Advice

May

Writing With Soul

By Rachel Toor
Last fall I heard from a medical student who was trying to get a
personal essay published in a prestigious journal that has a
section devoted to first-person musings. The writer thought I
might be able to help him with his revisions, since that journal
had run a couple of my pieces.
His essay had already been rejected by the editor, who said his
writing was "one-dimensional and dull" and lacked "soul." The
student told me he had begged for a second chance and the editor
had granted it, provided he revise the essay. He had completely
rewritten it and now needed help putting, he said, the "final
touches" on it.
When I read the revised piece I found it earnest and generic.
The draft I sawdialogue-boosted and exclamation-point-riddled
smelled of effort, of trying to do right, of wanting to make a
contribution. The genre was sad but familiar: The beautifulheroic-dying-patient-teaches-the-doctor-in-training-about-life.
The essay was supposed to make me care but didn't. Not about
the patient, and not about the writer. The journal editor was right.
The piece had no soul.
How do you help someone learn to write with "soul"? What does
that even mean? What does it look like on the page?
Pascal said, "When we see a natural style, we are astonished and
delighted; for we expected to see an author, and we find a man." I
think that's a fine definition of writing with soul, except, of course,
for those times when we see a woman. Soulful writing is human
essential, authentic, honest, flawed, contradictory, messy. We see
a person with ideas and emotions who claims our attention not
because she has all the answers, but because she is struggling with
vexing questions and trying to figure something out.
We get the tradition from Montaigne, who attempted to

understand in his work who he was and what he knew. What

struck me as I read the medical student's essay was that he
seemed to have it all figured out: life, death, art, the practice of
medicine. He wrote things like, "Compassion is integral to
healing." Who would disagree with that? From what perch did he
get to proclaim that kind of conversation stopper? He wasn't
inviting the reader to do any thinking or even to engage. It was a
better-written, somewhat more sophisticated version of the "in
society today" essays that should make teaching first-year
composition warrant hazard pay.
I understood that this young man had learned something from his
slightly younger patient, but I didn't know who he was before he
met her, and didn't see how he had changedor more to the
point, how she had changed him. He ended with a diatribe on how
to alter medical education that made me smile. Many good
students think they know better ways to learn than how they are
being taught. I like critique. I like moxie.
But ultimately I am less interested in a finger-pointy harangue
than I am in seeing the way in which the remaining fingers point
back at the person who makes the accusations. My favorite pieces
of advice and wisdom tend to come enclosed in stories about how
the narrator messed up and learned what she's now telling me.
How did you get there? That's what I want to know, and that's
what I asked the medical student to think about.
Last month I wrote about how much I like reading the
acknowledgments sections of books. But when I was an editor of
scholarly books, I also loved to read the author's preface, where
she told the story of her work: how she became interested in her
subject and why it mattered to her, her struggles and challenges to
get it done. I realize now that the preface was often the only part of
the book with "soul." That's where I heard a human voice.
Academic research is often driven by real passion, but by the time
it turns into scholarly prose, the heat has long since dissipated.
Writing with soul doesn't have to be personal, confessional, or
raw, but it can't be pretentious or inflated. Most of the great
essayists knew that a plain style didn't hurt. Sit down with
Montaigne, Addison and Steele, Hazlitt, Goldsmith, Bacon, and
Lamb and you'll feel like you're in a tavern or a book-lined private
study, chatting with a smart, wise, and often witty friend.

