書評

meeting. The chapters on disengagement and containment theory, are complementary, because “disengagement” means an engagement with writing inthis book and the author refers to the containment
Rowena Murray (2015).

Writing in Social Spaces: A Social Processes
Approach to Academic Writing. London: Routledge.
Meric KIRMIZI

theory to explain how social writing functions wellby containing writing-related anxiety and achieves
disengagement by prioritizing writing over othertasks. Next, the meaning and role of leader as a facilitator in creating the favorable space for writingoriented relationships--the lack of which is the gap
that this book wants to fill in (p. 13)--during social
writing is discussed. Finally, all these components

Rowena Murray in Writing in Social Spaces, bringsof social writing are combined together in a “social

an alternative to academic writing that is promoted

writing framework” (p. 128), backed up by actual con-by “the competitive, managerialist, capitalist discourse

versations of participants regarding these elements.

that purports to foster collaboration but is experi-

Another point of emphasis is that social writing isenced as competition.” (p. 8) The aim of this book is

not only gathering together, talking while eatingstated to be twofold: 1) Analyzing the social compo-

cakes and drinking coffee at a cozy place of retreat

nents of writing 2) Proposing a connection between

in Scotland. Rather, it is about following some struc-these social components and dealing with writing

ture and practices of this form of writing such as

challenges, and in this way, rendering academic writ-

the presence of a leader, predetermined time slots,

ing a more meaningful, pleasant and satisfying task.

and measures for disengagement such as no internet“Social writing” in the context of this study stands

connection during the structured writing retreat pro-for: “creating conversations around productivity,

gram. Such a structural approach to academic writ-that are specific to participants’ writing projects ...

ing that the author calls “strategic engagement”[and] talking about what we want to write.” (p. 3)

also helps balance various competing tasks one has

The target readers are declared to be not only young

to do. Its difference from the management jargon

researchers, but also those, who have already hadof time management is that the former allows social

much experience in academic writing and publishing,support for one’s control of work and time, whereas

however, want to write in a more productive way.

the latter puts the burden on the pathetic individual,

The book welcomes also the skeptics of social writ-

who is trying to do “multiple tasks at the sameing to read about a model for actively constructingtime” (p. 112), and therefore, stressed for being al-

their writing so as to make it fit in their lives. The

ways out of time.

overall argument of the book is that social writing

The time issue for writing is analyzed in the bookworks because it “outs” and supports the writing

with reference to the scarcity theory. Murray is notprocess. This argument might inspire ideas on theconvinced by the excuse of scarcity of time for writ-creation of private versus public or common knowl-ing, and searches for a more positive outlook to theedge, as academic writing is a means to create newproblem than such a problematic mindset. I don’tknowledge. Not only the ends, that is knowledge,

agree with this argument “that time and space are

but also the means, that is the writing process can

not the issue” (p. 101), because it disregards the fact

be made public and collective.

that individuals are indeed overburdened with their

In terms of structure, after arguing for “makingworkloads in the current system and neither timewriting ‘social’” in the first chapter, Murray intro-

nor space are illusionary problems of a negative

duces the social writing alternative in its various for-thinking. Nevertheless, at other parts of the book,mats in the following five chapters. These formats

the author makes clear the roles and responsibilities

include: a formal academic writing course, social writ-of institutions in intensifying or at least, not solv-

ing in workshops, structured writing retreat (includ-ing writing-anxiety. In addition to time and space,ing micro-groups and mini-retreats), and writing

funding is part of the problem: “Participants often

105

都市文化研究 18 号 2016 年

fund them (retreats) out of their own pockets, but

her past work related to social writing are especiallyshould they have to do so? Not everyone can afford

valuable in making explicit their first-hand experi-that.” (p. 66) I think, it would be helpful, if Murrayences of social ways of tackling the academic writing

provided an exemplary cost statement along with theproblem. For example, a behavioral pattern that I

programmes and templates in the Appendix. Other-observe among PhD students came up in the bookwise, the image of a retreat at a Scottish hotel be-

as: “(Retreat) helps me to stop hiding behind readingside a recent British movie, Tamara Drewe (2010)- which means I don’t write.” (p. 112) As someone

about unfolding events centered around people at ain her initial stages of academic writing, I have felt

writing retreat in a farm at the beautiful country-

relieved to learn that it is not only me that is trou-side make me wonder, whether this is becoming abled by the task and the competition in the academic

profitable sector in itself. On the other hand, thepublishing market. The book’s influence on me isfact that one can apply social writing at home miti-

summarized by a retreat participant’s observation:

gates such criticism.

“It makes getting started with writing task less in-

The theory and practice are well-balanced intimidating.” (ibid.) I would suggest it primarily tostrengthening the argument for social writing in

all graduate students, who have a sense of unease

the book. The quotes from previous participants toabout academic writing.

106