Preview this article: The Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the Holocaust, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/54/3/collegeenglish9392-1.gif

Preview this article: The Excluded Conflict: The Marginalization of Composition and Rhetoric Studies in Graffs Professing Literature, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/54/3/collegeenglish9393-1.gif

Preview this article: Hymes, Rorty, and the Social-Rhetorical Construction of Meaning, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/54/2/collegeenglish9403-1.gif

Preview this article: The Accumulative Rhetoric of Word Processing, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/53/8/collegeenglish9536-1.gif

Preview this article: Does Rhetoric of Science Matter? The Case of the Floppy-Eared Rabbits, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/53/8/collegeenglish9537-1.gif

Andrew Sledd, James Sledd, Wayne Crawford, Two Comments on "Beyond Anti-Foundationalism to Rhetorical Authority: Problems Defining 'Cultural Literacy' ", College English, Vol. 53, No. 6 (Oct., 1991), pp. 717-724

It has been twenty years since Richard Young, Alton Becker and Kenneth Pike brought out their challenging and revolutionary book, Rhetoric: Discovery and Change. Though cast in the mold of a rhetorical handbook, Rhetoric: Discovery and Change (like many of the best rhetorical handbooks, including Aristotle's Rhetoric) attempted to do more than relay the accumulated rhetorical wisdom of its age in a predigested form suitable for students. It was an attempt to synthesize a complete rhetorical system, a system that in some ways built on and in some ways departed from the classical model. Arguing that Profound changes are taking place in the system of Western values that has for centuries guided conduct (8), Young, Becker and Pike wanted to rethink rhetoric from its foundations, using concepts borrowed from problem-solving theory, game theory, dialogic communication, linguistics, and Carl Rogers' nondirective therapy. Out of these materials they created a rhetoric that they claimed offered new goals, new ways of creating ideas, and new ways of managing the rhetor-audience relationship. I would like to focus primarily on Young, Becker and Pike's use of principles. I see this as their most interesting, possibly most enduring, and certainly most controversial contribution to modern rhetoric, a contribution that escapes the bounds of the eighteen pages in which they explicitly discuss Rogers and subtly but pervasively dominates the entire work. The propriety and the pedagogical utility of Young, Becker and Pike's Rogerian rhetoric has been debated before, by Andrea Lunsford, Diane C. Mader, and Lisa Ede among others. This debate has centered chiefly on two questions: whether rhetoric as developed by Young, Becker and Pike is genuinely different from Aristotelian rhetoric and on whether it is fair to its main source, therapy. This debate is far from trivial and it is far from closed; this article to some extent will continue it. But it is time to step back and, from our twenty-year vantage point, ask some larger questions that enclose and put into perspective these more local questions of fairness to sources. To do so, let us look at Young, Becker and Pike's version of rhetoric both in its historical context and in the context of the larger rhetorical sys-

Preview this article: Young, Becker and Pike's "Rogerian" Rhetoric: A Twenty-Year Reassessment, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/53/4/collegeenglish9576-1.gif

Preview this article: Rhetoric of Science, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/53/3/collegeenglish9582-1.gif

Preview this article: Writing Ethnography: Representation, Rhetoric, and Institutional Practices, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/53/3/collegeenglish9585-1.gif

Preview this article: Richard M. Weaver: Philosophical Rhetoric, Cultural Criticism, and the First Rhetorical Awakening, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/52/6/collegeenglish9629-1.gif

Preview this article: Beyond Anti-Foundationalism to Rhetorical Authority: Problems Defining "Cultural Literacy", Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/52/6/collegeenglish9633-1.gif

Preview this article: Review: "Our House of Many Mansions": History/Rhetoric/Philosophy, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/51/8/collegeenglish11259-1.gif

Preview this article: Beyond System: The Rhetoric of Paralogy, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/51/5/collegeenglish11288-1.gif

Preview this article: Psyche/Logos: Mapping the Terrains of Mind and Rhetoric, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/51/3/collegeenglish11302-1.gif

Preview this article: The Rhetorical Tradition and Recent Literary Theory, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/51/3/collegeenglish11309-1.gif

Preview this article: Aristotle's Lyric: Re-Imagining the Rhetoric of Epideictic Song, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/51/1/collegeenglish11322-1.gif

Preview this article: Walter Pater and the Sophistication of Rhetoric, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/51/1/collegeenglish11327-1.gif

Few will disagree, I think, if I say that twentieth-century discussion of the lyric has often granted little recognition, and sometimes none, to the role of argumentation. Indeed, the word itself may not appear at all: we are much more likely to be told, instead, that lyric poems contain-and we should emphasize the word contain--such things as subjects, ideas, themes, or even conceptual schemes, and we are just as likely to be told that none of these things are what the lyric is really all about. Such things belong to prose, and in the lyric are merely there, contained, as useful but dispensable accessories and props; the lyric dramatizes or expresses feeling. Or rather, it bodies forth image of the poet's thought as it moves through some phase or phases of an intensely felt experience (Hardy 1-2). It is essentially dramatistic or expressive, rather than, say, discursive, argumentative, or suasory-no matter how much, in the reader's experience, it may seem to operate discursively, as an argument intending to create, intensify, or change belief. The feeling's the thing. Or so that argument goes, or has gone. This is the average mainstreammodern view of lyric, the view most likely to be taken as a self-evident given in a typical account of this most protean mode of poetry. (Barbara Hardy, for example, is able to simply declare it, as an opening premise for her book, with virtually no recognition of a possible disagreement.) I believe that few will disagree, either, if I say that strong objections to this mainstream-modern version of the lyric are and have been available. We can argue, as did Yvor Winters, that lyric poetry, or any poetry, intends not only representation or embodiment of an or state of but also judgment or evaluation of human experience, and thus is necessarily suasory and involved with argumentation, or what Winters called exposition. Or we can argue, as Gerald Graff has done, that the logos and the pathos projected by a poem are necessarily related, as premise(s) and conclusion(s), what Graff calls ground and consequent: the ground provided by what is said, by logos, makes the speaker's represented state of feeling or act of mind both convincing and intelligible-as opposed, say, to self-indulgent, incoherent, and neurotic. Graff's line of objection, then, defines the lyric once more as a form of argument. We

