Erin's Response, "Understanding Composing"

[Anonymous]

#562

“In the approach I am presenting, the ability to recognize what one needs to do or where one needs to go is informed by calling on felt sense. This is the internal criterion writers seem to use to guide them when they are planning, drafting, and revising. The recursive move, then, that is hardest to document but is probably the most important to be aware of is the move to felt sense, to what is not yet in words but out of which images, words, and concepts emerge.” (366)
I spend so much time thinking about my writing process in order to be able to better explain process to my students. But I haven’t spent much time trying to connect that process to my physicality.
When I see the description of the recursive move of felt sense as being something involving images, I’m really strongly drawn to that. It makes me think of what some people mean – including me – when they say they’re visual learners. Does that connection to visualization offer an inclination to be aware of felt sense? (This is just speculation/random thinking aloud-ish.) If I think of my thought process when I compose, I definitely associate my thoughts/ideas heavily with internal imagery, whether that’s through visualizing a literal shape for my paper or visualizing the people/places about which I’m writing or associating certain colors with certain levels of ideas in the paper as I think about them, etc. Those aren’t things that ever come out on paper (except for the color thing – I am highlighter crazy when drafting papers), and to be honest I’ve never mentioned that thought process aloud before, but I wonder: is that a visual learning thing, or a felt sense thing, or is there a difference, or do those things speak to each other, or is there no connection at all?
I’m also suddenly reminded of Elbow and “Cooking.” (Sean brought up a connection to this as well last week as we watch the Gendlin video, I believe.) Really, I’m thinking of the way I cook in the kitchen – Dave, my husband, hates it; he can’t be anywhere near me. (He loves the finished products – just not the process of their creation.) I’m an exact baker – I measure out things, etc. – but when it comes to cooking… less so. I don’t taste ANYTHING as I cook. I don’t measure anything either. I just toss things in, I measure spices by pouring them in the palm of my hand, I eyeball things… I give it all a stir, and sort of just know what’s right. I make my own recipes. I experiment with ingredients and techniques. I envision what I want as a final dish; I consider the flavors I’d like to experience as I pick things off the shelves to chop up and throw in. I don’t taste until I’m done.
…Actually, now that I think about it, that’s how I do my best writing, the writing of which I end up being proud. …which is not at all what I started out to say. Hmm.

[Sondra Perl]

#563

All of this seems very physical to me. You ask if this is a ‘visual learning thing’ or a ‘felt sense thing’ — and so what strikes me is the use of the word ‘thing’ — I know what you mean but Gene would want to say that a lot of the problem in western philosophy is related to the thing model. That we put things in boxes. What he’s trying to get us to see is how process continually evolves … that’s in part what the occurring into the implying is about. He will ultimately talk about ‘carrying forward’ — another way of talking in process terms, not thing terms.

[Author]

Posts