學好見聞

〔the Gardian衛報〕 創意寫作課程只是浪費時間????

2014-3-5

Hanif Kureishi has declared that creative writing courses are a waste of time and that most of the people enrolled are talentless (and as he teaches on one, presumably he should know). As an alumna of such a programme, I’d love to say that I was – what is it that politicians say? – ‘dismayed’ by his comments, or that they were ‘unfortunate’, but actually, I think he is probably right.

My overriding memory of studying creative writing is of sitting in a room without air-con in high summer, listening to the ululating sound of my desk partner’s hearing aid, while we ‘workshopped’ passages from students’ opening chapters for three hours or so. All I could think of at the time was that I probably would have learned a lot more by rereading Tender Is the Night, or firing off submissions.

Of course, there’s something to be said for Gladwell’s “10,000 hours” maxim, or Beckett’s “fail again, fail better”; and practising something, if it doesn’t make perfect, will at least make for improvements. But do you really need to pay thousands of pounds a year for somebody to tell you that?

The people on my course were there because they wanted to write. But I don’t think wanting to write matters; all that matters is writing. There are plenty of people ”with a book in them”, but apparently not very many with a really good sub-four hour open-heart surgery in them.

The best things I learned, I learned outside of university: going to poetry open-mic nights, bouncing ideas off friends, getting in touch with writers I admired and asking for their advice; reading, reading more; writing, writing more. I was doing all of this before I set foot in university. I already knew about the Writers’ and Artists’ Yearbook; I knew about double-spacing manuscripts. This kind of information can be readily found online, or by reading interviews and profiles in journals and newspapers, or just by asking writers themselves.

When all of that exists, joining a creative writing course seems redundant. I would often be frustrated by being given a handout of writing tips that I could have just Googled, say, or a photocopied excerpt of Stephen King’s On Writing, which I had already read.

Advertisement

The other thing that impacts massively on the success of a course (any course) is the tutor and peer group. A key problem for a writing course is this: what if you read your tutor’s writing and decide you really don’t like it? Worse, that you think it’s bad? Then what? And what if you find yourself in a group with people whose writing is incredibly dull to you? You still have to dedicate hours of your time to their work, when the selfish truth is that you’re better off focusing on yours.

Still, there were many positives to my course. I met a lot of wonderful people, many of whom found the course useful and whose work I enjoyed, but in terms of becoming a better writer, I really don’t think it’s worth spending so much money on something that, with a bit of initiative and determination, you could do by yourself.

 

《奇摩新聞》2014-3-19

【編譯劉耘整理報導】

       據《衛報》報導,身為小說家及創意寫作教授的庫雷西(Hanif Kureishi)日前表示,創意寫作課根本是「浪費時間」,引起英國教育界討論。

       甫出道便以《郊區佛陀》(The Buddha of Suburbia)一書獲得惠特比文學獎小說首獎的庫雷西在去年秋季成為英國金士頓大學(Kingston University)教授,當時他表示「相當興奮能成為創意寫作學院的一分子」。

       然而,庫雷西日前在獨立巴斯文學節(Independent Bath Literature)演講時表示,他的學生中「可能有99.9%的學生根本沒天賦,只有剩下的那一點有些許才氣。」

靈感教不來 說故事更需磨練

「我的許多學生真的就是不會說故事。他們可以寫出句子,但卻不知道怎麼用這些句子組成一個故事,卻不讓觀眾看到一半就無聊而死。寫作是件難事,這需要很多技巧。你能教導這些嗎?我不認為你可以。」庫雷西表示。

       他解釋,許多學生並未真的了解故事本身才是最重要的事,他們老是擔心寫作技巧和行文,但根本沒人會因為作者的寫作技巧而讀一部小說,大家想知道的是故事接下來會怎麼發展。


       庫雷西說,他與他的學生得努力很久才有些許成果。「他們約在3年後開始活躍起來,並在5年後領悟了一些關於寫作的事。這是個很緩慢的過程,但當人們花上一個週末的時間參加寫作課時,總有人質疑:『有需要到一個週末嗎?』」

       庫雷西表示,他自己絕不會付錢去修習創意寫作學位。他在演講中告訴觀眾:「這簡直瘋了。我會找一個我自己認為對我有益的老師學習。寫作與上課無關。那些課程的最大問題就在於,有太多老師在上課了,而大部分老師都只會教一些浪費你時間的東西。」

