The Elephants Teach: Creative Writing Since 1880

by D.G. Myers

This book traces the development of "creative" writing as a classroom subject, the teaching of fiction- and verse-writing; and as a national system for the employment of fiction writers and poets to teach the subject. It answers the questions, "Why has fiction and verse writing come to be called creative?" and "When and why was this term first used?"

Genres: Nonfiction, Writing

240 pages, Paperback

First published July 1, 1995

Reviews

[J.S.A. Lowe · Rating 2 out of 5]

For a book about the institutionalization of creative writing, astonishingly dull. The worst are these Homeric catalogues of people's names, just their names and their university affiliations, for whole paragraphs. Also, it's sexist. Also, did I mention it's boring.

[Paul · Rating 3 out of 5]

The penultimate and ultimate paragraphs of the afterword lift D. G. Meyers' laborious, scholarly piece of literary criticism up Jacob's ladder from three stars into higher ground: a fourth star appears, shining forth under the kingdom of heaven's banner and banqueting table of love incarnate, love come down. However, upon further reflection and rumination, the fourth star disappears for two reasons: Meyers seems to repeat the mistakes of modernism without directly addressing and considering the pressing problems that postmodernism presents between "You and I" but instead simplifies subjectivity and objectivity as mere dichotomy. Allow me to quote this lit critic's ultimatum in its entirety: "Creative writing might offer another kind of knowledge, teaching how the strongest stories construct human possibility, but to do so it would have to abandon subjective satisfaction as the sole measure of creative accomplishment and begin to answer to objective facts outside the self, where other people might possibly live. Again, the best writers already know this. When an outstanding novelist who teaches in a front-rank writing program separates herself from the prevailing ethos to affirm values anchored in an ultimate reality, she is less likely to write essays about creative writing than to reclaim human civilization by returning to "the idea that people have souls, and that they have certain obligations to them, and certain pleasures in them," because she is concerned to begin the process of reform at a much more basic level. And that may finally be the problem. Creative writing may not be able to reform itself from within. A value system that transcends the subjective needs of individual expression may be necessary to produce good writers or even public intellectuals. In the mean time, the workshops will go on." As an addendum, afterthought, short answer, and suggestive antidote to the postmodernist problem of creative writing, Meyers alludes to essayist and novelist Marilynne Robinson as one of today's boldest and brightest lights, one of modernity's most resplendent reformers of creative writing. There are also others writing on and underground.

[Zelda Godsey-Kellogg · Rating 3 out of 5]

pretty funny at points and definitely a deft analysis of the history of the term creative writing itself, but i wish it dealt with contemporary workshop spaces more. it did some in the afterword, but since (as he, begrudgingly, rightly, states) his is the first work of his kind in the field of the “sociology of literature”. creative writing wasn’t so self-referential at the time. the subjective expressionism intrinsic to the discipline itself prevents any sort of alternative pedagogies relating to the subject and, thus, there is little to go off of. a good companion/precursor to mark mcgurl’s the program era, even if his analysis was more two-sided then it was nuanced/dialectic.

[Mary · Rating 5 out of 5]

What an extremely useful book! The last chapter especially will be helpful for my project with the establishment of a professionalized discipline, but it's very useful as well to be reminded of Barrett Wendell's influence in comp and in creative writing. Also interesting to see the history of creative writing instruction develop from economic possibility with few teachers, to lots of teachers and almost no economic pay off. This history shows a lot of that "cleaving"--with literary studies, with philology, with composition. Rock star quotes: "What had begun as an alternative to the schimatizing of literary study had ended as merely another schism" (168). "writers were becoming professionalized in the more usual sense of the term: they were less worried about the opinion of outsiders, including common readers, and more concerns witht he judgment of their fellow writers" (147).

[Laurel Perez · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book thought dry at times, provides a fantastic look at how and why we teach creative writing the way we have in the past, when we didn't, and how we do now. Very thought provoking, and I think an important book for English instructors to read. (First read through December 4, 2013)


***Upon re-reading a little over a year later, I still stand by what I said in the above review. Though, I think it was perhaps even drier this time around.

[Destroydecay · Rating 1 out of 5]

There's a lot of bias in the book towards creative writing and a larger focus on criticism and creative reading. I don't feel as if I've learned much through reading this book. Additionally, a lot of it was repetitive, circular, and could very well be condensed.

[Hannah Spencer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Can't say I read it very carefully. I should probably read it more carefully one day. The history of creative writing is definitely important to consider, especially if we want to think about the future of the creative writing program.

[Christie · Rating 3 out of 5]

As far as I know, this is the only book of its kind. So, the info within is valuable. However, it's unduly boring, mostly bc it's about 75 pages longer than it needed to be -- lots of repetition and inconsequential details.

[Tal · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

[Brandi]

Discusses a tired idea in a dull way. Lists a ton of names, to no interesting end (what could possibly be interesting about such a list). Sexist. Hard to slog through.