Formalist theory in composition studies

Formalism is the study of a text without taking into account any outside influence. Formalism rejects notions of culture or societal influence, authorship, and content, and instead focuses on modes, genres, discourse, and forms.

Beginnings

Formalism has its roots in current-traditionalism, which is a composition theory commonly tied to very negative connotations.

Criticisms

One of the greatest opponents is Sharon Crowley, who claims that current-traditionalism dominates composition classrooms [Crowley, Sharon. "The Methodical Memory: Invention in Current-Traditional Rhetoric". Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1990.] . James Williams says that in the current-traditional classroom, focus remains on description, narration, and exposition, exposition divided into categories like definition and compare/contrast (44). Critical thinking is not often thought to fit in with current-traditionalism, as many current-traditionalist composition assignments will ask a student to write a book report, e.g. (44).
Patricia Bizzell states that current-traditionalism emphasizes expository writing and prescriptivism in grammar, usage, and style [Bizzell, Patricia. The Rhetorical Tradition. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 1990.] . What follows is the practice of applying to one’s composition rhetorical modes and outlines, situating one’s writing in a very formulaic setting. Current-traditionalism is thought to stifle the creativity of students in the composition classroom by confining them into genres such as description, argumentation, and narration. C.H. Knoblauch and Lil Brannon oppose current-traditionalism, claiming that it is impossible to define writing using such a narrow scope. It is too difficult for students to try to mold their writing into the typical “prewrite, write, revise” pattern, since writing is not so mechanical or rigid a task [Knoblauch, C.H. and Lil Brannon. "Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing." Upper Montclair: Boynton/Cook, 1984.] . Instructors, according to Knoblauch and Brannon, often adhere to a production recipe, claiming that in order to learn to write, students but start from beginning to end: that is, “find a topic – state a thesis – etc.” [Knoblauch, C.H. and Lil Brannon. "Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing." Upper Montclair: Boynton/Cook, 1984.] . The authors claim that a current-traditional approach in the classroom is often billed as employing process theory, when really instructors are simply having their students write composition from a mechanistic, analytical standpoint without allowing any room for creativity [Knoblauch, C.H. and Lil Brannon. "Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing." Upper Montclair: Boynton/Cook, 1984.] .

Pedagogy

William H. Thelin criticizes Maxine Hairston’s approach to teaching composition from a current-traditional standpoint, which she then mixes with the political. He claims that “No matter how sound the politics … the student would have no choice but to regurgitate that dogma in the clearest terms possible and to shift concentration onto matters of structure and correctness” [Thelin, WIlliam H. "Advocating Language: An Ethical Approach to Politics in the Classroom". "The Ethics of Writing Instruction". Michael Pemberton, ed. Stamford: Ablex Publishing, 2000.] .
Mary Ann Cain writes that “formalism asserts that the text stands on its own as a complete entity, apart from the writer who produced it” [Cain, Mary Ann. "Problematizing Formalism: A Double-Cross of Genre Boundaries." "College Composition and Communication". 51:1 Sept 1999. 89-95.] . Moreover, Cain says that “one can regard textual products as teachable and still maintain that being a writer is a "natural" act, one not subject to instruction [Cain, Mary Ann. "Problematizing Formalism: A Double-Cross of Genre Boundaries." "College Composition and Communication". 51:1 Sept 1999. 89-95.] . Composition, like creative writing, has flourished under the assumption that students are already writers, or have the capacity to learn-and that everyone should be writers. Yet the questions composition tends to pose within this assumption are not so much about which aspects of writing can or cannot be taught, but how writing can be taught and under what conditions [Cain, Mary Ann. "Problematizing Formalism: A Double-Cross of Genre Boundaries." "College Composition and Communication". 51:1 Sept 1999. 89-95.] .In regards to formalist composition, one must ask, “to what extent is this ‘need’ for ‘academic discourse’ real – any more than the need for more ‘imaginative writing’ is real-except to perform some function, to get something done?” [Cain, Mary Ann. "Problematizing Formalism: A Double-Cross of Genre Boundaries." "College Composition and Communication". 51:1 Sept 1999. 89-95.] .

Research

Formalism research involves studying the ways in which students present their writing [Cain, Mary Ann. "Problematizing Formalism: A Double-Cross of Genre Boundaries." "College Composition and Communication". 51:1 Sept 1999. 89-95.] . Some ways formalism research is conducted involves allowing the text to speak to the readers versus cutting out unintended meaning in a written piece. Respectively, these two methods deal with language as the “master” writer versus a teacher as the “master” writer.

Works Cited