R.W.B. Lewis' biography of Edith Wharton mentions with her other late works the 1934 short story Fever as a masterpiece of rhetorical coherence, but insists that in writing the piece Wharton was unperturbed by news from Europe of a terrible ... at hand (Biography 527). He suggests that the pervading tone of calm and repose in the story underscores her virtual mastery of history, of the past-both Wharton's own past and, in particular, the question of her paternity-as as the past of the species represented by the Roman ruins. Yet her Fever questions origins, persecution, and sexual violence-Rome itself a powerful site of primal violence. Her story interrogates society's periodic demand for an ultimate return to origins: whether it be racial purification or sexual housekeeping. Lewis writes that the possibility of Wharton's illegitimacy must have edged its way into Mrs. Wharton's mind over the years that followed [1908-09: the years in which the rumor began]. . . . situation of Grace Ansley's whole lifetime is revealed in a single phrase, and just possibly, with all obliqueness, one phase of Edith Wharton's situation as well (Collected Stories xxv). question of race and origin, which is central to Fever, also centers the moment of history-the terrible revolution brewing in Europe. Many critics would agree with Lewis about Wharton's apolitical, serene, and new state of being in the thirties (Biography 524). Cynthia Griffin Wolff does not deal with Wharton's politics at all, while, at worst, other critics label Wharton an anti-Semite. Cynthia Ozick writes that Edith Wharton was compliant in the face of her friend Paul Bourget's openly-declared anti-Semitism (293). Sol Liptzin's in American Literature cites Wharton's caricature of the bounder Jew as an example of her anti-Semitism (154); Wharton's name also appears as evidence of a general cultural anti-Semitism in Florence Kiper Frank's 1930 Bookman essay, The Presentment of the in American Fiction (274; see Dobkowski 177-80). At best, Wharton is considered a social critic with her own ideological blindspots, racism and anti-Semitism among them. (She condemns Carl Van Vechten's Nigger Heaven, along with all nigger society in Harlem, in an April 1, 1927 letter to Gaillard Lapsley.)

Preview this article: Rhetoric and Ideology in the Writing Class, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/50/5/collegeenglish11381-1.gif

Preview this article: Rhetorical Constructions: Dialogue and Commitment, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/50/2/collegeenglish11414-1.gif

Preview this article: Review: History Toward Rhetoric, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/49/7/collegeenglish11451-1.gif

Preview this article: The Purification of Literature and Rhetoric, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/49/3/collegeenglish11484-1.gif

I am coming on my twentieth year of teaching composition to college freshmen, and my fifteenth administering a composition program. These anniversaries incite me to think about the circles we who teach writing have perambulated in that time-to count the ways we have, for worse and better, changed how we shape composition programs, how we manage those programs, and how we teach the courses in them. From the fifties through my days as a student and then as a new teacher, rhetoric-meaning the analysis and presentation of arguments-dominated college composition programs. But at many colleges then, the English requirement included a literature survey, and composition programs often and awkwardly stirred rhetoric and literature in one pot. For example, research papers were on literary topics, an approach that encouraged publishers to produce hundreds of excellent casebooks, all recycled long ago. The rhetorical lion and literary lamb did not get on amicably, however. They tussled. The lamb often turned wolfish. The experiential programs of the early seventies-with their emphasis on narration and description, on journal writing, on films and visual arts as aids to invention-were a victory for the literateurs, and their last hour. For then came graduate programs in composition, and the gospel of process was heard in the land. Rhetoric-now meaning heuristic strategies-ascended. Literature became, and has remained, a negligible part of most composition programs. And today, as the slogan Writing Across the Curriculum is blazoned on textbook covers and eagerly mouthed by deans who see a way to save a buck, literaturemeaning the study of fiction, drama, and perhaps even (though that's radical) poetry for their own sweet sakes-dwindles to a thin shade in freshman writing

The future of the English department and the among its various parts are much-debated issues, with special attention now given (as it will be here) to the problem of connecting literature and composition. If English departments have a future (besides the one we are often asked to go back to), will that future combine or separate lit and comp? There are among us many who propose or announce the death of the English department altogether; indeed, one often finds its obituary in the more exciting journals. Others, given to slightly less drastic cures, argue for the separation (amputation?) of composition from literature, with composition forming an independent department. A more difficult problem faces us when we presume that English departments will continue to exist, that composition should be a part of them, and that literature and composition can and should cooperate in some way, not go about their work independently. I want to explore the possibilities of such cooperation, focusing on the key terms, the figurative devices, and to some extent the genres we use in formulating our visions of a connected English Studies. I should say right off that I will be looking closely at our rhetoric of connections for my own rhetorical reasons. I will be arguing for an antifederalist view of such a union, a Jeffersonian and not Hamiltonian notion of the English department and the profession. Like Jefferson, I think that certain ways of defining the union can be tyrannical, that some disconnections can be constitutionally healthy, and that in every generation we must be prepared, indeed eager, to rethink and rearrange our relationships. In this generation, there is certainly much to arrange and rearrange. Just a random sample from what I assure you were entirely unsolicited brochures sent

Preview this article: It Takes Capital to Defeat Dracula: A New Rhetorical Essay, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/48/3/collegeenglish11612-1.gif