Abstract

I write in response to James Raymond's I-Dropping and Androgyny: The Authorial I in Scholarly Writing (CCC 44.4, December 1993, 478-83). I appreciate Raymond's reflections on the increased uses of the authorial I in scholarly writing; his observations are particularly noteworthy because, serving as former editor of College English, he not only observed trends in the field but actively shaped them. What interests me here is how Raymond poses the question about the authorial I in terms of appropriateness and then identifies three qualities as typical of its successful use: topical relevance, authoritative voice, and energy of novelty and dissent (479). As Raymond puts it: