GOOD READING FEEDS GOOD WRITING:
AN INTERVIEW WITH GEORGE VENN
by Donald Wolff • 22 Feb. 1999 (Revised 3/9/99)
George Venn (GV), Eastern Oregon University’s Writer-in-Residence, is the English/Writing Program's historical consciousness. Widely-published in criticism, poetry, culture studies, and western American literature, he has been an active member of the Oregon Council of Teachers of English, serving as General Editor of their nationally-acclaimed six-volume Oregon Literature Series. He has taught English as a Foreign Language in Ecuador, Spain, and China, becoming in the process fluent in Spanish. Venn has worked countless times as a writer in the schools and was the first to advocate establishing an Oregon Writing Project site at Eastern (OWP).
The following interview with Prof. Venn conducted by OWP Director Donald Wolff (DW) was occasioned by a professional reflection on the English/Writing Program’s emphasis on the connections among Literary Studies, Rhetoric, Creative Writing, Composition Studies, and English Education, eschewing as it does the usual academic tensions obtaining in many English departments nationally. The interview was part of a larger piece that included interviews with the program’s other faculty. Unfortunately, that essay was rejected by “College English” for being too “positive.”
The following interview with Prof. Venn conducted by OWP Director Donald Wolff (DW) was occasioned by a professional reflection on the English/Writing Program’s emphasis on the connections among Literary Studies, Rhetoric, Creative Writing, Composition Studies, and English Education, eschewing as it does the usual academic tensions obtaining in many English departments nationally. The interview was part of a larger piece that included interviews with the program’s other faculty. Unfortunately, that essay was rejected by “College English” for being too “positive.”
DW: You are an accomplished poet, essayist, and literary scholar, dedicated to teaching English as a Second Language (ESL) and first-year composition. How do you account for this range of interests?
GV: Since 1976 Eastern's program has recognized Composition–thanks to the leadership of now Professor Emeritus Lois Barry—a distinct discipline. Our faculty has always sought new members willing and able to teach both their specialties and first-year courses. With one or two exceptions, faculty have always been trained in both literature and writing; new faculty arrive with the understanding that they would be teaching both every term. In such circumstances, it is difficult to develop an antagonism against those “over there.”
DW: So, composition and general education courses were never a “class issue” in our program?
GV: That’s right. We built on a collaboration of generalists with mutual responsibility for the whole curriculum. Of course, this carries over into English Education, and one fruit of this collaborative effort was the multi-track BA in English—Literature, Writing, and Discourse Studies.
DW: I remember developing Discourse Studies as a concentration in our major when my directorship of the Oregon Writing Project was new. It reflected my own conference presentations and publications in most of the sub-disciplines that comprise English Studies and that I thought future secondary English teachers should be introduced to and practice.
GV: So, you remember that for the Discourse Studies track, we included courses in all three disciplines, as well as applied linguistics. While serving those interested in English Education for secondary English teaching, Discourse Studies became the program’s fastest growing concentration, appealing to English majors who do not draw arbitrary distinctions among these facets of English Studies.
DW: While English Studies is by nature cross-disciplinary, you seem pleased by this diverse emphasis in the program. Does it appeal because of your own academic experiences?
GV: My own background is that of a confirmed generalist. In my first two years of college, I was not sure of a focus, taking courses in acting, journalism, music, theatre, literature, composition, and Spanish, as well as performing in the choir while matriculating on an athletic scholarship. I spent my third year in Latin America, where Spanish and daily cross-cultural experience showed me how writing, music, literature, politics, education, and history were all held together by language.
DW: Did you continue to pursue this broad perspective?
GV: I spent a similar year in Spain and England, teaching English as a Foreign Language and attending the University of Salamanca and City Literary Institute, London. In graduate school I continued the same pattern, completing courses equal to an MA while also completing an MFA, and taking graduate courses in linguistics, history, Spanish, philosophy, and ecology. You can't be a beekeeper—as I was trained—and not see the world holistically.
DW: How does your approach to your own creative and scholarly work and to your personal pedagogy reflect this confirmed generalist emphasis?
GV: This holistic vision guides my teaching and writing and reflects our program. A narrow vision—the vision of the specialist—can become arcane and esoteric, so we also need to welcome diversity, breadth, range—as even MLA discovered when it recently revised its editorial policy. I try to cultivate a Renaissance perspective. Thinking ecologically about the aspects of English Studies, I recognize that English Studies, including English Education, is comprised of mutually-nurturing and interdependent disciplines all connected to a common center–language. This organic inclusivity also enables and enhances my various outreach activities, including conducting creative writing workshops off campus for the general public, for younger students in OWP’s Student Writer's Workshop, and for teachers in OWP's Summer Teaching Institute.
DW: So you see no rewards for antagonism or condescension among the sub-disciplines that comprise English, especially literature and writing?
