Day Three – Reflections on Academic Writing
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-AU
X-NONE
X-NONE
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0cm;
mso-para-margin-right:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0cm;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”,”serif”;
mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;}
Today is day three of the November Writing Challenge! We hope that you have got off to a good start with your writing. It is important that you recognise that each small step you take will lead you closer to your goal. If your writing has been a little sluggish so far, don’t agonize and don’t rebuke yourself. Return to your goals, re-consider your plan if necessary, and start writing today!
Today’s guest blogger is Dr Kylie Mirmohamadi. She is a Senior Research Fellow in the School of English and a Senior Research Associate working on the Mallee Lands Project in the School of History. Kylie has authored a number of books, including, with Sue Martin, ‘Charles Dickens: What Australians Made of the World’s Favourite Writer’, which was published in 2012.
In today’s piece, Kylie reflects eloquently on the ways in which writing is conceptualised and wielded in the humanities. She reminds us that academic writing is often concerned with anticipating criticism and defensively insisting upon the correctness of the ideas that it attempts to capture. This, she suggests, can erode the capacity of writing to ‘carry’ and ‘explore’, and can negate the exciting and alluring untidiness of ideas. Finding a voice
which is expressive of one’s individuality and which concurrently satisfies
disciplinary norms, is a delicate, but most certainly worthy, challenge for academic
writers.
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-AU
X-NONE
X-NONE
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
Ideas and feelings: Some reflections on academic writing
Academic Writing Month provides a timely opportunity to reflect on the notion that, while all writing involves ideas, it is never purely an intellectual exercise. Putting thoughts into words and publishing them is, at some level, an emotional risk for any writer. As scholars, we expose our work to public scrutiny and sometimes hostile readings, and its inevitable mistakes and shortcomings can seem to sit like little discursive landmines, always threatening to be uncovered and detonated.
An editor once commented to me that the book we were working on had scope to be ‘generous to the reader’ in the matter of endnotes. This way of seeing referencing – as part of the reading experience rather than a structural component of evidence – alerted me to my own, entrenched, writing desires. At times, it is as if I write merely to prove myself ‘not wrong’ rather than to engage in the messy, fraught business of exploring ideas. Humanities scholarship doesn’t tolerate negative results in the same way as the sciences do, and perhaps this disciplinary difference generates a timidity that not only impedes the wilder, more exciting, reaches of our thinking, but also obstructs literary style.
If we write, as most of us now must, for a crossover market, the default defensive style of scholarly writing will in any case merely annoy our readers rather than impress them with the unassailability of a given intellectual position. General readers demand clearly-written prose which carries ideas rather than wields them as weapons, and opens up for them new ways of seeing rather than insisting on the absolute correctness of our own. This is our challenge, if we are willing to take it up.
writing cultures that exist within your own discipline. How is your
writing shaped by the discipline in which you work? Is there space to
write in ways that deviate from the disciplinary norm? Does defensive
academic writing undermine our capacity to engage a broader readership?
Does anticipating the criticism that your work might receive help you to
sharpen and clarify your ideas? These are all interesting questions
that you can reflect upon over the coming days of the Writing
Challenge.
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-AU
X-NONE
X-NONE
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
In it, she describes the pressure that bureaucracy exerts on academic
writing and invites us to re-imagine our identities as writers, and enocuages
to reconceptualise the audiences we write for.Published in 1991, she explores the pressures that
Keep up to date
Find out how to stay informed about all the development opportunities for researchers at La Trobe from the RED team.