I'm writing an essay for uni at the moment about writing. As a class, we're looking at the definition of writing, and wondering whether or not it needs to be expanded. We're examining the process of writing, and how writing is taught in classrooms.
For me, being a writer, this is fascinating research (and if you happen to be interested in it too, a lot of my thoughts are over at Inky Ponderances). I am fortunate enough to belong to a fantabulous community of writers *waves to you all* and have had several years of experience in developing and reflecting on my own writing practices.
But I'm still left wondering about a few things. Writing: what is it, really? It's a noun, and a verb all at the same time: it refers to the end result, the thing we create, and also to the process of creation. If we can talk these days about 'reading' various types of texts - like a reading of a film, for example - can we talk about 'writing' various types of texts - like 'writing' a painting?
And I'm curious: so much of my own learning about writing has been about process. The Think Sideways course I took, the discussions I have with my writing friends on writing - all of this is aimed at evaluating how I write - although learning the art of critiquing has also been an invaluable skill, and that's to do with looking at the end result.
Fascinating questions, and I'm interested to know what you think: What constitutes writing? For you, personally, is it more about the process or the end result? In learning to 'be' a writer, have you found it more beneficial to concentrate on learning the process or the end product?
Talk to me. Let me know what you think.
One final thought: regardless of the definition that we ultimately choose, there's one thing that we can never divorce from it. Something that, as writers of fiction, we can't afford to forget.
Writing always has a purpose, and that purpose is to communicate. Who are you communicating to? Why? And what, underneath everything, are you trying to say?