Brandon’s Reviews > The Anti-Racist Writing Workshop: How To Decolonize the Creative Classroom > Status Update

I’m torn by the simplicity of-isms. Some of the most interesting battles I saw in academia were between people who came from the same protected categories, but I’ll save those. On the plus side, Chavez’ system advocates frequency and the oral element (144, 174). Granting “Permissioned Opinions” (138) might require more compassion than practical efficacy.

When Chavez writes about “the hardships of writing” (172)), she reminds me of Cameron’s “Discovering a Sense of Resiliency” (173-203) in Walking in This World. Comrades who can direct you to the right exercise for specific difficulty are good sources.

Chavez writes, “You try as hard as you can to listen,” without really delving into why listening is trying. If a character is “protected,” when should the instructor say so? When should a professor profess?

The Lerman Critical Response Process has 4 steps: audience states meaning, writer asks about craft, audience asks neutral Qs, audience asks permission to offer prescriptive opinions.

Policies for getting from critique to craft:question awareness and question questioners.

Differentiate open and closed questions.

1) write by hand
2) stand & read
3) everyone participates for context
4) author talks about process & goals in specific words
5) other participants respond in specific words

Trying to place her memoir about her regrettable mentoring into my own context. Is Chapter 3’s takeaway that “today’s students expect our camaraderie” (89), not our authority as mentors?

After 10-minute freewrite, the 10-minute “quick-revising” process.

How does “power of frequency” transform into power of growth? Reflection of “reading work aloud.”