a step further. Faculty who write fiction that brings health problems to the attention of the public should also be recognized.
www.erisfield.com
Hi Eris
excellent point, if we want to make sure that our research is disseminated to wide audiences we need to move beyond the academic article and connect with new audiences at an affective level. Making writing accessible and engaging is sometimes made impossible by disciplinary conventions but to get around this we can rock the boat of set formats and write in unconventional ways. Good luck with your work
best wishes
Dawn
I would add, that the difference of creative non-fiction and academic writing depends on the academic field.
Speaking for the field of philosophy: The function of an academic text is different from the function of a non-fiction narrative.
e.g. the academic text is supposed to be a valuable peace of research to the academic community - and so the references and definitions need to be explicit so others can check on them, critisize and use them for further research. For a narrative, explicit references and definitions are sometimes clutter.
Another point: In an academic text one should rather avoid to engage the reader by emotion-words or surprising plot-points. What is of great value in a non-fiction narrative can be an unwelcome distraction to the academic readership.
But of course there is no reason, why one could not write both, or even blend the styles.
Yes, its a blending of the styles that I have been going for in my own writing. I will often embed poetry or a more creative style within an academic article so that the references and background are available to support the central argument. However, I think that it is important to engage the reader on an affective level. When we are writing about subject, for example domestic violence and using statistics, X number of women are killed every week in the UK, people get tired of the figure and it becomes only a figure and not a person - the numbers lose there meaning - and it becomes important not simply to make an academic point but to try and move people and policy makers to action. Creative writing exploits reflection and can inspire an audience to make changes.
When you are writing fact based or experience based article without giving any due reference then your article can't be considered as academic article.
http://internationaljournalofresearch.com/list-of-volumes-issues-published/volume-1-issue-4/training-in-the-learning-strategies-of-writing-its-effects-on-different-ability-groups-of-writing-user-groups-of-the-strategies-and-gender-with-regard-to-improving-their-belief-about-autonomous-lea/
Another way creative writing might be considered academic writing is if these materials are cited in a paper, such as in a content analysis of the material or using them in an analysis of trends in writing in a selected community, such as in a sociological or anthropological study.
A member of Princeton's faculty, John McPHee, is well known for his writings, some fiction and some non-fiction. Who has not been impressed by "Bitter Lemons".
I am concerned by the number and quality of novels that are awarded PhDs. A PhD in the Arts should be for a high-level contribution to knowledge and/or represent a distinctive advance in theory that is publicly verifiable (hence the need for references, footnotes and a bibliography). There may be borderline cases, but I suspect that too many instances of 'reflection' on the fictions presented are simply apologies or defences. And what does the holder of a PhD in creative writing do with it? Go on and teach more people to do creative writing PhDs? At best a Master's for competence in writing and understanding the relevant field would seem to me to suffice.
You have a fair point Dennis but some fictional novels can have more impact in raising awareness of social inequalities than traditional social science research; and this has been the case for a long time - Charles Dickens. If a doctoral thesis and its future publications can enlighten the reader and engender a response, political or personal then this is a good thing and the novel can be the inspiration to look for supporting academic evidence or maybe begin a new study to address the issues raised by the creative writer
Dawn I do agree on the broader point, but don't think a PhD gets awarded for raising awareness of inequalities per se. Prizes such as the Orwell or even (!?) the Booker help to identify the novels we should attend to. maybe more prizes for socially aware fictions would help.
Dennis, could you please give us the number of novels awarded PhDs? Can you give us the title of a novel of poor quality that was granted a PhD?
"A PhD in the Arts should be for a high-level contribution to knowledge." No, a PhD in Fine Arts is awarded for creativity in executing literary writing skill, not knowledge. They're not the same thing. A PhD in violin performance is awarded for the fine arts skill in music, not a body of knowledge. Renoir would not get a PhD for his knowledge of art but rather for his creativity and skill.
If there is a "distinctive advance in theory" (in the case of the fine arts it would be better to say rather than "theory" technique, approach, style, method, ie, terms applicable to a skill) it is generally included as a requirement in narrative form complete with references, footnotes, and bibliography, albeit in shorter form than a PhD thesis in humanities, sciences, social sciences, technology, etc.
"I suspect that too many instances of 'reflection' on the fictions presented are simply apologies or defences." You don't offer any references to substantiate this statement because it is merely your suspicion. "Too many instances"?--how would you know the quantity when you haven't done the research? Do you think the majority of faculty in a department of fine arts would lack intellectual integrity and award a PhD to tripe? A few, yes. Some, maybe. But not the majority; their reputations depend on doing the right thing.
"And what does the holder of a PhD in creative writing do with it?" They frame it and hang it on the wall. No, seriously, they do teach writing in Master of Fine Arts programs--there are few offering a PhD in the field. They work for publishers, newspapers, magazines, media, advertising, marketing, etc. Any area in which expertise with the written word is needed. And if they're not directly involved in creative writing on their jobs, they creatively write on the side.
Dennis, you referred to novels at the outset; I hope you're referring to literary fiction as opposed to pulp fiction, trade paperbacks (romances, dystopia, etc.). We're dealing here with the "higher" end of writing--academic nonfiction, creative nonfiction, and literary fiction.
Why shouldn't all academic writing have to be creative? Creative means well-written, with some original research, offering a different perspective to our knowledge. Academic writing needn't be boring, only documented.
Joel, I agree, of course. I suppose it won't happen any time soon because The Man would explode if a grad student wrote a doctoral dissertation that was intelligible and even entertaining to the general public. Perhaps the entrenched guard in each department would be jealous if a dissertation actually got published so they enforce tradition and insist on formal academic format and style. Maybe the people in the graduate office at each university who are charged with copy editing theses and dissertations don't have the expertise to edit creative nonfiction. They've been editing academic nonfiction for years (decades?) and they don't want to learn something new so they resist change (progress?) Academic nonfiction and creative nonfiction are very different in technical format and writing style, though not in content, and require different editorial skills.
Joel, my advocating for change is for the benefit of younger scholars since I'm retired, old, and tired and change at the university wouldn't affect me. I wish we could simply send your concise statement to universities and it would be done!
John;
Thanks for your response.
I work on the cusp of academic and creative (not popular) writing, and counsel graduate students on how to meld academic and creative nonfiction. However, we only have graduate students, most of whom are older than most students attending universities. Also, our curriculum.is more humanistically oriented.
Perhaps creative academic writing can't come out of universities, especially given the present circumstances of these institutions intent on feeding the business machine. However, there's no reason why independent scholars can't do the kind of writing we're discussing. I suspect that this community will be growing.
-Joel
Joel, thank you, but I say creative writing MUST come out of universities - and it is. And maybe because of the machine there is more impetus. I'm a bit cheeky about this: we must lean towards new ways of expressing what we make of these times. Past divergent disciplines are converging. Sciences and humanities, engineering and medicine etc.. are by necessity finding parallel connections. We need to remember the Socratic origins of critical, discursive production and plug ahead with a willingness to be risky, rehearse and invent more ways of describing, inscribing and narrativising what we are learning.
Cassy
Cassy;
I think you're right about the need for more generalists, if this is what you're proposing. However, there's no MUST in creativity. I've yet to see Shakespeare's college degree.
Before the 18th Century, the arts and sciences were in one basket, so convergence is old stuff. However, what I still see in universities is that Interdisciplinary Studies is itself a specialty.
-Joel
Joel,
You're fortunate to be able to counsel students to blend academic and creative nonfiction. And the fact that they are older students and graduate students must be a plus as well. No beer bashes, hook-ups, hung-over students in class!
Joel & Cassy,
I don't know if we should use absolutes of what can't or must be done, particularly in reference to a university as a whole. In terms of colleges/schools and departments it would be more possible and more likely that a change would take place in accepting creative (academic/scholarly) nonfiction and literary fiction as well (as in the case of Cassy and what she does in writing). In the "must" column might be these: Fine Arts is and should be receptive to this with eventual recognition coming from humanities, liberal arts, social sciences, and "descriptive" natural and physical sciences. Is descriptive the right word? I'm having a brain malfunction. I don't mean the applied or hard sciences. It would be hard to write a creative narrative with predominately formulas, compounds, chemical reactions, etc.
It seems that applied sciences, medicine, technology, etc. would be in the "can't" column as their scholarly production is so highly technical that even the best of writers and editors could not turn it into creative nonfiction.
While we are waiting for the non-technical departments mentioned above to give academic recognition to a work of creative nonfiction, it would be appropriate for them to give some scholarly credit (toward promotion, tenure, etc.) for a creative work derived from the academic version. (I mean both written by the same person.) I know from experience that creating (get it?) the creative version from my scholarly mumbo jumbo takes a lot of work and--dare I say it?--creativity. For those who might think "double counting"--they are two versions not two copies. The issue of "credit" or "recognition" doesn't affect me; I'm retired. I write on behalf of the up-and-coming.
