Composing Theories class?

I immediately recognized the name Peter Elbow and David Bartholomae from my Composing Theory class last semester. Opposing viewpoints that are all looking for what I equate with the search for the fountain of youth: It's a worthwhile purpose but is nonexistent.

Bartholomae is promoting the critical writing method while Elbow leans more towards the creative method. That is a very extreme generalization of this conversation and doesn't cover most of the aspects of their disagreement. Suffice it to say that although both have the same leanings, that is a longing to produce properly educated individuals, Elbow feels more inclined to be an advocate for the 'writer' in himself than for the 'academic'. He feels they are at odds with one another although he wants harmony. Both are addressing the problem that is postmodernism. It has been inculcated into educational systems and is now posing problems for the staff as it relates to an appropriate approach to pedagogy.

If postmodernism is 'all that', why then is it collapsing upon itself for the philosophy it is espousing? Was it really worth exploring? Was it worthwhile? Did it help humankind in any shape or form other than to show a failed method of thought?

Inspiration or aggravation?

With this semesters' Scissortail festival over and done with and myself not attending any presentations, I am presented with the prospect of 'feeding the muse' as Dr. Benton has put it. What do I find inspirational? Inspiration springs forth from me as a result of a heartfelt desire. That may include accomplishing a task such as writing, relishing in the day that is provided for me, or from a reading that was moving. These are only examples and are not conclusive.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, some of my recent inspiration has come from the abhorrent ideologies or philosophies presented in instructions, readings, and attitudes exhibited upon the ECU campus, especially pertaining to the English Dept. Indeed, they are prevalent elsewhere in every facet of society. The very idea that such discourse presented is overwhelmingly and potentially dangerous to students demands that I speak up.

In my eyes, much of the faculty and subsequent required readings of various authors, are postmodern/poststructural in their content. This is contrary to my entire belief system and I find it detrimental to producing valued members of society.

That being said, I should really save the rest of this diatribe for the papers that are due at the end of this semester. If anyone is really that interested in further conversations concerning this, please comment and we can explore these concepts in depth.