Allow me to dare to follow in the footsteps of William Riley Parker and define rhetoric the way he traced the history of teaching of English, that is, rhetorically. No, I won't get into the familial relationships of Ms. Rhetoric and Ms. Oratory and their descendent, Ms. English. I say Ms., because to say otherwise would amount to female foeticide in my head, but let us leave that discussion for another day. Thankfully, our Ms. English is alive and well and all grown up, almost aging. So much so, that it appears that she is knocking on the door of second childhood, "sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything," courtesy Twitter and Facebook and other social networking engines designed to slaughter the good old family, separated or not. Anyway, let us leave that discussion for another day, too. Before I digress any further, and what is rhetoric? becomes a mere rhetorical question, let me answer it, rhetorically. Isn't rhetoric what Donald Trump calls "political correctness" yet convinces people without using any of it (political correctness)? Isn't rhetoric what diplomats use to tell people to "go to hell in a way" that they actually "look forward to the trip?" Isn't rhetoric what makes the “pen mightier than the sword?” Isn’t rhetoric what sometimes makes the pen ironically wield a sword and seal the fates of nations on death certificates signed in the blood of innocent people? For our 1301 students, however, it won't be something as murky.
Now let us take a peek at what Merriam Webster says rhetoric is. It states, "language that is intended to influence people and that may not be honest or reasonable." Ouch! Political correctness, anyone? The second definition might be a bit closer to what we are trying to achieve in our department: "the art or skill of speaking or writing formally and effectively especially as a way to persuade or influence people." Voila! Here we go! If I were to teach a class, I would stick to the second definition and for obvious reasons, in a very politically correct manner, jettison the one that mentions dishonesty. To the art of effective persuasion!
As far as the history of rhetoric is concerned, like almost everything under the sun, it goes back to the Greeks. The Sophists in fact remind me of the people who work for presidential campaigns. Aren’t they the ones who prepare a future president for his/her public appearances and speeches? What is interesting though, is the fact that while the Greeks were teaching rhetoric thousands of years ago, the teaching of English is only in its nascency (compared to Greek teaching, of course). I was impressed to see how well the Greeks had developed the art of oratory and even more, the art of teaching oratory.
This brings me to my teaching and the question of what I want to do with the content from this course. With 5060, I am hoping to not only learn how to teach composition, but also to hone my writing skills. What better way can there be of teaching than to practice first and then preach? In addition, I am interested in creating a deep interest among students for reading. Any good writing is preceded by good reading. When I was in school, cell phones did not exist. Winter vacation meant travel, books, coffee, snow, more books, more snow, and electricity outages, which in turn meant bon fires in snow and a discussion of what we were reading before the electricity betrayed us. The only tweets that existed were those of real birds (Don’t even get me started on the colors of their feathers and beaks. They were nothing like a rainbow could even begin to imitate) and were far more melodious than the ping of one’s phone. Yes, I am old school and I believe good writing begins with voracious reading. I am worried about the dwindling attention spans of students these days and while we may be linking technology and internet with composition, I am interested in how to do so without making them entirely dependent on it. What I am trying to say is that while spell checks and grammar checks are great tools for proofreading, but isn’t there a peril of becoming dangerously dependent on them?
It's always interesting to think about the relationship between politics and rhetoric, I have a general background in political science (minor in undergrad, some courses as a Master's student), and I find it fascinating to hear how some scholars in that discipline respond to rhetoric--usually it's not in very complimentary lights. I think it's important that we're mindful of "political correctness" like you mentioned, as well as how persuasion can be interpreted as both a tool of effective communication, but also negatively as a mechanism to deceive.
ReplyDeleteDonald Trump is such a great example because one could argue that he's a highly effective orator in that he's drawing support in far higher numbers than I would have ever anticipated, but that doesn't necessarily equate to a good leader or thinker. It reminds me a lot of the debates between Plato and the Sophists, as you mentioned in your posts--where do we try and find responsibility in rhetoric? Should we find responsibility in rhetoric? Big thoughts from your blog post!!