Academics learn to dress their ideas in bulletproof, jargon-ridden

suits, to parry attacks before they are launched, to make small and
careful points rather than allowing themselves to be vulnerable by
pitching big and strange ideas in direct and forceful sentences. But
that is not the path to making yourself compelling as a writer.
Indeed, one of the problems with much scholarly writing it that
we can't see the men and womenwith sweaty hands and
occasionally overfull stomachs or caffeine-buzzed nervous
systemswho compose it. It seems, often, to come straight from
central processors, with formatted bullet points, weak verbs, and
multisyllabic Latinate phrases.
The moves that academics tend to make in their prose are often
antithetical to "soulful" writing. Long, windy, semicolon-flecked
sentences with recycled and ready-made phrases can create
barriers that establish distance between writer and subject, author
and reader. Often when I'm reading academic work not only do I
feel like there's no soul, I feel like it's not even written by humans.
Or for humans.
I hate pretension. That may be a lingering side-effect of having
attended a fancy-pants college where I felt so strongly that
someone had messed up by letting me in that I spent years trying
to convince othersand myselfthat I was worthy by using
intellectually tarted-up language and tossing around ideas I didn't
fully understand. It's taken me a long time and a lot of
professional success to be able to sound this direct and
unconcerned about being thought stupid.
It's also taken me a long time to realize that it's OK and even
admirable to admit how much you don't know, and, when writing
an essay, to put yourself in harm's wayto expose your own flank
to whatever poison darts people want to fling at you. (Though I
would like to point out, people, that anonymous and bilious
comments still hurt.) It may be easier to attack someone who
doesn't admit to flaws.
Recently I've been thinking about actress Anne Hathaway. Or
really, about how many people seem to hate her. She strikes me as
smart and accomplished but there's something about her bearing
that has created a whole phenomenon: "Hathahaters." I think it
has something to do with the fact that she seems too perfect, too
much a construction of what she thinks she should be. At the

Oscars she was poised and impeccable and even kind of smart and
funny, but no one laughed at her jokes. When earthy Jennifer
Lawrence tripped on her way to the podium, and then made a
crack about it, everyone loved her.
That's what I realized was missing in the medical student's essay.
He was too much Anne Hathaway and not enough Jennifer
Lawrence. He was trying so hard to appear perfect and
accomplished that all we saw was the effort and the desire to cover
something up. Maybe that's what "writing with soul" isfalling
over on your unaccustomed high heels on your way to being
recognized for your accomplishment, and then laughing about it
and accusing the audience of applauding only because they feel
sorry for you. No one will ever feel sorry for someone brave
enough to say something like that. It was, in that moment,
impossible not to love Jennifer Lawrence.
There may not be much call to write with soul in many types of
scholarly work. And bravery in academic writing may not be
rewarded with a standing ovation; it may, in fact, cause some
trouble. The personal essay may not "count" on an academic CV.
But acquiring the skills required to write with soullearning to be
honest and vulnerable on the page so that the reader sees not an
author but a person, will help you find more readers, make you a
better writer whatever the genre, and may even help you discover
bits of your own well-armored soul.
Rachel Toor is an associate professor of creative writing at Eastern
Washington University's writing program in Spokane. Her Web site
is http://www.racheltoor.com. She welcomes comments and
questions directed to careers@chronicle.com.

29Comments

TheChronicleofHigherEducation

SortbyOldest

Login

Share

Favorite

Jointhediscussion

curioser

10monthsago

Ihaveoftenimagined(fantasized?)thattheonlyjobsinacademe
wheremuchofthereadingisroutinelyenjoyablearethosein
departmentsofEnglishorliterature(ofanylanguage).Sure,
professorsstillneedtoreadscholarshiponthoseworksof
literature;buteventhesecondarysourcesinEnglishandliterature
seembetterwrittenthanthoseinmanyotherfields.Isthereason
perhapsbecausetheauthorsare(orshouldbe)absorbedinworks
ofliterature,whichare(or,again,shouldthemselvesbe)well
written?Whileworkingonmydissertation(inoneofthosetypically
dry,boringprofessionalfields),Ifrequentlypickedupworksof

dry,boringprofessionalfields),Ifrequentlypickedupworksof
literatureorwellwrittenpiecesofnonfiction(oftenessays)to
remindmyselfhowI*should*beaspiringtowrite,evenwithinthe
confinesofadissertation.(Style"soul"ispossibleina
dissertation,evenifrelegatedtofootnotes,theprefaceor
introduction,theacknowledgments,theauthor'sbiography....)
8

