Wednesday, February 2, 2011
The Rhetorical Turn, the Construction of Reality, and FY Writing
I especially like Chapter 4: Challenging the Literal. What runs through Chandler runs through professional talk in rhetoric and composition. There is no innate link between the signifier and the signified, and meaning is determined by interpretive communities. All of this is reflected in basic rhetorical theory -- meaning is the product of the interplay between author, audience, and medium. While we do discuss rhetorical theory in fy writing, at least to some extent, we never make the leap to the linguistic construction of reality and identity. This leap seems too difficult to make. FY students are under so much pressure, and so many new things are happening at once. I wonder, though, if there's a way to make these connections more explicit not only because it's interesting and useful to writers but also because it's a way to publicize our field. Every first year student knows about literature and creative writing, but none of them knows about rhetoric.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree Tom. My first experience teaching writing was last semester. I realized quickly that rhetoric is central; students cannot write effectively without a thorough understanding of context. I have a hard time addressing this directly, partly because my own understanding of how meaning is made is very indirect. For me, the study of rhetoric (and semiotics) has essentially been organizing and analyzing vague understandings I already have. And it's very challenging. How can this be brought into FYW?
ReplyDeleteAlex, Tom: I appreciate the questions being raised here. I'm just now gaining a footing with rhetoric and semiology, and it seems intensely difficult to impart what has often been my vague understanding of these fields to students.
ReplyDeleteA consideration for audience, social context, and discourse community knowledge seems crucial for our students' becoming mature and intentional writers. At the same time, students are used to classifying English as synonymous with literature, so I've found that they often have trouble when my class takes a rhetorical turn. I'd actually really enjoy having a discussion about how semiology and rhetoric can inform the teaching of FYW on Thursday, if it comes up.
For now, I think I'll get started on our reading for the week!
Hmmm. Good question. I really do think it does a disservice to the English department that areas like this don't get more "air time" -- I can especially relate to this, since my undergraduate focus (linguistics) had much the same problem.
ReplyDeleteThis is also particularly interesting as I think that this lack of a stable, innate connection between signifier and signified is what allows for social change, for better or worse. Maybe this is a way into discussions in FY writing? To clarify, I'm thinking something along the lines of looking at how clothing styles, or writing styles for that matter, have changed over time, and then discussing with students how/why they think these changes occur?