學校制度不利創意思考

       在英國,人們學習創意寫作課程的管道有許多,而庫雷西不是唯一一個這麼想的作家。也曾擔任創意寫作教授的小說家艾爾曼(Lucy Ellmann)雖不同意庫雷西認為行文風格並不重要的看法,卻也同意教授創意寫作課程「是學術界最大的騙人職業(con-job)」。

        「整個體制是在讓作家噤聲並欺騙學生。就像庫雷西已清楚說明的一樣,學校甚至無法為作家提供一個無所顧慮的天堂,原因是多數大學都在用各自的方式摧毀作家,像是過多的行政規定、超時工作及其他荒謬的事情。此外,也有很多教師十分差勁,我就認識一些創意寫作教師甚至不會閱讀學生作品。這簡直是犯罪。」艾爾曼表示。

       「當然,現在這些已淪為企業的大學,目的就是要扼殺原創及異議之聲。大學已經從保存文化的機構變成了摧毀文化的機構,但人們卻每年付給這些專門摧毀文化的機構9千英鎊(約新台幣27萬元),確保任何有關文學的想法在進到他們腦袋前就被摧毀。」她說。

大量閱讀 尋求個別作家指導

        除了批評,艾爾曼也給予想學習寫作者一些建議。「若你真想寫作,你真正該做的事,是讀遍你所能拿到的好文學作品,越多越好,年復一年地讀,而不是浪費你大學中的大半時光,寫一些你尚未準備好要寫的東西。」她說。

       「一旦你做到這點,你所需要並且也值得的,就是來自個別作家的幫助,就像庫雷西說的。」她說:「在我看來,來就讀這門學科的數千位學生在不合格的老師下學習,真的是很可惜,有些教師甚至根本沒寫過小說。我也受不了作者強調他們擁有創意寫作學位。這又如何?這學位一文不值。」艾爾曼表示。

反對者:課程仍有助探索自身

       然而,在曼徹斯特大學教書的溫特森(Jeanette Winterson)不同意庫雷西的看法。她表示:「我的職責不是教導碩士生如何寫作,而是讓語言在他們面前炸開,好向他們展示,寫作同時是炸藥也是解藥,它能粉碎那些陳腔濫調和假說,並拆解種種現代生活中枯燥乏味的訊息。我的職責是改變他們與語言之間的關係。」
今年在傑瑞伍德小說新人獎(Jerwood Fiction Uncovered)擔任主持的卡斯克(Rachel Cusk)和小說家海格(Matt Haig)也支持傳統的創意寫作課程。

「創意寫作課程可以是非常有幫助的,就像音樂課可以很有助益一樣。

       像庫雷西那樣說99%的學生沒有天賦,不但殘忍,也是錯誤的。我相信某些作家傾向相信自己是帶著特殊且不可傳授的天賦來到世上,而這僅是出於他們的自負。」海格表示。

       「當然,知道你自身的限制向來都很重要。舉例來說,我可以去上7千堂吉他課,變得比我現在強上許多,但我不會因此成為亨利克斯(Hendrix)。如同大部分藝術表現一樣,寫作半靠直覺、半靠技藝;技藝這部分是可被教導的,且對很多作家來說,這能造就關鍵差異。」他說。

       海格的第一部小說就是由溫特森閱讀的,而他表示,她當時給他的建議至今仍受用無窮。

       「認為創意寫作課全然無用的想法,就像是認為所有編輯都沒有用處一樣愚蠢。不論何種程度的作家,都必能受益於給予其指導的建議。」海格說:「儘管我確實認為有些人永遠無法成為作家,就像有些人永遠無法成為建築師或網頁設計者一樣,但好的寫作課將能幫助你確認自己是否是個作家。」

WEBSITE:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2014/mar/05/hanif-kureishi-creative-writing-courses-waste-of-time

中文節錄轉譯,參考:

https://tw.news.yahoo.com/英教授-創意寫作課浪費時間-161548086.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 〔學好觀點〕

學好系統語文認為:

       真正的「創意練習」,目的從不在於訓練您的孩子成為「作家」,而應當是訓練您的孩子成為能夠靈活地「運用想像力」,用富含創意的表達力和理解力,完善他們所接觸的各個領域,成為一個「能夠說故事的人」。

「學好系統語文」的智能創意寫作不只不是浪費時間,更是幫助孩子理解自我天賦的最佳途徑!

