More Reflections on the Role of Creative Writing in the Tragedy at Virginia Tech

Though yesterday’s post on the relationship between creative writing and this week’s terrible events at Virginia Tech hasn’t yet gleaned any public comments here, I have received a number of private e-mails about it (and believe me, the site stats/referral pages show readers are coming to the blog specifically because that post is here). Since the topic is now attracting more attention elsewhere, today I’ll provide some sources for further information/reflection:

At InsiderHigherEd.com you can find Elizabeth Redden’s “When Creative Writing Provides a Clue” as well as a number of reader comments.

At Harriet, the Poetry Foundation’s blog, you can find Emily Warn’s “Responding to Violent Poems in the Classroom”.

And it turns out that poet Nikki Giovanni (who provided the rousing closing moments for Tuesday’s Convocation on the Virginia Tech campus) seems to have been the instructor who brought the future gunman’s alarming behavior/writings to Lucinda Roy’s attention (again, see yesterday’s post for that background). Last night Giovanni appeared on CNN on both Paula Zahn’s show and Larry King’s. You’ll need to scroll down each transcript for her comments, including this from the Paula Zahn appearance: “You’d be amazed at what we get in creative writing, not to mention across the campus. You get a lot of expression. Some of it would be troubling, and in Cho’s case, some of it — you know, some was a troubling youngster that, frankly speaking, I didn’t think I could help. That didn’t mean he was beyond help.”

Reflections on the Role of Creative Writing in the Tragedy at Virginia Tech

We seem to learn more, almost hour by hour, about what happened at Virginia Tech on Monday. I’ll spare you all my thoughts and associations, but for writers who teach, there’s one aspect of this story that simply must be addressed.

I ran across the name “Lucinda Roy” twice yesterday. In the morning, I read Ms. Roy’s eloquent op-ed in the New York Times. And later, I read news reports, like this one at CNN.com, detailing how alarming the gunman’s creative writing had been.

After having the young man’s work brought to her attention, says the CNN report, Roy, former English department chairwoman at Virginia Tech and co-director of its creative writing program, “went to the police and counselors ‘and everywhere else, and they would say, but there’s nothing explicit here. He’s not actually saying he’s going to kill someone.'”

Frankly, if selfishly, I wish the op-ed had addressed this piece of the story, too.

Why? Because those news reports about the student’s writing brought back a memory. It’s hazy now–I can’t supply the details. But it involves my alerting my writing program supervisor about what I viewed as alarming elements of a student’s fiction writing in a summer school workshop. Counselors were contacted. And the student raged at me, both semi-silently and gloweringly in class, and in words, when the time came for my end-of-course evaluations.

But I’m not sorry I signaled her work to my supervisor. I’d rather risk being “wrong”–and/or suffering a bad evaluation (which is actually pretty serious business within this particular writing program, but that’s a subject for another post on another day)–than taking the risk of silence.

It’s a difficult balance to try to maintain, especially when students are writing fictional plays, or short stories (or poems, which despite what some people may believe, are not always first-person “confessional”), and we must respect the forms. We must refrain some assuming that what’s on the page is autobiographical.

But sometimes, as Lucinda Roy recognized, you just have to speak out. And then, you have to find people who can and will do more than simply listen to you. They have to act, too.

Any of you practicing-writers-who-teach have other thoughts on this?

College Writing

As if we need further evidence of the decline of writing skills (and other academic skills) among America’s youth, Inside Higher Ed this week offers up a piece titled “Fooling the College Board,” with some dispiriting information on the essay portion of the SAT.

And sorry to darken your day even further at this early hour, but don’t expect colleges to fix the situation. This week the same site also brings us “The Overflowing Composition Classroom.” (And remember, bright-eyed MFA candidates, until and unless you publish a book of your “creative” work, composition is quite likely what you’ll be teaching, if teaching is your goal.)

But it’s not all gloom and doom on the higher education front. This week some students at The City University of New York (disclosure: my place of employment) received some wonderful and well-deserved news. And happily, The New York Sun took note and commented.

AWP Reportage: The Creative Writing Tenure Track

(Second in a series of posts detailing sessions from last week’s AWP conference in Atlanta. Click here for the previous post.)

Last Friday morning I awakened in time to get breakfast and make it over to a 9AM session on “Getting the Job and Keeping It: The Creative Writing Tenure Track.” Once upon a time I thought I’d be on said track by now, and since I haven’t altogether abandoned the idea, I thought the session would be helpful.

And it was. Moderated by Katherine Coles, a poet on the faculty of the University of Utah, it also included Christian Teresi, Associate Director of Membership Services (and coordinator of Career Services) at AWP; Pablo Medina, who teaches writing and literature at New School University in Manhattan as well as for the Warren Wilson MFA Program for Writers; and Margot Singer, an assistant professor of English at Denison University in Ohio (who, we quickly learned, beat the conventional wisdom by winning a tenure-track job even before she had a book published or even under contract).

It was an extremely informative session. Here are some gleanings:

1) If you’re already an AWP member, you have access to a lot of helpful information for the job search online. First, log on through “eLink.” Go to the “AWP JobList/Career Services” section. Read through the archived JobList articles later. Read through the job listings later. Right now, you want to download AWP’s “Career Services Guidelines.” Even if you choose not to have AWP manage your dossier (you may already be entitled to similar services elsewhere, as I am), you’ll want to read the information about the components of a dossier; etiquette for seeking letters of recommendation; and tips on creating an effective application, c.v., and/or resumé. Teresi had helpfully brought along a number of packets containing the printed version of these materials, and I was glad to snag one.

