Gerald Graff’s 2003 book Clueless in Academe has a chapter titled Unlearning to Write, in which I found solace. Graff advocates for plainer language, even in academic discourse.
I second that motion. My friends, you are killing me with your jargon. Between the comp-speak, rhet-chat, and teacher-talk, I’ve got quite a list of words to look up. Sometimes I am looking up the same word more than once. No doubt, I am the only one who is struggling. I believe that the function of jargon is to provide a shortcut among people who are in the know. Some day I will be in the know too, I hope.
Graff seems to be pulling back the curtain to expose the little man behind the wizard. He admits that he at first didn’t dare to write in a more vernacular tone because that would endanger his carefully-constructed persona. Now that he is an established academic, Graff is secure enough to abandon many of the academic conventions, and even says academics should write so that a non-academic could understand. He assures the reader that this is not the same as dumbing down.
I wonder where such suggestions would lead. Would simplicity in language lead to simplicity in thought? Would academic pieces of writing become longer because they wouldn’t use jargon as a shortcut to the ideas in question? Would the public become interested in reading academic writing? Would the public become interested in engaging in academic discourse?
I find it refreshing that one of the “gray-haired men” is willing to be critical of his field and his peers. On the other hand, it’s easy for him be critical. Graff is not trying to build a career and a life, and he is beholden to few. I’d love to know what some young academics think. Dr. Donna – what do you have to say?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ha! This class has produced nothing nearly as bad as some of the crap I heard as an undergrad in New England. Jargon is okay if the speaker has sufficient control of it. So far, I haven't heard anyone slip and say something completely meaningless merely because it sounded good at the time. If ever you hear me speaking pseudo-intellectual jabberwocky, slap me in the face and tell me to go back to Wonderland. I won't mind. I enjoy Wonderland more than this world anyway.
ReplyDeleteCathy,
ReplyDeleteYou are not alone, trust me. I, too, see the wisdom in Graff when he calls for a clarification in academic writing. In fact, there have been quite a few blogs and reading assignments that I’ve had to step away from because the constant bombardment of jargon and effusive overflow of vocabulary have been beyond overwhelming (I apologize if my own blogs have been the same for you). Indeed, the entire time Scott was explaining Graff’s concept of this dulling-down in academic writing, I perpetually found myself nodded. In fact, such a concept reminds me of a comic strip from Calvin and Hobbes in which Calvin meanders up and down his block critiquing the snow-art of his peers. In doing so, he comes across a single snowball amidst a vast field of snow and remarks: “Look, pal, there’s no point expressing ideas if you can’t make them understood! You’re just babbling to yourself!”
This entire semester we have been reading works which continually debate how best to teaches students to write well and be understood through that writing; however, much of this debate occurs in this stilted language. This makes me wonder: If we are calling for students to write clearly and understandably, shouldn’t we make our own works understandable and accessible to them as well?
Thomas