Reply Share

nematoda

10monthsago

IadmitthatIgenerallywritewithnosoul,butIguessthat'swhy
I'mapoorlypaidprofessorratherthanamultimilliondollar
earning,awardwinning,bestsellingauthor.
Ifinditironic,though,whenIreadselfimprovementessayssuch
asthis:wearetoldtowritesothat"thereaderseesnotanauthor
butaperson...".Andyet,thisessaydoesn'tgivemeanysenseof
whoRachelToorisasaperson.Evenmore,Toorcomesacrossas
an"AnneHathaway"ratherthana"JenniferLawrence"inthis
piece,asshecriticizesthepoormedicalstudentfornotknowing
whatsheknows.There'snovulnerability,justoverweeningself
assurance.
Yes,IknowambeingunfairtoToorI'msureshewritewithagreat
dealofsoulinothervenues.But,Iwouldhavelikedtoseeher
practicewhatshepreachesinthisveryarticle.
9

Reply Share

maw57

nematoda 10monthsago

Idisagree:thisseemstomeaquitepersonableessay,inpart
owingtotheAnneHathawaycomparison,inpartowingtoher
confessionofhavingbeenshaped/distortedbyherownelite
education.
ButI'dbeinterestedinhearfromothersabout"soulful"
writersintheirowndisciplines.Fromlitcrit,Iwould
nominateoneoldschoolguy,IanWatt(moreinhisConrad
bookthaninTheRiseoftheNovel),andonecontemporary,
RitaFelski(e.g.,inTheUsesofLiterature).
Nominees?
9

Reply Share

11182967

nematoda 10monthsago

Aw,c'monthisisanothernicelittleToordeforce,fullof
personaltouches.Yes,it'spolished,likemostofToor's
essaysfullofavarietyofillustrativedetail,bothhigh
(Montaigne,AddisonandSteele...)andlow(Hathawayand
Lawrence),withpersonalreferencestopastandcurrent
careers.But"soul"doesn'thavetobeboldlydramatic,andI
don'treadRachelToorlookingforpassionboilingover.
Rather,sheisconsistentlycalm(andonlyjustpeeved,when
not),helpfultowritersinthebestsortofeditorialway(she
reallydoescareaboutthem),andalwaysalittlebitfunny.
Thesequalitiesseemtobeher"soul,"lessexcitingthanthe
soulsofsomeothers,certainly,butpleasantandcomfortable
andobviouslyherown.Souls,likebodies,excitedifferent
responseswhenbaredevenpassionisboringif
unrelenting.Bethankfulthattheequilibriumisasenjoyable
asthepunctuation.
30

Reply Share

racheltoor

11182967 10monthsago

Wellthankyou,11182967.AndI'lltakethisasa
challengetoflashalittlemorepassioninfuture
columns.It'sagoodreminder.
2

Reply Share

edumacator

racheltoor 10monthsago

[Takei]Racheljustpromisedtoflashus.Oh,

myyy...[/Takei]
3

rick1952

Reply Share

edumacator 10monthsago

Well,ifshedoes,sherunstheriskofrunning
afoulofthejointDoEOCR/DOJguidelines
providedtoUofMontanaasa"blueprint"forthe
restofusregardingsexualharassment:)(see
HansBader'scommentaryelsewhereinthis
week'sChronicle.)
Seriously,Ithinkflashingalittlepassionisgood
thing,eveninspirationalattimes.Agoodeditor
ofanationalpublicationhelpedmeseehowthat
couldhelpinanessaywhichIwroteabouta
SupremeCourtjustice.
1

fiona

Reply Share

10monthsago

Thisisagreatarticle.Iwouldsay"soul"is(assoulsingerssay)
theprojectionoffeeling.Academicwritingissupposedtosqueeze
outfeeling,anditusuallysucceeds.
RetheAnneHathawaycomment:Beyoncestrikesmethesameway.
Beautifulandperfect,butnohumanzest.
Writingwithsoulconveysmessinessandspontaneityandyou
havetoworkreallyhardtodothatwell.
8

