English 5011

The Power of Writing

"An Ethics of Teaching Writing, " written by Sandy Moore and Michael Kleine offers a situation in which we can study the power of writing. In their advanced persuasive writing course, both teacher and student assumed an untrue condition. They believed that a writing classroom is free from the outside world, that what they chose to write was somehow protected. They forgot, or were never instructed, how powerful writing is. This power extends beyond the classroom, and into our everyday lives.

The Prelude asserts that Ms. Moore "wanted to use the university classroom not as a place from which to launch a public attack on a private workplace; instead, she hoped that the classroom would provide a safe place in which would provide a safe place to in which to practice persuasive discourse and to develop her rhetorical skills" (94). However, the charged nature of her piece presents us with a picture contrary to this assertion. Never brought out in the collaborative essay "An Ethics of Teaching Writing" is the fact that there is always an intention behind the context of what we write. Mrs. Moore obviously wanted to vent the frustrations of her job, and she decided her writing class would be the forum.

Her professor, Dr. Kleine, further encouraged this type of writing:

"I encourage students to import their own discourses into my writing class and to shape those discourses there, I count myself participant in a pedagogy of "liberation" and permission, an advocate of free speech in writing" (98). Because he believed that the classroom is protected, he failed to inform his students of an important lesson. As a writing instructor, he is not responsible for what his students write, but he must inform them that there are potential consequences to what they write. When text is committed to paper, it is cemented there. Written words have a longer lasting effect then even the spoken word. What would he have done if a student wrote something that could be harmful to another person, confessed to a crime, or wrote about their ongoing sexual molestation? Because it was in the "protected" context of a writing class does he not have the responsibility for reporting it? The classroom is not a confessional, and writers are not protected in a classroom. Fortunately, this lesson was learned, as Dr. Kleine, in the wake of the situation, now states "There is no sanctuary, no protected context," writing is potentially harmful, both to the world and the writer" (99).

This lesson, conveniently learned after the fact, is something that Michael Kleine obviously knew before Sara Moore completed her paper. We have evidence of this knowledge from his "Corporation X" article. He, in sight of potential problems, changed the names and disguised the identity of the office they studied (100). Michael Kleine knew how powerful writing can be, and attempted to share that power with his students. Unfortunately, he did not instruct them to protect themselves as well. Instead, Dr. Kleine wanted a personal peek into the lives of his students. He encouraged students to write about real life practices. His students happily complied with his requests, offering pieces that were not socially acceptable in the workplace. The question is why?

One student attempts to answer the question by stating she was writing to a specified audience: "’…I was writing a report about work for people who didn’t work there: my teacher’" (99). Still, we must as why. Why is it permissible to write something in a classroom that you could not write outside of it? There is no teacher/student privilege. We, as writing instructors, are not priests, lawyers, or social workers; so why does a student feel he/she can share intimate details with the writing instructor? Is it because we, like Michael Kleine, ask for it?

Most writers know to protect themselves, evident in Mrs. Moore’s interactions with the students in the writing center (95). If we are to teach writing, it is important for us to also teach how powerful writing is. Written words cannot be erased once they are shared with an audience. This audience may not be the one the author intended it to be, and has therefore has the potential to become harmful. Any work can be misinterpreted, so it is up to the author to protect themselves from wrongful accusations and actions. If we do not, we must be willing to accept the fallout.

This lesson is well learned by both authors in this essay. Michael Kleine suggests that there was a "sanitizing process" (103) before publication. For most of us the editing process of deleting names and companies (the sanitizing process) would be automatic, and not because of paranoia. Part of the writing process is learning that what you write has an impact on others, no matter if it is the intended audience or not. Does this mean that we cannot "name names?" NO, but, if you chose to write a "charged" piece, you must also be willing to accept the consequences. We do not live in Plato’s ideal world where you can say anything as long as it is for the good of the people. Therefore, we must all learn, and teach, the lesson of protecting ourselves when we write. Teachers must set guidelines on what is acceptable for "personal" papers. In short, if it is not acceptable in the "outside world," it is probably not acceptable in a writing classroom.