Customer Reviews

Writing from Start to Finish: The "Story Workshop" Basic Forms Rhetoric-Reader

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

John Schultz does not understand how to write clear, concise English sentences. An example:

"The truly promising direction for contemporary fiction writing to take is toward a synthesis of fictional systems and a breadth and generosity of content and emotion, with a full commitment of the mind of the author in perceiving, imagining, and telling of the story."

If you remove all the buried verbs & passively voiced clauses, he says:

"Promising contemporary fiction synthesizes 'fictional systems,' has lots of content and emotion, and commits its author's mind to perceive, imagine, and tell stories,"

Which is a load of old toss, meaning and signifying nothing, academic BS of the rankest vintage. What troubles this reviewer is the Fiction Writing program's blindness to their textbook's essential vapidity and profound impenetrability. The book is the program's academic synecdoche, which is a shame, as its professors--Schultz & Shifletts (plural; both his wife & stepson teach there) aside--make lemonade of this muck. The sooner they commission an English translation of this book, the sooner the MFA world will recognize their program as a legitimate institute, as opposed to the bastard child of two talentless, visionless writers.

Having studied under John Schultz at Columbia College Chicago as an undergraduate, I'll have to support my reasons for why his methods are useful. Methods of diverse structural forms are part of a broad integration of educated writing. Letter writing is a lost art, and this book tries to salvage that ideal; dream writing helps connect the mind to a subconscious level. Word games employed throughout his fiction classes help disconnect the literal meaning of a word and establishes the linkage to another meaning, creating in-depth metaphorical meaning. Story-within-a-story is one of many basic forms used in the professional writing world (Christ, think of how many movies use this form). The method of "seeing" is deeper than the word, itself. Deeper concentration is harder than it seems, especially with all the distractions of technology we have today. The use of parody writing or remaking an established story is another method. Finally, the trick to reading broadly, not just in a localized genre, is stressed...really, it's paramount. No, this book is not The Holy Bible, but it should help you create a bible in your own religion of writing. It is one component a serious writer will need admid thousands of other books a writer will need, in order to establish a well education. To toss a book aside is to toss away a foundation of options a writer cannot afford to lose. Oh, and to the one-dimensional writer whose work will be self-published in a sea of digital noise on the Internet, don't bother. This book is not for you.

Reviews of Writing from Start to Finish are bound to end up as referendums on the Story Workshop(r) writing pedagogy itself, because the two tend to be interlinked. So that readers know where I'm coming from: I studied in traditional creative writing workshops in my undergraduate years, then entered Columbia College Chicago's MFA program and felt the Story Workshop classes opened up my writing process and the kinds of stories I could tell. I have studied the pedagogy and become an instructor as well.

About the book itself: First, the forms (journal, letter, how-to, monster story, model telling, folktale, parody, instances, essay, etc.) presented are useful in and of themselves--at least half of them could work in nonfiction and/or journalistic modes as well as in fiction. Once the basic forms are mastered, writers can build longer works (e.g., a novel) from them through extending or combining forms.

Because the emphasis is on form instead of content, writers following assignments tied to the text can pursue any subject matter that interests them and often find themselves burning to write something matters keenly. Frequently subject ideas and images arise for ("from" might be a better word) writers as they consider the demands of the form. Because you're given a framework (a letter story, a folktale, etc.) to play with instead of a topic (e.g., "What I did on my summer vacation," "Three pages regarding a piece of driftwood"), your only limit is your own imagination and willingness to take risks.

Second, a variety of excellent models illustrate each form. Authors drawn upon for excerpts scattered throughout the book include Kafka, Flaubert, W.E.B. DuBois, Katherine Anne Porter, Herman Melville, Robert Penn Warren, Charles Darwin, Christina Stead, Larry Heinemann, Jane Goodall, Tom Wolfe, Bruno Bettelheim, Richard Wright, Zora Neale Hurston, the Brothers Grimm, and Upton Sinclair. These are supplemented with examples of work from successful form assignments by (now former) students who also add to the diversity of voices and subject matters that might not otherwise find a place in the traditional literary canon.

Third, (and this may be what rankles authors of the angry reviews) this book and the method that it employs are process-driven, not end-result driven. One of the underlying assumptions is that when a writer develops a solid process (of varied journaling, of reading, of writing, of using forms, of rewriting...all accompanied with a sense of audience), a writer will have a good sense of direction toward solid writing.

Granted, there are spots where the book seems dense--particularly the "Process of Writing" chapter. Considering the breadth and depth of valuable information it contains, this is no surprise. It is worth the time and trouble. The examples offered throughout the book are pleasureable to read and have been juxtaposed with an eye toward variety.

While the book contains alot of useful examples and discussions of form, as well as an indepth discussion of writing (including the important connections between spoken language and written language), that many writers would find useful, I do think the text would likely be most useful employed in tandem with a workshop taught using Story Workshop pedagogy. On that particular score--hey, I know I'm biased.

The Story Workshop methodology is far too involved for a discussion here. And as for a discussion of Shane Redman's poisonous gripe regarding a bit of Columbia College politics that predates 1989...well, frankly, life's too short. I'll spare the public.

While the Story Workshop method is not perfect, it is hardly crippling. I have found that it is a great way to generate material to work on, though since I write a lot of things besides prose, not all of it can be turned in for my Fiction Writing classes. The main weakness of the Story Workshop method is that while it does give you a lot of leeway in terms of voice and content, you will not get feedback on what you are doing that is good or bad, or what works and does not work. This can be good for some people but not for everyone. Also, I have had mixed results doing straight genre work with it.

Overall though, it is a very useful book to keep on your shelf, though I add the caveat that very few books are the end all be all of how to write (and most of the people who make that claim are lying).

I recommend this if you are trying to write straight literary (as opposed to category) fiction and work on your literary voice rather then pushing your content. I personally find that it helps more with third person work then first person also. From my experience it also works better with slightly more autobiographical content.

I have to say that the parody is one of the most useful tools to learn about the structure of a story that you can find anywhere. I finished one that actually turned out longer then the original story. If you can get a copy cheaply then it's probably worth picking up just for that. Besides the parody though, there really is not a lot about structure, though there is quite a bit on form (or at least the forms used in the program).

It is not for everyone though, I know of at least one other talented writer (other then Shane who I've never met) that felt that it was useless.

This book was only bought because it was a required text for class. Everything the book tells you to do as a writer comes down to this: see it better.

There, I saved you a few bucks and several hours of your life.

The workshop method for writer's is more effective then then textbook that goes along with it. I have to own and therefore sometimes am assigned readings from within the text. It's boring and sometimes ineffective but the story selections show exactly what each chapter is about and what is to be worked on as a writer.

In my opinion, this is a ridiculous method of writing. It is highly constrictive and limiting.

What's even worse is the extent to which Columbia College's Fiction Writing Department emphasizes this style. Students are required to purchase this book (interestingly enough, Schultz was...maybe still is a long time teacher at Columbia and acting chair).

My advice is to firstly.....avoid the fiction writing department at Columbia College Chicago....it's only through their "babying & crying" that they have even been allowed to be a separate entity. The English department is much more prestigious. Just look at the amount of published work represented in each department. Many of the teachers in the fiction writing department are barely 25.

Secondly, Schultz and his "story workshop method" are crippling to young writers.