Creative writing education has developed in an unusual way since its inception. Prior to the 1960s, the educational pathway for any aspiring novelist or short story writer usually started with the traditional English literature degree, or maybe history, philosophy, or any other subject which requires extensive analysis of literary sources. It was generally understood that the knowledge acquired through these studies would familiarise the student with literary form, which could be later applied to their own creative practice. However, the gathering momentum of the commercial creative writing industry saw an increase of writing-specific programmes in the latter half of the twentieth century and a rapid expansion of programmes in the UK in the last two decades. Due to this, fiction writers who would have embarked upon one of those earlier pathways were drawn towards these courses.
 
Fiction, whether in print or televisual form, has always enjoyed preferential attention from the public within the arts: the average person is far more likely to frequently read novels, and enjoy film and television, than they are to make regular visits to an art gallery. This reality has put extensive pressures on the way creative writing is taught. Unlike fine art studies, for example, which are inherently less commercial and thus able to appeal to a broader artistic remit, creative writing education sometimes narrows itself towards what is saleable and acceptable in a commercial environment. This isn’t always the case. And the quality and style of any creative writing programme is largely dictated by the quality and perspective of its faculty (within the limitations of the curriculum, of course). Where it is the case, this can discourage difference and experimentation that does not fall within accepted commercial boundaries. This has occurred for a number of reasons, one of the most significant being the increasing popularity of cinema and other televisual media over print mediums. 

These events have instilled a set of erroneous beliefs that underestimate writers and readers alike. Namely, that all writers are concerned with significant commercial success whose ultimate goal is adaptation to screen-based mediums, while simultaneous assuming all readers to be a homogenous demographic whose damaged attention spans will not allow for literature that doesn’t always meet the sensational immediacy of film and television. It’s true that televisual media now outstrips literature in revenue and time spent in the attention economy. However, there will always be writers and readers who are invested in that which is different, unusual, and innovative. This isn’t to criticise any writer’s desire to produce commercial fiction which is a perfectly legitimate pursuit. Only to suggest that many other types of valuable literature can be easily sidelined as a result of those circumstances. 

Next: The ‘Workshop’