I’d like to close out Phase 1 of my investigation with a little breakdown (not mine, I already did that this year!) of language, of fiction, of rhetoric… Where do we stand with language, with fiction, with education of language and fiction, in the 21st Century?

Language is powerful. From arguments, to political speeches, from science textbooks, to novels, language is incredible. The way a historian might describe how the telephone was invented will be mostly, if not all, factual – but the way a novelist might describe how the telephone was invented could be a fantastic story of blind witches needing a way to communicate across a world without drawing attention to their power. I don’t know… My point is, language can be literal, factual, nonfiction… but it can also be lyrical, silly, and beautiful (not that facts aren’t beautiful). As Michael Holquist says in his article about Language and Fiction, “Language has a dual nature: it can be logical and useful and provide valuable information, but it can also be literary and thus unconstrained by facts and logic” (Language of Fiction, Fiction of Language).

If we, as students, as writers, as educators, don’t learn the multi-faceted world of language, how are we to teach it to the next generation? What kinds of novels will hit the shelves in fifteen to twenty years if kids aren’t able to deeply explore the Fiction world alongside of the Nonfiction world? According to the Commore Core State Standards Initiative, between grade 4 and grade 12, the percentage of time spent on fictional and nonfictional texts drop from 50%/50% to 30%Literary/70%Informational. With such a high emphasis on nonfiction/informational texts, it’s like we’re trying to limit the way our students are exposed to language. “Fiction is a category the framers of the ELA standards either ignore or treat as merely a set of techniques with a mysterious abilitiy to enhance the truth”  (Language of Fiction, Fiction of Language).

“We are the teachers of students who in increasing numbers will come to us trained in the shadow of the CCSSI’s restrictrive conception of language” (Language of Fiction, Fiction of Language).