Synthesis Of Bartholomae and Flower & Hayes

I synthesised Flower and Hayes into Bartholomae's ideas in my Bartholomae response. I found that they all seem to agree that writing is a process and what matters is not the final text but how the author got to that final product. It was stated in both articles that "If writing is a process, it is also a product,; and it is a product, and not the plan for writing that locates a writer on the page, that locates him in text and a style and the codes or conventions that make both of them readable" (631). This sentence to me, summed up the main points of the article. It incorporates the audience and the writers intentions. It also discusses the points made by Flower and Hayes with writing as a cognitive process and the goals the writer creates. The writer creates goals independently and privately, when the paper is finished and others read it is when it becomes public.

However, I feel that the writers disagree on where the invention aspect comes in during the process. Bartholomae feels that Flower and Hayes take invention out of the active writing process and that is a problem. His argument is due to that we see the product in text from the author not from his mind. We have no ideas as readers what the author's original ideas were and the process he went through to transform them from thoughts to text. Flower and Hayes Cognitive process demonstrates that the plans of the paper happen before the actually composing of it, I agree with that. One always has an idea or thought in mind of what they want to say but how to say it is what involves research and thinking. They argue on where the invention stage lies, for Flower and Hayes it is in the Task enviroment, for Batholomae it is in the active writing process.