Collaborative Writing - The Experience of Two Authors

Ede, Lisa and Andrea Lunsford. “Why Write…Together?” Rhetoric Review 1.2 (1983): 150-157. Print.

Collaborative writing in academia can produce outstanding products or lead to devastating failures.  Lisa Ede and Andrea Lunsford’s article titled, “Why Write… Together?” addresses certain factors that lead to successful collaboration. Specifically, these authors examine their process of co-authoring and the perceived advantages and disadvantages in using this method.  In addition, the authors ask numerous questions stemming from their experiences, thus laying a foundation for future research and suggesting that co-authorship may be beneficial in the Humanities.   

Ede and Lunsford use anecdotal evidence to describe the process, requirements, and outcomes of co-authorship.  The authors realize the multitude of co-authoring scenarios, however they focus on two people working together throughout each step of the writing process.  Ede and Lunsford describe the method they use to complete a successful collaborative essay.  First, the authors determine the audience, medium of publication, and the general topic of the essay.  They then structure the endeavor around internal and external time constraints.  Following this step, the process is not linear and involves a combination of talking, reading, writing, and editing.  Talking is a heavily emphasized aspect of the process, taking up as much time as writing.

Following a description of their process, Ede and Lunsford examine the specific personal characteristics required for their successful writing collaboration.  Flexibility, cooperation and compromise, accountability, mutual respect, commitment, and a strong desire to work together are all important factors.  Ede and Lunsford also address the advantages and disadvantages they experience when writing together.  First, they communicate about the project and research more than they do if writing the piece alone.  This discussion increases productivity and efficiency, enhances understanding of the topic, and results in a stronger overall argument.  In addition, working together provides increased stimulation and excitement for the topic at hand, leading to a better product.  In contrast, the disadvantages of co-authorship include increased time-constraints and pressure, a more complicated writing process, and issues with differing personalities.

Ede and Lunsford’s experience in co-authorship raises numerous issues and questions, including defining the scenarios and parameters of co-authorship, how this collaborative work changes the rhetor-audience relationship, how technology affects the process, the ethics behind co-authoring, and the pedagogical implications.  More broadly however, Ede and Lunsford plan to define the differences between single and co-authoring and determine if one is beneficial over the other in creating a product.  Therefore, if co-authoring is advantageous, these skills should be taught to students.

The reviewed article offers an interesting and entertaining account of two author’s collaborative writing experience.  The article also provides insight into the factors that can dictate or are required for success.  More importantly however, Ede and Lunsford stress the importance of communication and raise numerous questions regarding the use and potential benefit of co-authoring in the Humanities.  This article is older, but is an important work due to the points the authors raise, the foundation they lay for future research, and the relevance that still holds today.