According to Sondra Perl, the writing process is a recursive process. As Perl defines the complex writing process into stages, I find that the most important and enduring idea that Sondra Perl has contributed to the field of theorizing is the process she labeled retrospective structuring. If a writer can either naturally utilize or learn how to utilize retrospective structuring, the chances of becoming a successful writer are great.
As a writer begins to writes, he or she goes through several stages even before the pen has hit the pad or the fingers have hit the keyboard. Prewriting, which includes reading, asking questions and creating outlines, etc.; writing, which includes projective structuring (thinking about what might be said later on), and retrospective structuring (thinking about what you have already written); and rewriting, which includes rereading, revising and erasing if necessary (Mc Andrew & Reigstad 22). While all of the steps to the writing process carry importance and are, constantly recurring, I will focus on the retrospective structuring.
Thinking and then hesitating… writing a sentence or two…going back to read it aloud…and then asking myself, “Did I capture exactly what I wanted to say?” “Am I using the right words?” “Are the mental images in my mind clearly being depicted by the words that I have chosen to write?” “This process of attending, of calling up a felt sense, and of writing out of that place, [is what Perl labels as] the process of retrospective structuring.” (Perl 1980, 367) The reason why Perl has labeled it retrospective structuring is simply because, “it is retrospective in that it begins with what is already there, inchoately, and brings whatever is there forward by using language in structured form.” (Perl 1980, 367) Retrospective structuring allows the writers to go back, think about the idea or thought that was not fully developed, and assign words to identify exactly what is in the mind of the writer.
What makes retrospective structuring so important? As retrospective structuring points out that the ideas or the images has to already be in the mind of the writer, one must ask what if that idea or thought about the subject or topic is not readily accessible? The writer may find him or herself having trouble writing about a particular subject or topic. Once the initial ideas or thought are registering at a blank, writing may come to a complete stop until the ideas or thoughts begin to generate in the writers mind.
While some writers may have a difficult time generating ideas, other writers may find that the ideas flow continuously and their trouble lies in accurately describing what they really want to say. Perl states that although ideas begin as thoughts that are not fully developed, they end with a result that is “tangible” (Perl 1980, 367). The fact that these thoughts are in the mind and not fully developed proves that you cannot just simply “dig deep enough to release it.” (Perl 1980, 367) Perl makes it clear that these thoughts have to be “crafted and constructed” in order to accurately pinpoint the true meaning to what we intend to say (Perl 1980, 367).
When the writer experiences no blocks in ideas or has no trouble accurately pinpointing what they intend to say using words, the process of writing can be smooth and efficient, moving along quickly. During Perl’s research on the writing process, she talks about several case studies. Tony, in particular, provides a perfect example of someone who exhibiting the use of retrospective structuring. “During the intervals between drafts, Tony read his written work, assessed his writing, planned new phrasings, transitions, or endings, read the directions and the question over, and edited once again.” (Perl 1979, 324) This reveals that the retrospective structuring process of looking back and configuring if what the writer meant to say, is actually said in the way that the writer desires for it to be structured is very important and very necessary.
Is it possible for someone who is not able to generate ideas or thoughts to learn how to generate them? Is it possible for someone who has the capability to think the ideas or thoughts about any topic or subject but, find it difficult to accurately structure what they want to say on paper learn how to accurately structure the meaning that is currently in its intangible form? According to Sondra Perl, the answer to those questions is yes. Retrospective structuring is just one, not easily identifiable stage that can help all writers in the writing process. For “this basic step… skilled writers rely on and… less skilled writers can be taught.” (Perl 1980, 366) Therefore, once a writer has learned on how to utilize retrospective structuring his or her success in writing will increase their chances of becoming a better writer.
Work Cited
McAndrew, Donald A., and Thomas J. Registad. “The Writing and Tutoring Processes.” Tutoring Writing a Practical Guide for Conferences. 22. Print. 15 Sept. 2011.
Perl, Sondra. “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English. Vol. 13, No. 4. National Council of Teachers of English, Dec. 1979. 324. Jstor. Web. 13 Sept. 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40170774
Perl, Sondra. “Understanding Composing.” College Composition and Communication. Vol. 31, No. 4. National Council of Teachers of English, Dec. 1980. 366-367. Jstor. Web. 13 Sept. 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/356586
This was a well-organized paper. It was enjoyable to read and kept me interested. This was good research that leads to a good introduction to quotes in the essay. The information and writing was developed well. The thesis statement was answered and referred back to into the writing multiple times which made it easier to understand exactly what the writer’s point was in this essay and their feelings about the subject. I like the way you put your own ideas into this essay and your opinion, it was well written.
ReplyDeleteGood, focused opening. I wonder if you could improve it, though, but merging and re-organizing your first two paragraphs into one intro. It seems like laying out the writing process in stages and then narrowing in on the stage you think is most important would make for better structure. But you have some questions to address first. Is retrospective structuring really a stage or is it a concept that addresses how one moves through various stages of the writing process? Re-read Perl and see what she says. What language does she use to introduce RS?
ReplyDeleteAlso, be careful--you start out in one place talking about things that occur "before the pen has hit the pad or the fingers have hit the keyboard," but then move directly into laying the whole writing process through revision.
The current third paragraph is good,, but be careful of how you present quotes. You have a lot of separate quote piled on top of each other, but as I read it I think what you intend is to have one quote from Perl where she has quotation marks around the questions one should ask oneself during the writing process. See if you can figure out through research how to handle a quote that contain others quotes.
The next few paragraphs are where your main problem emerges. I like how you describe that a writer may have thoughts he or she cannot access or put into words, but how does the idea of retrospective structuring help that problem exactly? Same goes for the paragraphs on writers who know what they want to say. What exactly does retrospective structuring have to do with these people's process? What exactly is RS and how does it come in to (both/either) define a problem (and/or) offer a suggestion for how to remedy a problem in writing?
To some degree I feel this paper is operating halfway between the ideas of retrospective structuring and felt sense. There is a difference between these two things, and you may have some blur still happening in your sense of the boundary between the two concepts. Re-read the essay that helped you grasp RS, and come up with a clear definition of it, one that defines it APART from felt sense, and try to incorporate these two different concepts into your revision in a way that allows them to complement each other without interfering with each other. It's a tough job, and you chose a the toughest topic of anyone, I think! So your rewards will be great if you pursue this, but it is a bit knotty to figure it out. If you want to run some ideas by me as you work, please feel free!