2) Coles repeated some pointers one would think job seekers for posts teaching writing wouldn’t need. Be neat. Be sure your cover letter and your c.v. don’t contain grammatical errors or typos. Don’t be “flip.” Be straightforward and speak to your strengths, explaining what you would bring to the particular program and to the job. (If the job involves a lot of undergraduate teaching, for example, speak about that, and your qualifications.) Coles and the others pointed out that because these jobs are so competitive (it’s possible to get hundreds of applicants for a single post), the unfortunate truth is that the easier you make it for your application to be tossed aside, the more likely it is that that’s exactly what will happen.

3) Medina noted that he always asks recommendees if there’s anything in particular they’d like him to discuss in his reference letters. And he reminded us to always, always waive our rights to see these letters, thus affirming their confidential nature (Coles noted that she always shows her recommendees the letters she’s written for them anyway. But the panelists agreed that not signing the waiver signals something negative to search committees.) Coles added that she has her students remind her to update their letters every year, to keep the letters “fresh” for the new search(es) that may be needed.

4) Noting that the goal of the first step (the application packages) is getting to the point of an interview, Singer emphasized the importance of conducting a mock interview before the real thing happens. The panelists instantly agreed. There was quite a bit of discussion about interviews. Coles spoke about items you might not think about ahead of time, including the usefulness of dressing as if you were meeting everyone in person even if your interview with the search committee is being held by phone (you’ll simply sound more energetic and professional wearing interview attire than wearing your pajamas).

Overall, the panelists seemed to emphasize the importance of presenting a good, professional first impression. Coles recounted stories about job candidates she’d worked with whose cover letters had clearly worked against them. These were talented writers and wonderful people, she said, who simply kept search committees at a distance (they weren’t receiving any interview requests) by issuing strong aesthetic or pedagogical opinions in their cover letters. But don’t you want me to be myself, such writers have asked her. Not now, she replies. Now is the time to be your “best self,” the hire-able self, the self who works well with others, even others who may have different opinions and experiences. Later, once you’re hired and established on your new campus and socializing with your colleagues, is the time to get into debates about the primacy of formalist poetry, or the efficacy of the workshop model for undergraduates.

I have to confess that I found this thread of the discussion a little disheartening (and come to think of it, the session focused almost exclusively on “getting the job” rather than “keeping it”). But I think it was realistic. Certainly, everything I heard in this session was worth hearing, whether one ends up, ultimately, “on the market” for a tenure-track job in creative writing or not. Because it’s not just as teachers of creative writing that we need to present our “best selves.”

Monday Morning Market Listings (Post-AWP Edition)

When I last posted here, I was on my way to the Association of Writers and Writing Programs annual conference (held this year in Atlanta). Now that I’ve had a little time to unpack and catch up with things back at home, and reflect a bit on the event, I must say, first, that the AWP staff did a fantastic job planning and running a conference for 4900 (that’s right, 4900) people. I was so happy to see old friends, connect familiar names with the faces to which they belong, and meet practicing writers new to me, too. I’m also very grateful for the Southern hospitality extended to me by my good friend, L, a practicing poet based in Atlanta. Among other treats, she and a friend took me to dinner Saturday night at Nancy’s, a wonderful restaurant where I enjoyed some delicious country fried chicken, macaroni and cheese, and green beans (see photo). It was yummy!

I’ll tell you more about the panels/activities in upcoming posts. Meantime, I thought I’d share with you the scoop on some markets/opportunities advertised at the conference:

Among the information sheets I picked up was one for the Astrobiology and the Sacred Fiction Competition. Administered at the University of Arizona, this contest awards a first prize of $1,000 plus an invitation to read at the University of Arizona in September 2007 (travel and lodging included). Second and third prizes will be $500 and $250, respectively. Details/submission guidelines here. NO ENTRY FEE.

Handouts were also available with guidelines for the 2007 Charles Johnson Student Fiction Award. Administered at Southern Illinois University Carbondale, this competition is open to all undergraduate and graduate students who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents currently enrolled full- or part-time in a U.S. college or university. It is “intended to encourage increased artistic and intellectual growth among students, as well as reward excellence and diversity in creative writing.” Winner receives $1,000 plus a signed copy of a Charles Johnson book, plus publication in Crab Orchard Review. There’s NO ENTRY FEE. NB: Given that the handout noted that submissions “must be postmarked in March 2007,” I have to believe the Web site will soon be updated very soon.

At the West Branch table I picked up an information sheet noting that the journal’s contributor rates for poetry have increased. “We now offer payment in the amount of $20/poem + $10/additional page, or $10/page of prose, with a minimum payment per writer of $30 and a maximum payment of $100.” Contributors also receive two copies and a one-year subscription to the journal. “Book reviews are typically arranged by assignment. If you are interested in writing reviews, please query with a sample. We currently pay $200 per assigned review.” Read more about the journal here.

I was also reminded that the 2008 Zoland Poetry submission deadline is March 15, 2007. More information here. This publication also pays its poets/writers.

Lyon College in Batesville, Arkansas, is offering a 2008 Visiting Fellowship in Creative Nonfiction. Details and application guidelines here.

Here’s an interesting award I learned about from the folks at the Flannery O’Connor Review: “The Sarah Gordon Award is an annual $500 prize for the best article written by a graduate student on Flannery O’Connor and/or Southern Studies.” There’s NO ENTRY FEE. Again, I’m not sure the Web site has quite kept pace with the flyer I saw displayed at AWP. Check for updates (my understanding is that articles must be submitted between April 1, 2007, and August 1, 2007, and that each entrant must be a graduate student as of August 1, 2007) here.