Conduct in the (Creative Writing) Classroom

What I’ve been trying to underscore is that being ethical as creative writers is vital to our practice and that, for us, academic integrity involves more than citing our sources. The work that we produce must demonstrate sensitivity and respect toward our audiences. This is not only true of writing that we wind up publishing but also of works-in-progress that we share in classroom settings. Exercising sensitivity and respect toward our peers’ writing is equally important.

Every post-secondary course is structured around particular modes of learning (lecture, lecture/discussion, group work, lab work) and each classroom is a community governed by explicit and implicit rules of conduct. In all courses, regardless of discipline, “community members” (i.e. the instructor and students) are expected to be respectful of others’ ideas and opinions, not to mention their gender, social class, religious views, “race,” ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Creative writing courses, however, are unique in that they are largely workshop-driven and, therefore, what is intensely personal (i.e. my writing) becomes somewhat public (in the sense that my classmates read and comment on it). In some other disciplines, students are asked to “peer review” each other’s writing but in creative disciplines the work produced, and subject to public scrutiny by peers, tends to be intensely personal. Students can experience equally intense vulnerability in workshop settings.

It is imperative, then, that, in addition to being cautious about such matters as intertextuality, appropriation, and truth claims in our own work, we must be mindful of how we enter into conversations about our peers’ work, which isn’t as easy as a person might think. Simply heaping praise on a classmate’s writing can be less-than-productive, particularly when the praise is disingenuous. Effective workshopping demands that participants provide comments which are supportive but also geared toward improvement. (Are crucial details missing? Do some confusing moments require clarification? Can some words, or line breaks, or images, or motifs be finessed? Is the plot believable, the characters plausible, the dialogue authentic, the context accurate?) Neither ambiguous admiration nor acerbic articulations of concerns “work” in the workshop environment. We all take substantial risks when we share our writing. Following a version of the “golden rule” is essential: “Speak about others’ work as you would have them speak about yours.”