Abstract

The almost exclusive reliance on evidence developed from documentary analyses, specifically analyses of textbooks, in composition historiography has resulted in an agonistic, heroes-and-villains image of the history of writing instruction, whereby modern composition scholars have defined themselves in terms of their opposition to what has come to be called “current-traditional rhetoric.” This article promotes the use of oral evidence in composition historiography to guard against overgeneralization and simplistic reduction of composition history to binary oppositions. Oral interviews also can serve as a way of collecting information that would otherwise be lost, of exploring the thoughts, motivations, feelings, and values of informants, and of giving voice to those marginalized politically, socially, and professionally. This article also defends oral data against positivistic attacks on its reliability as evidence and argues that the evidentiary value of any piece of historical data depends not on some abstract ranking of different kinds of evidence but on the historian's understanding of the rhetorical context informing the production of that data.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
1992-07-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088392009003002
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cites in this index (7)

  1. Rhetoric Review
  2. College Composition and Communication
  3. Written Communication
  4. Rhetoric Review
  5. Rhetoric Review
Show all 7 →
  1. College Composition and Communication
  2. College English
Also cites 15 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.2307/377329
  2. 10.2307/377477
  3. 10.2307/356607
  4. 10.2307/357516
  5. 10.2307/354995
  6. 10.2307/357846
  7. 10.1080/01463377409369125
  8. 10.1086/434775
  9. 10.2307/357884
  10. 10.17723/aarc.40.4.y10q27j415278520
  11. 10.1093/ohr/6.1.45
  12. 10.1093/ohr/9.1.27
  13. 10.4324/9780203142165
  14. 10.2307/357306
  15. 10.17723/aarc.28.1.dk4312n1q9365x72
CrossRef global citation count: 6 View in citation network →