Lunsford and Ede

Lunsford and Ede’s discussion on women and collaboration was short albeit very enlightening. They bring up the terms “hierarchical” and “dialogic” as types of collaboration.  They describe dialogic collaboration as, “loosely structured” and “roles enacted within it are fluid; one ‘person’ may occupy multiple and shifting roles as the project progresses” (275). I as I read the description I asked, what’s so wrong with that? It sounds like great way to collaborate. Lunsford and Ede talked to two professional groups on how they viewed collaboration and women were much more likely to describe a dialogic collaboration. They therefore deem it the “other” and that it is “predominantly feminine.” As for hierarchical, those who responded said they felt it that this type of collaborative writing was “efficient and productive if sometimes unsatisfying” and they called it “’the way things are’” (227). This brings up a question we have already discussed in class before, but I think it begs more attention, why do people shy away from dialogic collaboration? Why is it viewed as not scholarly and not legitimate work? Lunsford and Ede clearly wanted readers to take collaboration more seriously, and to take dialogic collaboration as a legitimate writing strategy.

What really got my mind turning were the examples on page 277 which showed the stand-by singular author construct is what our minds are stuck on. I found myself outraged and even writing “WTF!?” in the margin next to the stories. These anecdotes were ridiculous, they were punishing collaboration as if it were illegal or immoral. The first one, regarding the poem written by three students, did not make sense; you would think out of all the departments at a university, an English department would respect the concept of collaboration. If the three students each wrote their own poems, would they have been as good as the one they wrote together? What if each person brought different things to the poem that made it so great that caused them to win the contest?

Lunsford and Ede also bring women writers in the discussion, mentioning that women writers are more likely to write collaboratively. In a patriarchal society, women writing collaboratively must look like they need “help” to write. Other than that, I cannot give an explanation as to why women are called “writers” and not authors and collaborative writing is seen as less authorial.

Questions:

            Is collaborative writing considered lesser than individually written texts because women prefer it? Is there a stigma attached to collaborative writing that makes it undesirable?

            In what ways could collaborative authors help to make this type of writing to be considered more valuable?