Joel,
I think the arts and sciences were placed in the same basket during the 18th-century Enlightenment when the scholars of the age developed/devised/modernized the natural and physical sciences along with the political and economic sciences as well. When they made an effort to introduce these into university education through change/reform (much like Cassy, you, others, and I are doing now) there was no school or college for them. They had Philosophy (Greek & Roman), Law (Greek & Roman), Medicine (Greek & Roman), and Theology. The best fit was Philosophy and that's where they went, called the New Philosophy, which eventually became schools of arts and sciences.
Isn't Interdisciplinary Studies or University Studies primarily undergraduate? I always considered them majors for kids who didn't know what they wanted to be when they grew up. :) Are there master's or PhD programs in these? If so, it would be interesting to know how they operate in terms of specialty and thesis or dissertation.
Regards,
John
John;
To my recollection, it was in the 18th Century when science (the "scientific method") briskly stepped away from philosophy, and thus also from the arts, especially poetry; although the process probably began earlier, with Galileo. But of course I could be wrong, as I'm not a scholar in the History of Science.
You're right about University Studies being an undergraduate path. However, Interdisciplinary Studies is more complicated and varies by school.
But this is somewhat off-subject from the creative academic writing. Or is it.
Best,
Joel
Joel,
Your recollection is spot on. Wish mine were; I can barely recall yesterday. :) The New Philosophy segment did move quickly in entering the universities through the Philosophy college/department during early to mid 18th century. And you're correct that they said bye bye to philosophy and literature during the second half of the century.
My mistake to mix Univ and Interdisciplinary Studies. Univ Studies is the major for students without a major while Interdisciplinary Studies is a more coordinated and monitored array of related disciplines. Just my opinion--Univ Studies is not very valid while Interdisciplinary Studies has a good deal of academic and personal value.
Not off-topic really considering that creative academic writing could well exist in Interdisciplinary Studies.
Interesting points, Joel, I'm enjoying the conversation.
Regards,
John
Well, someone has to disagree.
The essence of innovative literary writing is that it draws attention to its form -- Jakobson's poetic function, language about language. It takes time to read and experience.
Academic writing, by contrast is designed to communicate a precise meaning to experts as quickly and transparently as possible.
Remember how much researchers have to read. Most academic writing must be conventional and conformist because that way attention is drawn to content and not form and reading is faster. The form doesn't have to attract the reader because for the expert interest comes from the novel content. Of course that means that the form should be as simple as is consonant with getting the meaning across, but it should also be as much as possible what the reader expects, so that it doesn't interfere with the content.
Of course it is extremely important that the knowledge we create should get out to the wider society that has paid for it, and that's a different matter. There we have to be interesting, lively and attract attention via form, because we are competing with other texts on those grounds.
Or you can have the best of both worlds, there has been a shift in journals attitudes in a few publications in the social sciences so I have been able to insert a poem into a standard academic text, in this way providing both the traditional academic discourse and something more creative. The first time I did this was with Qualitative Inquiry who have always been open to creative forms but more recently more standard journals such as Families Relationships and Society and the Journal of Corporate Citizenship are allowing space for these combined approach papers - I feel its a move in the right direction and hope more journals will begin to allow elements of creativity
I realize that it depends a lot on the discipline. I think the terms are nomothetic and idiographic. The natural sciences are nomothetic and a natural-scientific article reports some knowledge that has been created in the lab or the field, more or less independently of how it is reported. The humanities (and social sciences?) are idiographic and the text creates the knowledge. What I said above refers mainly to nomothetic disciplines. In the idiographic disciplines we read less and slower, so there's more scope for creativity. But even so it would be very tiring to read all one's academic sources as slowly as a poem.
Creative writing you refer to has to be contextualized in order to be considered academic writing. Students' writing in a School of Letters, for example, is academic and also creative.It follows expectations and conventions of the discourse community. It follows the discourse practices that characterize the different disciplines. I do not think that it is a question of style. Scientists use less footnotes than Philosophers and the way they refer to other authors is totally different. I wouldn't use the term "creative" because all writing is creative. I would recommend you to read more about academic discourse: Hyland, 2002, 2005, 2010; Swales, 1990, 2004, among others.
