I think Richard's summary is an excellent one.

What has long struck me - and not meaning to sound haughty, because I  
alluded to this earlier and repeating this point might sound that way  
- is that while we have widely investigated and debated the nature of  
critical tools in the fields of History and Biology, Sociology and  
Mathemathics, indeed Musicology and Aesthetics (and so on and so on),  
we have not done so, widely, in the field of Creative Writing.

Some might say that, of course, we have done this via literary  
analysis - but so very very much in-and-of Creative Writing (eg. the  
acts and actions; the knowledge bases; the methods, ecetera) is not of  
a literary nature.

Similarly, so much Creative Writing is not readily visible to  
readers/audiences (eg. most of our writerly acts and actions; and 99%  
of all Creative Writing undertaken [ie. the Creative Writing of the  
"unpublished"], and so on.

Does that make this kind of thing *not* Creative Writing?

Naturally, it doesn't - any more than not revealing/publishing the  
results of a Chemistry experiment, or a Sociological survey, would  
make those things any less Chemistry or Sociology.

So, if we're to ask PhD students to offer a "commentary"  -- and, of  
course, Matthew, you might know I favour the word "response", rather  
than commentary, others favour "reflection", some faviour "exegesis",  
among various other things folks favour! -- then, to my mind, this  
"commentary" should be about Creative Writing.

Thus . . .  how we talk about Creative Writing (eg. as a set of  
actions; as a field; as a cultural phenomenon - the list could go on)  
is the contribution to the field that a PhD "commentary" can explore.

Because Creative Writing always combines the individualist/personal  
and the holist/societal/cultural, in some way or other, the  
"commentary" offers an opportunity to draw on a range of knowledge  
that highlights how higher learning can involve genuine human  
engagement with the world in a direct/immediate way, as well as  
organised understanding, as seen in 20th/21st Century university  
disciplines and "marshalled" fields of knowledge.

The choice of combination - individual writer/holist knowledge - is  
established by the creative writer's sense of their own practice as  
acts/actions and as evidence of their range of understanding.

A PhD creative writer can, thus, do much via their "commentary" to add  
to our sense and understanding of Creative Writing.

All exciting stuff!

Graeme





-- 
Professor Graeme Harper  ¦ Yr Athro Graeme Harper BA MLitt DCA PhD FRGS FRSA
Arts and Innovation      ¦ www.bangor.ac.uk/artsandinnovation/index.php.cy?
Bangor University        ¦ www.bangor.ac.uk/artsandinnovation/
Director of Research,CAH ¦ Ymchwil: Coleg y Celfyddydau a'r Dyniaethau
NIECI, Bangor University ¦ Cyfarwyddwr, CREAD, Prifysgol Bangor
www.graemeharper.com     ¦ www.nieci.org.uk
Out Now: www.creativewritingguidebook.com - www.creativewritingstudies.com

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.


-- 
Gall y neges e-bost hon, ac unrhyw atodiadau a anfonwyd gyda hi,
gynnwys deunydd cyfrinachol ac wedi eu bwriadu i'w defnyddio'n unig
gan y sawl y cawsant eu cyfeirio ato (atynt). Os ydych wedi derbyn y
neges e-bost hon trwy gamgymeriad, rhowch wybod i'r anfonwr ar
unwaith a dilëwch y neges. Os na fwriadwyd anfon y neges atoch chi,
rhaid i chi beidio â defnyddio, cadw neu ddatgelu unrhyw wybodaeth a
gynhwysir ynddi. Mae unrhyw farn neu safbwynt yn eiddo i'r sawl a'i
hanfonodd yn unig  ac nid yw o anghenraid yn cynrychioli barn
Prifysgol Bangor. Nid yw Prifysgol Bangor yn gwarantu
bod y neges e-bost hon neu unrhyw atodiadau yn rhydd rhag firysau neu
100% yn ddiogel. Oni bai fod hyn wedi ei ddatgan yn uniongyrchol yn
nhestun yr e-bost, nid bwriad y neges e-bost hon yw ffurfio contract
rhwymol - mae rhestr o lofnodwyr awdurdodedig ar gael o Swyddfa
Cyllid Prifysgol Bangor.  www.bangor.ac.uk

This email and any attachments may contain confidential material and
is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s).  If you have
received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete this email.  If you are not the intended recipient(s), you
must not use, retain or disclose any information contained in this
email.  Any views or opinions are solely those of the sender and do
not necessarily represent those of the Bangor University.
Bangor University does not guarantee that this email or
any attachments are free from viruses or 100% secure.  Unless
expressly stated in the body of the text of the email, this email is
not intended to form a binding contract - a list of authorised
signatories is available from the Bangor University Finance
Office.  www.bangor.ac.uk