vceross

Reply Share

10monthsago

Ithinkthisisthesortofdeclamationoneoftenhearsfromcreative
writersandjournalists,whoinsistthateveryonemustwritelike
them.Theydonotunderstandthattheiraestheticisonly
applicabletotheirparticulargenresofwriting.Scholarsarenot
writingtoentertain,provoke,ortitillate.Theyarecontributingto
thedefinition,understandingorsolutionofaparticularproblem.
That"jargon"isshorthanditallowsustogetquicklyfrompointA
topointB.Amedicalresearcherwouldbefoolishtospendher
nightsrevisingandrevising,lookingforthebonmotandattempting
totranslatemoundsofscholarlyknowledgeintoexplanationsand
lovelyoldplotlinesguaranteedtoenthrallanonspecialist
audience.Ourarticleswouldbehundredsofpageslongandother
specialistswouldhavetoplowthroughallthatnonsensetogetto
whattheyneeded.
Putincreativenonfictionterms:ataconstructionsite,Imaycall
outforamitersaw.Apasserbymaynotknowwhatoneis:too
bad.I'mnottalkingtohim.Ifhewantstoknowwhatamitersaw
seemore

29

Reply Share

Guest

vceross 10monthsago

Sorryvceross...You'reagreatwriterwhichdisqualifiesyou
fromcommentingonthisdiscussion.
10

shakesguy

Reply Share

vceross 9monthsago

Someofwhatyou'rearguingworksforthesciences,butnot
thehumanities.Weinthehumanitiescan'tjudgeourideas
bysomesortofempiricalstandard.Thetruthofourclaims
dependsmoreonhowconvincingtheyare,andthereis
alwaysthesuspicion,corrosivetocredulity,thatourjargon
ismeredoublespeak,wordswithoutcontent.
Usingthelanguagecanbeamarkerofengagementinthe
conversation,butbeingalwaysselfcritical,alwayswillingto
suspectthatourownwordsmaybeempty,isafarmore

authenticqualificationasacriticalthinker.

Reply Share

NathanielM.Campbell

10monthsago

ImustobjecttoToor'scritiqueofacademicwriting's
"pretensions",e.g.thelong,periodic,Latinatestyle,fullofskillful
vocabularyandcomplexideas.
Forme,suchawritingstyleispartofmy"soul"asawriterand
thinker,preciselybecausemywritingandthinkinghavesomuch
beeninfluencedbyclassicalandmedievalwritersofLatin
literature,philosophy,andtheology,aswellasbyGerman
literatureandpoetry.Toabandonthe"pretentious"stylethatToor
abhorswouldbe,forme,toabandonthatwhichmakesmywriting
mineratherthanhers,theproductofmyintellectualjourneyrather

thanherwritingworkshop.
Thisarticlestrikesmeasamisguidedattempttodeterminethat
"soulful"writingmustadhere,nottoeachindividualwriter'sactual
soul,buttothecontemporarywritingprofession'sownpretensions
againstearlierandmoreelaborateformsofwrittencommunication.
14

Reply Share

kpam1234

NathanielM.Campbell 10monthsago

Thisissowellput.Thankyouforsaying/writingit.Soulful
writingshouldbeasindividualasthesoulwho'swriting.We
eachhaveauniquevoiceanditisashamewhenayoung
writeristoldtosimplyfollowaparticularnorm.
2

cwilli

Reply Share

10monthsago

Iwonderiftherehasbeenanyormuchempiricalinvestigationof
howreadersofdifferenttypesreacttodifferentwriting
techniques;I'veneverheardofany.Insteadthereseemstobealot
ofintuitive,subjectivejudgmentsbywritingteachersaboutwhat
supposedlyconstitutesgoodwriting.Literaturepeoplepraise
writingthatis"essential,authentic,honest,flawed,contradictory,
messy,"butIsuspectthatwhenscientistsreadaresearcharticle
theydon'tgiveadamnaboutsuchthings;theywantclearclaims,
evidence,methodology,objections,limitations,etal.AndwhenI,
asanonscientist,readanarticleaboutcurrentscience,Ifindan
articleladenwithpersonalinformationaboutthescientiststobe
boringandirrelevantIwanttoknowaboutthescience,notthe
scientists.Idon'tliketowadethrough"humaninterest"
introductorygrabbersbeforegettingtotheimportantstuffabout
thestateofthescience.Myinterestisgrabbedbyaninformative
titlenomore"grabbers"needed.
Inshort,howaboutwritingteachersdoingsomewelldesigned,
statisticallyrespectablesurveyresearchtofindouthowdifferent
audiencesreacttovariouskindsofwriting,insteadofjustmaking
subjectivejudgments?
2

Reply Share

RichardGrayson

10monthsago

PutneysaystheBorman6girlisgottohavesoul!