Dear John, I apologize for having offended you. It was not my intention. Please ignore my comments. I was trying to understand how Researchgate worked and after reading your answer I realized I hadn't read the 55 answers to your question. I lacked previous information and background to the issue. I didn't mean to sound presumptuous. Please accept my apologies. I have learned a great lesson and I thank you for it. Please leave Chávez out of this exchange. We have enough nightmares about what he did to this country.
Dear Rebecca, Thanks for writing and apology most warmly accepted. I should have realized that you were new to RG and to the discussion. I'm enjoying RG, even though I'm retired, and I expect you will as well. What I like is the opportunity to discuss meaningful topics with, shall we say, "learned" people (gente letrada). I grew so weary of trying to converse with people in the comments section of random web articles. I never knew with whom I was communicating, it's anonymous, but I suspect the vast majority were high school kids or early undergraduates. If I didn't agree with them they always responded with insults and a good deal of profanities. I don't know if the web publications in Venezuela are like that. For your sake I hope not. Here on RG we get knowledge, information, common sense, ideas, and, importantly, civility.
I will never mention that name again! It broke my heart when that began. It reminded me of Colombia in the late 60s and early 70s. As soon as anyone found I was American it was all "imperialismo yanqui, gringo go home," etc. The country was/is pleasant enough but those belligerent attitudes and discussions made me uncomfortable. VZ was a paradise; never experienced that type of attitude or confrontation. I took students from Tennessee to VZ for summer study (Caracas & Puerto La Cruz mainly) several times in the 80s and 90s and visited frequently as member and then president of TN/VZ Partners of the Americas. But when he took over I was literally afraid to go back for fear of a physical anti-American confrontation. It happened in Col. when I was younger but I didn't want to deal with it in VZ at my "advanced" age at the time.
Sorry!! I'm rambling again! I'll follow you, unless you prefer I didn't.
Best regards,
John
I guess this exchange that seemed quite rough at the beginning ended up well. I am so happy things turned out well that way. Even though I didn't know you, I was so upset to have offended you without meaning to. Now we are friends! Unbelievable. What a coincidence that you spent time in Vla. It used to be a marvelous country, one of the mos tolerant countries I had ever been to. Most people are still that way but a great number of chavistas hate anything American, though deep inside they love the "imperio". It's a love and hate situation. Best to you, Rebecca.
Creative Writing belongs to another field of writing and its purpose is also different from the purpose of academic writing. In my view, creative writing has no place in academic writing unless the writer is into drama, theater or literary writing.
As a writer and an independent scholar, I often write what I might loosely term 'literature' that is scholarly but avoids standard academic formats. To me, such cross-genre writing enables a seriuos and necessary destabilizing of many taken-for-granted habits of knowledge-building, and opens up the process of discovering and examining evidence, facts, ideas, etc. in ways that are usually inaccessible through conventional academic forms. This doesn't always, or necessarily make my writing or thinking more accessible or popular or easy. But I believe it allows me and at least some of my readers more space for meaningful insights.
As someone who writes in the space between the creative and scholarly, it seems to me that, like the APA's control over degrees in psychology in many states of the US, it's more a matter of power than reality. Breaking down this wall would inspire students to be both better scholars and more creative writers. Scholarship, then, would also reach a larger audience.
Joel.
I'm wondering whether someone here can give us a reading list on the history of when and how creative and academic writing split.
Thanks,
Joel
I am a practitioner of the dark art that at least half of those replying within these fascinating comments seem to have no place within academia. I am a writer of creative non-fiction, specifically a travel writer. As my PhD project, I am writing a narrative travel book with a strong historical emphasis, together with a critical commentary on the process of travel writing, partly reflecting on my own practice, partly on the restructuring of the genre within the postcolonial period. One part of the PhD is therefore technically creative non-fiction, the other academic writing. I would say that, given the topic, the research element of my creative non-fiction is quite as rigorous as that given to the academic section. I am dealing with subjects in which scrupulous accuracy will be picked up not only by academics but by reviewers and the public and my reputation and my ability to earn a living post-PhD are also on the line. The book also has references, a bibliography, endnotes (although not specific page references) and a glossary. The only difference is a slight difference in the tone of the writing. I would also point out that the creation of all good non-fiction is, by definition, a creative process and that creativity does not of necessity involve fiction (truisms perhaps but these need saying from time to time). Moreover, the academic study of literature would not exist without creative writing.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education
- Academic Writing