I'm also with you on the old school approach to composition--reading before writing. In a lot of my own classes, it's always emphasized that before writing an argument of any kind, it's important to see what conversations are already happening (in vein with the Burkean Parlor--you have to listen before you can hop in to a discussion).
With your discussion on reading before writing, I was curious as to what you think about integrating research from sources that are more tech-based (digital archives, blogs, tweets, etc.). Do you think there's value in studying more social, digital writing even if you don't want students to become dependent on it in your classrooms?
Leah, I totally agree with you when you say that while it would be safe to categorize Trump as a good orator (only because he is succeeding in making his outrageous points) he is far from being a good leader.
DeleteWhen it comes to incorporating research from tech-based sources, I think it has become a necessity. While digital archives can be immensely helpful, I'm not very sure about tweets. In fact, I see social networking sites as very anti-social in that they foster bullies and ignorance. So for research, I don't think I would count on tweets or blogs as I see them as highly unreliable and sometimes based on uniformed opinion.
Have you ever seen the film, Independence Day? Most people have, but surprisingly some haven't. If you haven't here's a YouTube clip I'm about to talk about: https://youtu.be/QoLywiaM6PA
ReplyDeleteThis particular clip, in my opinion, is one of the greatest rhetorical speeches I've ever heard/seen. I don't know who actually wrote this part of the script, but I applaud them. I use this clip to teach Ethos, Pathos, Logos. This is the clip I think of when I think of rhetoric and politics. Obviously, it's fake, but in the film, it's real. You could argue it's both politically correct and politically incorrect, but we'll save that for later. The point is that this clip invokes the very essence of rhetoric: the ethos, pathos, and logos.
Moreover, I can't add much for Donald Trump, I haven't paid any attention to him. Which brings about an interesting point, actually. If you read Jessica's blog she talks about liking a person even with boring material. I choose to avoid listening to anything that man has to say. I can't tell you a specific reason why, I just vaguely recall he did something stupid a long time ago that I didn't agree with and since then I've thought of him as the very embodiment of the "rich white collared white man super republican". So now, no matter what he says, even if I did listen, I would likely disagree. So in the concept of rhetoric, it's not just what you say or how you say it, but it's also about your history, who you've been, what you've done, what you've said before. If I remember correctly, thinking back to my undergrad days, I want to say it was Aristotle or maybe Quintilian who said something like "in order to be a good rhetor you must be a good man." (I have my rhetoric book somewhere I could probably find this if you're interested.) Which this is very interesting when it comes to rhetoric and politicians.
Now moving on, to add to your comment about composition. I'll admit something here. I never learned grammar in primary school. I wasn't taught grammar in high school. I actually had never taken an English or Language Arts class until I was a 9th grader. I am dyslexic, so I was pulled from my ELA classes to attend a Language Science class where my teacher never taught us grammar, but rather how to read phonetically and such. I never taught myself grammar, my mom tried to teach me a little bit when I was a kid, so I knew what a noun, verb, adverb, and adjective were, but beyond that, no clue. So I learned to write, and write well through reading. I studied sentences, their structure, their syntax, their proper uses of verbs and active voice versus passive voice. Like you said, good writing begins with reading. And also as you've pointed out, and I did as well in my own blog- how can we get students to actually read more than 140 characters at a time? How can we get them to read well written literature? Almost everything I see on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, etc. is poorly written. It's also culture. I think one of the biggest questions we as comp teachers face is how to teach students the difference between what is good writing and what is not. Or what would be more effective is to teach students to simply not write poorly. Obviously, easier said than done when 99% of their life is consumed by poor writing primarily on social media. But how do we get them away from social media and on to a different source of media with good writing? If only these social media sites would not let you post something that is poorly written, life would be a lot less frustrating for English teachers, wouldn't it?
Meghan, I am glad that you brought up Independence Day. It's been a while since i saw that movie, but who can forget that famous speech? Yes, I concur with you that it is a great example of rhetoric.