Reply Share

sand6432

10monthsago

Thereismuchtobesaidforwritingwithsoul,butTooriswiseto
addthecaveatsinherlastparagraphbecause,generallyspeaking,
thiskindofwritingisnotlikelytoearnanycredit,andmayeven
"causesometrouble,"withthosewhowieldthepowerovercareer
advancementintheacademy.Ifascholarispurposelytryingto
reachawidermarketbeyondtheacademywithapieceofwriting,
Tool'sadvicemaybeworthheeding,butitwouldbedangerousto
followitforscholarlywritingthatseeksonlyotherscholarsasits
primaryorperhapssoleaudience.

Thisisnottosaythatoccasionallyascholarwillsucceedinwriting
withsoulandyetbeabletogainarespectfulaudiencebothwithin
academeandbeyond.AnexamplewouldbeAlbertO.Hirschman,a
mastercraftsmanoftheelegantlywrittenessay.Butsuchscholars
arefewandfarbetween,anditwouldberiskyfortoomanypeople
toattempttobecomethenextHirschman.
SandyThatcher(whojustlovesJenniferLawrence,bytheway)
3

Reply Share

vceross

sand6432 10monthsago

Hirschmanusednarrative.Journalistsandcreative
nonfictioniststhinknarrativeisthecat'spajamas.Butin
factnarrativetrapsyouintowritingalimitedsetofplotlines
thatreproduceacertainkindofthinking.Therehavebeen
scholarswhohavedoneinterestingworkonnarrativeand
how,forexample,itconditionsustothinkingintermsof
forcingachangeonothersorourselves(conversion
narrative,narrativesofprogress).Othershaveshownhow
womentendtoplaythebearerofmeaning,ratherthanmaker
ofmeaning,asoccursrighthereinToor'snarrative,where
women'semotionalexpressivityleadthemtobe"good"or
"bad"objects.Wedon'tquestionsuchstorylines.Weeat
themup.Scholarlywork,atleastinsomefields,attemptsas
muchaspossibletoavoidnarrativespreciselybecausethey
organizethingsintidywaysthatexcludeallsortsof
complicatinganddrearyfactors.Hirschmanwasagreat
narrativist.
9

dank48

Reply Share

10monthsago

MyGod,thecommentshere....Theheading"Comments"could
almostbereplacedbyonereading"Q.E.D."
Subjectmatterisnoexcuseforunreadablewriting.
7

gahnett

Reply Share

10monthsago

Tome,writingwithsoulisconnectingwiththeaudience.
Iftheaudienceisperfectandtheyappreciateperfect,there'sno
reasonnottolikeHathaway.
Ontheotherhand,ifnoonelikedher,hercareerwouldbeshort
lived,unlessshedecidestoplaymeancharacters.
Maybethestudentwhowrotethereportjusthadnothingoriginalto
say.
2

withatwist

Reply Share

10monthsago

Ilovethisarticle.WhenIguideastudentthroughadifficultpaper,
Itellthemtotellthestoryofthetopic.Itseemstohelp.Clarityof
ideasseemstocomewithadoptingthetopicasthe
protagonist/antagonistofthestorybeingtoldaboutit.
It'sunfortunate,butinthehumanitiesweseemtoconstantlyrun
intothosewho'vereadfartoomuchJudithButler.OrHomiBhaba.
Or[insertadarlingofcomp.lit.here].Butlercouldn'tevenswitch
registerstodefendherownabsolutelyappalling,inexcusably
obnoxiouswritingstyle:http://query.nytimes.com/gst/f...
And,naturally,ourstudentsgetholdofsomeonelikeButleror
Bhabaandoneoftwothingshappens:1.Theyadoptthe
obnoxious,verbosestyleofthesewriters,withoutunderstanding
howobnoxiousthey'rebecoming,or2.Theyfreakoutandrunaway
screaming,thinkingthatthey'restupidbecausetheycan't
understandsomethingthat,honestly,wasnevermeanttobe
understoodinthefirstplace.Atleastnotasanythingprofound.