GV: It's so obvious that good reading feeds good writing–and vice versa. As a teacher and writer, I—at any given time—may want to turn from critical academic writing to my own poems, personal essays, and stories, then—at any given time—go back to some formal more scholarly piece again. As a faculty, we attempt to represent this vision of the essential complementarity of literature and writing, so obvious in the schools.
DW: Did the administration agree to institutionalize this vision?
GV: They welcomed the change to the multi-track major and Discourse Studies. When this unity is encouraged, we hope that our students have the broadest, most balanced, most coherent preparation in both major disciplines—literature and writing—so important for those going into teaching—and everyone else in English Studies.
DW: Is there anything you want to add?
GV: I want to thank you for advocating the Discourse Studies track in our program. It wouldn’t have happened without your support and the support of the National Writing Project.
DW: Thank you. I am fortunate to have a home in a program distinguished by a remarkable commonality of purpose and a vibrant community of interests—all too rare in academic culture.
Venn, George. Personal interview. 22 Feb. 1999. (Revised 3/9/99)
GV: Since 1976 Eastern's program has recognized Composition–thanks to the leadership of now Professor Emeritus Lois Barry—a distinct discipline. Our faculty has always sought new members willing and able to teach both their specialties and first-year courses. With one or two exceptions, faculty have always been trained in both literature and writing; new faculty arrive with the understanding that they would be teaching both every term. In such circumstances, it is difficult to develop an antagonism against those “over there.”
DW: So, composition and general education courses were never a “class issue” in our program?
GV: That’s right. We built on a collaboration of generalists with mutual responsibility for the whole curriculum. Of course, this carries over into English Education, and one fruit of this collaborative effort was the multi-track BA in English—Literature, Writing, and Discourse Studies.
DW: I remember developing Discourse Studies as a concentration in our major when my directorship of the Oregon Writing Project was new. It reflected my own conference presentations and publications in most of the sub-disciplines that comprise English Studies and that I thought future secondary English teachers should be introduced to and practice.
GV: So, you remember that for the Discourse Studies track, we included courses in all three disciplines, as well as applied linguistics. While serving those interested in English Education for secondary English teaching, Discourse Studies became the program’s fastest growing concentration, appealing to English majors who do not draw arbitrary distinctions among these facets of English Studies.
DW: While English Studies is by nature cross-disciplinary, you seem pleased by this diverse emphasis in the program. Does it appeal because of your own academic experiences?
GV: My own background is that of a confirmed generalist. In my first two years of college, I was not sure of a focus, taking courses in acting, journalism, music, theatre, literature, composition, and Spanish, as well as performing in the choir while matriculating on an athletic scholarship. I spent my third year in Latin America, where Spanish and daily cross-cultural experience showed me how writing, music, literature, politics, education, and history were all held together by language.
DW: Did you continue to pursue this broad perspective?
GV: I spent a similar year in Spain and England, teaching English as a Foreign Language and attending the University of Salamanca and City Literary Institute, London. In graduate school I continued the same pattern, completing courses equal to an MA while also completing an MFA, and taking graduate courses in linguistics, history, Spanish, philosophy, and ecology. You can't be a beekeeper—as I was trained—and not see the world holistically.
DW: How does your approach to your own creative and scholarly work and to your personal pedagogy reflect this confirmed generalist emphasis?
GV: This holistic vision guides my teaching and writing and reflects our program. A narrow vision—the vision of the specialist—can become arcane and esoteric, so we also need to welcome diversity, breadth, range—as even MLA discovered when it recently revised its editorial policy. I try to cultivate a Renaissance perspective. Thinking ecologically about the aspects of English Studies, I recognize that English Studies, including English Education, is comprised of mutually-nurturing and interdependent disciplines all connected to a common center–language. This organic inclusivity also enables and enhances my various outreach activities, including conducting creative writing workshops off campus for the general public, for younger students in OWP’s Student Writer's Workshop, and for teachers in OWP's Summer Teaching Institute.
DW: So you see no rewards for antagonism or condescension among the sub-disciplines that comprise English, especially literature and writing?
GV: It's so obvious that good reading feeds good writing–and vice versa. As a teacher and writer, I—at any given time—may want to turn from critical academic writing to my own poems, personal essays, and stories, then—at any given time—go back to some formal more scholarly piece again. As a faculty, we attempt to represent this vision of the essential complementarity of literature and writing, so obvious in the schools.
DW: Did the administration agree to institutionalize this vision?
GV: They welcomed the change to the multi-track major and Discourse Studies. When this unity is encouraged, we hope that our students have the broadest, most balanced, most coherent preparation in both major disciplines—literature and writing—so important for those going into teaching—and everyone else in English Studies.
DW: Is there anything you want to add?
GV: I want to thank you for advocating the Discourse Studies track in our program. It wouldn’t have happened without your support and the support of the National Writing Project.
DW: Thank you. I am fortunate to have a home in a program distinguished by a remarkable commonality of purpose and a vibrant community of interests—all too rare in academic culture.
Venn, George. Personal interview. 22 Feb. 1999. (Revised 3/9/99)