DeleteI also like the fact that you have decided to pay no attention to Trump; he deserves none. But because I am an immigrant (legal of course!) and a woman at that, I am still searching for ways to ignore him.
"How can we get them to read well written literature?" Well, I think we could get out students to do this, half the battle would be won. As of now I am clueless as to how to to do this. Social media is the nemesis of good writing.
"With 5060, I am hoping to not only learn how to teach composition, but also to hone my writing skills. What better way can there be of teaching than to practice first and then preach?"
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way--especially as a poet who just graduated from an MFA in creative writing, I want to work on my critical/analytical essay writing skills more. I definitely bring over knowledge about writing from my work in poetry, and I think academic writing could be more poetic, but I think more discussion and more practice in academic writing specifically would help me improve in the various genres--article, abstract, literature survey, book review, even CVs and professional bios.
Teaching essay writing in particular re-immerses me in the fundamentals of academic writing. But I do want to encourage and create opportunities for my students to be flexible in how they compose--in different genres, across disciplines. Here, too, I'd like to bring in my experience in poetry and other creative writing genres. It's a continual process or experiment in cross-pollination.
"I am worried about the dwindling attention spans of students these days and while we may be linking technology and internet with composition, I am interested in how to do so without making them entirely dependent on it."
My hope--and classroom practice--is that digital media can be a valuable platform for underrepresented voices. Many activist campaigns begin on Twitter these days--and we can talk about both the pros and cons of this tactic. But it's through Twitter that I've found and been enriched by some of the best critical articles on say, intersectional feminism, or racialized violence against black & brown bodies. So, it can be a gate or passageway to true engagement. It can be a network of support. Asian American & Asian Canadian YouTubers do collaborations and help make up for a giant media gap. Attention span is a problem, but students' apathy can be linked to their perception that none of this academic stuff is relevant to their lives. I don't want to reduce things to the lowest common denominator and teach YouTube clips just because it will hold students' attentions... but I don't want to be nostalgic for some "golden era" of literacy and literary appreciation that never really existed anyway (who had the time and luxury to "seriously" read and write...?). So, some kind of balance needs to occur--YouTube clips, okay, but also nitty gritty close reading. Questioning. Critiquing. Not passive consuming of media and texts. Engagement. What this looks like, though, is certainly a lot of work on the teacher's part. But also on the students'. I think intellectual rigor means making it clear to students that it's their responsibility to engage. Whether it's Judith Butler's work on precarity and poststructuralist ethics... or it's a YouTube video of Natalie Tran talking about her cat... or some strange surprising combination of the two... the goal is to get students to read and think beyond the surface, to move beyond either "this is too academic and difficult" or "this is just fluff." And I think that means as instructors, we have to be (strategically) flexible in our pedagogies and our compositions, too.
Chen, I love the idea that "academic writing could be more poetic." I would really enjoy reading that kind of writing or even writing in that manner. Now that you brought it up, I am curious as to why it is not so already. Or maybe I already have an answer to that somewhere in my blog. It is a great idea, though! Poetic academic writing!
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting how you've utilized Twitter to focus on things that matter. However, the question is how do we get our students to behave more maturely. Or are they doing so already and I'm just unaware of it? I also like your analysis of why they have the attention spans that they do. In fact, your reason that they do not find academic stuff relevant to their lives makes a lot of sense. I think this is the primary reason why the kind of language that is used on social networking sites is something that they find cool. It is relevant to their lives after all!
Great post, Chen!
Wow, excellent replies here. I'd recommend offering replies here in your blog to these comments, and/or carry on the conversation in their blogs. Nice connections to ongoing rhetoric in the news. There is much connotation to the word rhetoric, absolutely. There is also much pre-conception over what argument is. Argument is a productive term that can be used very constructively. It's our job to teach students how to find stasis and argue productive, responsibly, ethically, etc. You might check out some of the books I've showed during class regarding grammar and style. Joseph Williams' work, in my view, is the very best. You might like Martha Kolln, too: practical grammar.
ReplyDelete