"Writer's Block" : It's Not a Condition.

"The Essential Delay: When Writer's Block Isn't"

Donald M. Murray. 715-720.

I am now a Donald Murray disciple.  

I did not intend to become one after reading his essay, and I do not pretend to have a knowledgeable background in regards to his contributions to composition theory and research (although I will be now reading more of his work in the future). In this particular essay, Murray has articulated many of my own thoughts and beliefs regarding the writing process that I’ve been attempting to pass on to my students consciously, and even unconsciously in some circumstances.

Murray argues that the anxious stage that all writers go through before actually writing, or what we often call writer’s block,  (or what I experience as similar to that terrible feeling when a plane bounces on turbulence, or an elevator jumps two floors), is in fact a necessary and essential delay in the writing process for producing effective writing.

According to Murray, a writer needs to experience/feel/know five essential things before actually writing:

·      Information

·      Insight

·      Order

·      Need

·      Voice

Only after ascertaining a knowledge of these five things can the writer actually start drafting. I interpreted these five things as objects which writers must articulate in their mind before articulating in writing.

The “essential delay” is obviously a psychological process, but we tend to label it as a negative experience, thus “writer’s block”. I wonder why we do this…is it just a result of poor project management, or fear that what we have to say isn’t worthwhile for our readers? I am rarely unanxious when I write—the only time I’m not is when I’m furious or unhappy and by then, I’ve clearly gone through my essential delay. Although I have gone through my own essential delay writing this blog post (I delayed while doing a load of laundry, writing notes on the essay, and then typing sentence fragments in Word), I criticized myself for not writing this blog post immediately after reading the essay. 

Clearly, I was in the stage of “need". Murray notes that “We delay writing until we can find the need to write” (718). I developed an “internal need[…] to speak, and the perceived need of readers to listen” (718) afterwards.  I had not only a desire to speak and add to the conversation, but by writing this piece, I also determined that my readers needed to listen to my thoughts. It is in fact, of utmost importance that they do so.

Murray also notes that excellent writers also know to write with specifics, and I found  the most interesting quote to be located in the information section: “ ‘The more particular, the more specific you are, the more universal you are,' declares Nancy Hale” (717).  This quote identifies one of the peculiar problems of writing—it is difficult to make the subjective the objective, and to make your own personal experience relevant to the experience of others. It is also a problem I see in my own writing, and the writing of my students. My previous study in philosophy made me determine that holding a subjective view of the world is pure selfishness (even though often, it is the only view you have). Your own experience is not the one that matters all the time. Yet, a subjective view can also encourage readers to empathize with authors—but I don’t want my students to continue to embody a me-based culture through writing. I describe thesis statements to my students as having the characteristics that Hale discusses above in order to temporarily mollify my conundrum discussed in this paragraph.

Murray also discusses what he calls “insight." Insight may be a problem that “may be solved by the writing” or “a single vision or dominant meaning that will be tested by the writing of the first draft” (717). After finding this interest, Murray informs readers that the writer may finally begin the draft (717).  Additionally, determining order plays a crucial role in the delay as well (718).

I was surprised to find that Murray’s section on voice is the shortest section.  His primary thought regarding voice is that “An effective piece of writing creates the illusion of a writer speaking to a reader” (719). Is this it?  The not-so-new revelation that the voice must match the audience? I remember in high school that we went over and over how to construct voice—this semester I devoted two days of class to teaching how to essentially write in an academic style and voice because my students last semester lacked the understanding how to.  Perhaps though, this is Murray’s last ditch attempt at convincing his audience that the essential delay is necessary and that our anxiety regarding the essential delay is natural. Things come together when writers let things go. 

He's got me convinced. Anyone else?