understoodinthefirstplace.Atleastnotasanythingprofound.
9

Reply Share

dank48

withatwist 9monthsago

Ican'tagreethat"Butlercouldn'tevenswitchregistersto
defendherownabsolutelyappalling,inexcusablyobnoxious
writingstyle."Ithoughtherletterwas,onthewhole,readily
understandable.Thatisquiteaswitchinregister,imo.
1

Reply Share

withatwist

dank48 9monthsago

Understandabletowhom?I'venevermetanyone
withoutatleastaMAwhoknewwhoAdornowas.

goaway

Reply Share

withatwist 8monthsago

Righton!

ksurman1

Reply Share

10monthsago

GreatcomparisontotheOscars.LoveSpokane.
1

rahodeb

Reply Share

10monthsago

Ihavejustonethingtosay:anonymouspeerreview."Bigand
strangeideasindirectandforcefulsentences"arethefirstthing
togetslashedfromapaperifitistobepublished.ButIadmirethe
sentimentnonetheless.
3

Reply Share

scorpio1711

9monthsago

IquiteendorseToor'ssentiment.
ThoughIwonderifsoulfulwritingHAStobeinterspersedwith
bombasticwords,makingitdifficultforacommonmanto
comprehendit?

Reply Share

ruthenium66

9monthsago

Ieditscholarlypapersineducation,mostofthemhighly
specializedandfullofstatistics.Yet...thesoulofsomewriters
sneaksin,whetherbyanintriguingmetaphor,insightfulanalysisof
existingliterature,orafrankappraisalofthelimitsofthestudy
doneorthetheoryposed.Ihaveafavoriteauthor,whosepapersI
lookforwardtoreadingalthoughIdon'tunderstandthehighly
technicalconceptstheycontain(hewritesforatinycohortof
researchersinhisfield)buthiswritingissolucidthatIknow
exactlywhathappenstoX,evenifIdon'tknowwhatXis.Itisa
pleasuretowatchhimtakeXthroughitspaces.Perhapshisstyle
isnotasdeeplysoulfulorrevelatoryasanessayonadyingpatient
couldbe,butIliketheauthor,whoIhavenevermet,andlook
forwardtoreadingmorebecauseofit.Rethemedstudent
piece...oranyfirstpersonessay...nomatterthesubject,the"salt
andpepper"ofhumorandselfdeprecationalmostalwaysaddto
theflavorofthepiece.Eveninaseriouspiece...perhapsespecially
so.
1

profdave

Reply Share

9monthsago

Ihavehadtowriteinadisciplinethatoverlapstwodistinct
"genres"ofwritingstylelaw.
Therearetwoways(atleast)towriteaboutlawandlegalissues.
Oneisthedry,dispassionate,factsonlystyleofthescholarshipof
law.Theotheristhepassionate,makethereaderfeelthe
rightnessorwrongnessoftheargumentstyleoflegaladvocacy.
IbelieveProf.Toor'sarticleilluminatestheborderareasthatcan
existwithinanyacademicdisciplinewhereanauthorchoosesto

existwithinanyacademicdisciplinewhereanauthorchoosesto
addressaparticularkindofaudienceinordertoaccomplisha
specificpurpose.

Reply Share

shamsuzzaman

8monthsago

SinceI'mdeeplyinvestedincomposition(secondlanguage
writing),Iwastemptedtoreadintotheessayasoneofmyfriends
sentitmyway.Ilikeditinitially,butasIdrilleddeepinto
it,Idiscoveredsomediscrepancies.Thecontentofthewhole
articlecanbeboileddowntothis:It'sapaeantocreativewriting,
andaharangueagainstacademicwriting.I'mattimesledtothe
persuasionthatshehaseithermisperceivedormisinterpretedthe
conventionsandcriteriaofacademicwriting.Worseeven,shedrew
on
herknowledgeaboutandbackgroundincreativewritingtopreach
about
academicwriting.Whatqualifieshertoclaimthatacademicwriting
is
"pretentiousandinflated"andisnotwrittenbyhumanssinceitis
too
"jargonridden,andisconstructedwith"weakverbsand
multisyllabic
Latinatephrases?"Everygenreofwritingisamenabletosome
seemore

Subscribe

Reply Share

AddDisqustoyoursite