2014-3-5

Hanif Kureishi has declared that creative writing courses are a waste of time and that most of the people enrolled are talentless (and as he teaches on one, presumably he should know). As an alumna of such a programme, I’d love to say that I was – what is it that politicians say? – ‘dismayed’ by his comments, or that they were ‘unfortunate’, but actually, I think he is probably right.

My overriding memory of studying creative writing is of sitting in a room without air-con in high summer, listening to the ululating sound of my desk partner’s hearing aid, while we ‘workshopped’ passages from students’ opening chapters for three hours or so. All I could think of at the time was that I probably would have learned a lot more by rereading Tender Is the Night, or firing off submissions.

Of course, there’s something to be said for Gladwell’s “10,000 hours” maxim, or Beckett’s “fail again, fail better”; and practising something, if it doesn’t make perfect, will at least make for improvements. But do you really need to pay thousands of pounds a year for somebody to tell you that?

The people on my course were there because they wanted to write. But I don’t think wanting to write matters; all that matters is writing. There are plenty of people ”with a book in them”, but apparently not very many with a really good sub-four hour open-heart surgery in them.

The best things I learned, I learned outside of university: going to poetry open-mic nights, bouncing ideas off friends, getting in touch with writers I admired and asking for their advice; reading, reading more; writing, writing more. I was doing all of this before I set foot in university. I already knew about the Writers’ and Artists’ Yearbook; I knew about double-spacing manuscripts. This kind of information can be readily found online, or by reading interviews and profiles in journals and newspapers, or just by asking writers themselves.

When all of that exists, joining a creative writing course seems redundant. I would often be frustrated by being given a handout of writing tips that I could have just Googled, say, or a photocopied excerpt of Stephen King’s On Writing, which I had already read.

Advertisement

The other thing that impacts massively on the success of a course (any course) is the tutor and peer group. A key problem for a writing course is this: what if you read your tutor’s writing and decide you really don’t like it? Worse, that you think it’s bad? Then what? And what if you find yourself in a group with people whose writing is incredibly dull to you? You still have to dedicate hours of your time to their work, when the selfish truth is that you’re better off focusing on yours.

Still, there were many positives to my course. I met a lot of wonderful people, many of whom found the course useful and whose work I enjoyed, but in terms of becoming a better writer, I really don’t think it’s worth spending so much money on something that, with a bit of initiative and determination, you could do by yourself.

 

《奇摩新聞》2014-3-19

【編譯劉耘整理報導】

       據《衛報》報導,身為小說家及創意寫作教授的庫雷西(Hanif Kureishi)日前表示,創意寫作課根本是「浪費時間」,引起英國教育界討論。

       甫出道便以《郊區佛陀》(The Buddha of Suburbia)一書獲得惠特比文學獎小說首獎的庫雷西在去年秋季成為英國金士頓大學(Kingston University)教授,當時他表示「相當興奮能成為創意寫作學院的一分子」。

       然而,庫雷西日前在獨立巴斯文學節(Independent Bath Literature)演講時表示,他的學生中「可能有99.9%的學生根本沒天賦,只有剩下的那一點有些許才氣。」

靈感教不來 說故事更需磨練

「我的許多學生真的就是不會說故事。他們可以寫出句子,但卻不知道怎麼用這些句子組成一個故事,卻不讓觀眾看到一半就無聊而死。寫作是件難事,這需要很多技巧。你能教導這些嗎?我不認為你可以。」庫雷西表示。

       他解釋,許多學生並未真的了解故事本身才是最重要的事,他們老是擔心寫作技巧和行文,但根本沒人會因為作者的寫作技巧而讀一部小說,大家想知道的是故事接下來會怎麼發展。


       庫雷西說,他與他的學生得努力很久才有些許成果。「他們約在3年後開始活躍起來,並在5年後領悟了一些關於寫作的事。這是個很緩慢的過程,但當人們花上一個週末的時間參加寫作課時,總有人質疑:『有需要到一個週末嗎?』」

       庫雷西表示,他自己絕不會付錢去修習創意寫作學位。他在演講中告訴觀眾:「這簡直瘋了。我會找一個我自己認為對我有益的老師學習。寫作與上課無關。那些課程的最大問題就在於,有太多老師在上課了,而大部分老師都只會教一些浪費你時間的東西。」

