Ronda Leathers Dively—retired Southern Illinois University Rhetoric and Composition Professor and writing program administrator—is the author of Preludes to Insight: Creativity, Incubation and Expository Writing (Hampton Press, 2006), Invention and Craft: A Guide to College Writing (McGraw-Hill, Inc., 2016) and Creativity and the Paris Review Interviews: A Discourse Analysis of Famous Authors’ Composing Practices (Anthem Press, 2022). In addition, she has written numerous articles on expository writing pedagogy and writing program administration.
- What inspired you to embark on the journey of researching and authoring your latest book, Invention and Craft, Second Edition? Why did you consider this subject/topic and what impact do you hope it will achieve?
Invention and Craft was inspired by my experiences as a student and as a new teacher grappling with the question of why writing comes relatively easily for some people while others struggle with it so significantly. Don’t get me wrong—writing is never easy in some objective sense, but, for me, it was a much more comfortable discipline than, say, algebra or computer programming. It pained me to watch peers and, later, students working so hard to improve the quality of their written communication with little reward, and I wanted to help. Toward that end, Invention and Craft is the expression of what I’ve learned about writing and writing instruction through thirty years of teaching personal, public and academic discourses at the secondary, undergraduate and graduate levels. During this time, I immersed myself in scholarship on best practices in my field and empirically tested instructional strategies prompted by my growing knowledge. I hope that, in this textbook, students will find motivation for writing sparked by the human need to create, as well as incentive to keep learning about and practicing the craft with the goal of continual improvement.
- Could you walk us through your writing process for this book? Were there particular challenges or obstacles you had to overcome? How would you characterise your approach to the writing process for this work, from concept to completion?
Since writing/creative processes have been my research focus for the past twenty years, I inevitably and regularly found myself reflecting on my own composing practices while engaged with Invention and Craft, from inception through second edition. But in light of the fact that this is a blog post with space limitations, I will concentrate my commentary on the second edition. To be sure, it presented some unique challenges because it was largely an exercise in revising/updating as opposed to developing and elaborating initial insights, which is the most exciting aspect of composing for me. Nevertheless, my methodical approach to all types and phases of writing carried me through the more tedious work of locating and securing permissions for model essays, clarifying my prose, editing for errors that might have slipped into the text during revision, proofreading for consistency in redesigned figures and tables and modifying the index.
My first objective was to think through the table of contents to determine if any major restructuring was in order. My second objective was to identify dated model essays (I did reserve some classics) and locate their replacements so I could initiate the permissions process, which always takes time. While waiting for permissions, I began carefully reviewing the first five chapters relevant to points of revision beyond essay substitution. Because these chapters lay the groundwork referenced time and again in later chapters, beginning with them helped reify the theoretical underpinnings of the book so that I could anticipate focuses for revision farther into the manuscript.
Simultaneously to these early stages of revising, I awaited correspondence from the editorial team and external reviewers about a couple of substantive alterations I was considering. As a result of these exchanges, I decided to eliminate a chapter (near the end of the first edition) on document design and to expand Chapter 1 with a section on AI and writing. The latter required me to shore up my knowledge in that area and became especially motivating because it presented a fresh generative challenge. Once I was content with Chapters 1-5, I proceeded, as is my nature, in lockstep fashion through the remaining nineteen chapters, annotating new (by that time permissioned) model essays where relevant, attending to feedback from reviewers on some minor issues and editing for accuracy and consistency in design.
When the manuscript felt complete in terms of substance, I proofread it straight-through a couple of times. Thanks to that extra effort, I believed that it was in good shape, so I submitted it in happy anticipation of the page proofs. Upon receiving the proofs, I noticed some glitches (apparently caused by software conversions) that compelled additional editing, primarily on the figures and tables. Once the design team and I addressed these glitches and the book’s pagination was set, I updated the index, engaged in a few more rounds of proofreading and then turned the manuscript over for production.
- In the course of your research or writing, what findings or insights most surprised you?
As mentioned in my previous reflections, while preparing to update this textbook, I needed to consider the current impact of AI on writing and writing instruction. With a reassuring level of agreement, experts in this area confirmed my instincts that composition courses remain essential to college curricula given AI’s many limitations, at least in its current form. Their work collectively emphasizes that text-generating artificial intelligence at this juncture is best utilized as a tool, not a substitute for human critical thought and emotional intelligence. Such revelations are especially germane to my textbook’s focus on invention and creativity (i.e., formulating ideas and insights to share), where the “human element” is most prominently on display, particularly in expository writing. Even with regard to the more perfunctory aspects of producing and editing expository writing—such as spelling, grammar, usage, source documentation, etc.—AI divorced from conscientious human oversight will, more often than not, disappoint both writer and audience(s) or, more seriously, commit breaches that can get writers into trouble. Despite its ills, text-generating AI holds great promise for supporting writers in various ways, and both its strengths and weaknesses are surveyed in the textbook, the goal being to help students apply it most effectively.
- Which writers, scholars, or thinkers have most influenced your work?
To single out a few individuals as having contributed more than anyone else to this project would be somewhat misleading. Invention and Craft represents a complex euphony of voices that includes scholars in rhetoric and composition and psychology (particularly creativity theory), famous authors who have published reflections on their own creative practices and, of course, thousands of former students whose hard work, insights and good will enabled my research. I will mention, though, that I made a significant leap forward in thinking about my classroom strategies and research agenda when, as a doctoral candidate in rhetoric and composition, I began filtering my knowledge of writing and writing pedagogy through the lens of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience and the subsequent Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. His work was my gateway into an interdisciplinary world of possibility that I explored extensively over the next couple of decades in search of links between writing and other forms of meaning-making, both artistic and scientific.
- Looking ahead, what areas of research or writing do you intend to focus on next?
Having recently retired from a thirty-year career in education that necessitated focusing my reading and writing efforts on scholarly prose, I plan to pursue several projects outside my field that I delayed over concern that time spent on them would distract from my teaching and undermine my bids for promotion. In fact, I’ve already begun composing a memoir on my and my husband’s decision to remain childless after several attempts to become parents—a work I hope will prove illuminating for those facing similar life choices. Further, I have started compiling research for an historical account of women’s auxiliary organizations in the context of prominent labor unions, a study rooted in the experiences of my paternal grandmother. I would also like to revisit some poetry I have dabbled with over the years, and I am considering writing a children’s book based on our life with a deaf Airedale Terrier and his Airedale companion.
- What factors influenced your decision to publish with Anthem Press?
In 2022, I published a research monograph with Anthem Press entitled Creativity and the Paris Review Interviews: A Discourse Analysis of Famous Writers’ Composing Process. I settled on Anthem for this project because of their estimable reputation and their international reach. In bringing that project to completion, I was impressed by the level of author autonomy they allow, the rapid and supportive response of their editing and production teams and the quality of the printed product. When considering publishers for a second edition of Invention and Craft (my former publisher wished to move the textbook to digital, customized availability only), I immediately contacted Anthem in light of the experience I’d enjoyed while publishing the monograph with them. After reviewing my proposal, they extended the offer to publish the textbook in both print and digital forms. For that I am extremely grateful because signs are that print texts are still desirable in many educational contexts and even essential in others.
