Peter Elbow's Argument for Ignoring Audience
Peter Elbow writes in his article, "Closing My Eyes As I Speak: An Argument for Ignoring Audience", how audience awareness suppresses creativity and personal intuition in writing. He notes that in most instances, his mind would go blank while trying to address an audience, but when he closes his eyes, he is able to think clearly. This reaction, as he has noted in many other speakers or writers, is an illustration of how the audience can hinder one's creative ability. Thus, he proposes the strategies through which the audience can be blocked from the mind in order to allow free thought: limited claims and ambitious claims. Considering the author's argument, it is important that writers deemphasize their audience in order to have free thought without any form of coercion.
Limited and Ambitious Claims
Both limited and more ambitious claims validate the argument of individualism for free thinking. Considering limited claim, Elbow argues that ignoring the audience may result in better writing. According to the author, "There are certain people who always make us feel dumb when we try to speak to them: we can't find words or thoughts" (Elbow 1987, p. 51). Writers get confused by the audience who end up shaping their thoughts. The more ambitious claim posits that a writer-based prose is always better than a reader-based prose thereby suggesting the need to ignore the audience. Thus, if writers are free from any entanglement, they are able to write interesting expressive, descriptive writings. The author notes that, "the voice that emerges when we ignore audience is sometimes odd or idiosyncratic in some way, but usually it is stronger" (Elbow 1987, p. 55). By ignoring the audience, the voice and tone of the writing also improves. The author, therefore, proposes the need to ignore the audience altogether; this can help dissipate confusion.
The Importance of Deemphasizing the Audience
It is true, as stated by the author, that deemphasizing the audience than aid in creativity and critical writing. Considering the audience strains one's reasoning since all the generated ideas tends to be shaped on the audience needs (Elbow, 1987). Personally my thoughts are always limited, particularly in a classroom wetting when my professor expects me to address a particular audience. Rather than thinking freely, I would always ensure the writing considers a tone, content, and voice that are appealing to the audience demands. This idea has been supported by Kuhi et al. (2014) who found in their study that specifying the audience before writing creates the opportunity of considering the expectations and needs of the audience during the writing process. This leads the writers to discussing their ideas in a manner that facilitates understanding of the audience.
Disputing the Argument
The above argument, however, may be disputed by authors who believe that freedom in thought may actually be a hindrance to writer creativity and considering of relevant ideas. Some scholars believe that the actual involvement of the audience is essential in directing the overall worldview, and that deemphasizing the audience would mean encouraging consumerism. According to Biocca (1988), "freedom and consumerism had been integrally joined in the American psyche." Promoting freedom of choice among writers is a cornucopia of consumerists who prefer individualism. The author, thus, argues that having a passive audience may not only promote "consumerism" behavior, but also further limit the thoughts of a writer.
Refuting Arguments against Deemphasizing the Audience
However, Biocca's argument can still be argued using the Elbow's concepts. Unlike Biocca's ideology of consumerism as the basis for writers' selfish need of audience seclusion, Elbow believes that writers can only think clearly when they separate themselves from the audience. The Vygotskian model, as proposed by Elbow, acknowledges the need to be "alone" in order to be able to produce clear and good thinking. The mental life can be enhanced gradually through learning, growth, and practice. Those who learn to think about ideas are able to sustain and train their thoughts to individually think over the years. By relying on the audience, many students remain unable to think for themselves or possess innovative skills. Thus, deemphasizing the audience can greatly improve the cognitive abilities of writers who get a writing experience without coercion.
Conclusion
In summary, writers should always consider deemphasizing their audience whenever they want to develop a personal writing. The author expresses his concern of the possible coercion by the audience to think towards certain lines. By using both limited and ambitious claims, Elbow is able to prove that writers get distracted whenever they think of their audience. Some scholars may refute the idea that the audience may coerce a writer towards a different thought. As noted, Biocca argues that writers should be constrained; otherwise they end up developing a consumerism ideology rather than freedom. Although this argument might hold ground for certain writers, it is a fact that with freedom of writing, individuals can think widely without any limitations. This idea is further supported by teachers who suggest that students who are given freedom to write are always more creative than those who develop their essays through instructions.
References
Biocca, F. A. (1988). Opposing conceptions of the audience: The active and passive hemisphere of mass communication theory. In J. Anderson (Ed.), Communication yearbook, 11 (pp. 51-80). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Elbow, P. (1987). Closing my eyes as I speak: An argument for ignoring audience. College English, 49(1), 50-69.
Kuhi, D., Asadollahfam, H., " Amin, S. (2014). An investigation of the effect of audience awareness-raising on EFL learners’ use of interpersonal resources in essay writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1016-1025.