學校制度不利創意思考

       在英國,人們學習創意寫作課程的管道有許多,而庫雷西不是唯一一個這麼想的作家。也曾擔任創意寫作教授的小說家艾爾曼(Lucy Ellmann)雖不同意庫雷西認為行文風格並不重要的看法,卻也同意教授創意寫作課程「是學術界最大的騙人職業(con-job)」。

        「整個體制是在讓作家噤聲並欺騙學生。就像庫雷西已清楚說明的一樣,學校甚至無法為作家提供一個無所顧慮的天堂,原因是多數大學都在用各自的方式摧毀作家,像是過多的行政規定、超時工作及其他荒謬的事情。此外,也有很多教師十分差勁,我就認識一些創意寫作教師甚至不會閱讀學生作品。這簡直是犯罪。」艾爾曼表示。

       「當然,現在這些已淪為企業的大學,目的就是要扼殺原創及異議之聲。大學已經從保存文化的機構變成了摧毀文化的機構,但人們卻每年付給這些專門摧毀文化的機構9千英鎊(約新台幣27萬元),確保任何有關文學的想法在進到他們腦袋前就被摧毀。」她說。

大量閱讀 尋求個別作家指導

        除了批評,艾爾曼也給予想學習寫作者一些建議。「若你真想寫作,你真正該做的事,是讀遍你所能拿到的好文學作品,越多越好,年復一年地讀,而不是浪費你大學中的大半時光,寫一些你尚未準備好要寫的東西。」她說。

       「一旦你做到這點,你所需要並且也值得的,就是來自個別作家的幫助,就像庫雷西說的。」她說:「在我看來,來就讀這門學科的數千位學生在不合格的老師下學習,真的是很可惜,有些教師甚至根本沒寫過小說。我也受不了作者強調他們擁有創意寫作學位。這又如何?這學位一文不值。」艾爾曼表示。

反對者:課程仍有助探索自身

       然而,在曼徹斯特大學教書的溫特森(Jeanette Winterson)不同意庫雷西的看法。她表示:「我的職責不是教導碩士生如何寫作,而是讓語言在他們面前炸開,好向他們展示,寫作同時是炸藥也是解藥,它能粉碎那些陳腔濫調和假說,並拆解種種現代生活中枯燥乏味的訊息。我的職責是改變他們與語言之間的關係。」
今年在傑瑞伍德小說新人獎(Jerwood Fiction Uncovered)擔任主持的卡斯克(Rachel Cusk)和小說家海格(Matt Haig)也支持傳統的創意寫作課程。

「創意寫作課程可以是非常有幫助的,就像音樂課可以很有助益一樣。

       像庫雷西那樣說99%的學生沒有天賦,不但殘忍,也是錯誤的。我相信某些作家傾向相信自己是帶著特殊且不可傳授的天賦來到世上,而這僅是出於他們的自負。」海格表示。

       「當然,知道你自身的限制向來都很重要。舉例來說,我可以去上7千堂吉他課,變得比我現在強上許多,但我不會因此成為亨利克斯(Hendrix)。如同大部分藝術表現一樣,寫作半靠直覺、半靠技藝;技藝這部分是可被教導的,且對很多作家來說,這能造就關鍵差異。」他說。

       海格的第一部小說就是由溫特森閱讀的,而他表示,她當時給他的建議至今仍受用無窮。

       「認為創意寫作課全然無用的想法,就像是認為所有編輯都沒有用處一樣愚蠢。不論何種程度的作家,都必能受益於給予其指導的建議。」海格說:「儘管我確實認為有些人永遠無法成為作家,就像有些人永遠無法成為建築師或網頁設計者一樣,但好的寫作課將能幫助你確認自己是否是個作家。」

WEBSITE:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2014/mar/05/hanif-kureishi-creative-writing-courses-waste-of-time

中文節錄轉譯,參考:

https://tw.news.yahoo.com/英教授-創意寫作課浪費時間-161548086.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 〔學好觀點〕

學好系統語文認為:

       真正的「創意練習」,目的從不在於訓練您的孩子成為「作家」,而應當是訓練您的孩子成為能夠靈活地「運用想像力」,用富含創意的表達力和理解力,完善他們所接觸的各個領域,成為一個「能夠說故事的人」。

「學好系統語文」的智能創意寫作不只不是浪費時間,更是幫助孩子理解自我天賦的最佳途徑!