These chapters seem to go furthest of all of our readings to really show the connection between contemporary democracy and rhetoric. They show ways to reconfigure the relationship between the two. They don't focus so much on how to make a pedagogy out of this newly figured rhetoric, but looking at the earlier readings, mostly Berlin, I'm a-wonderin' if a teaching tool or two may be synthesized.
Berlin's model of a classroom that embraces student diversity, helping students to investigate their own backgrounds and delve into the rhetorics that those backgrounds provide, speak to Logan's chapter. The identification-resistance rhetoric could easily be taught with the foundation that such a pedagogy would provide.
The main question I'm left with, after reading and synthesizing, is whether we need to be focusing rhetoric beyond the composition of papers. Do we need to be teaching students the rhetorics of e-mail, blogging, and other forms of discourse that Gronbeck and others see as vital to the future of rhetorical democracy? And how would teaching that kind of rhetoric intersect with composition studies, and speech and communication?
Other questions that the readings raised, while I'm on that jag: how much access to the democratic process will rhetorical training give our students? This isn't meant to be pessimistic or rhetorical (hee hee); I'm wondering what our freshly trained rhetoricians would do with their new skills, to exercise their power to influence democracy. Blog? Protest? Restructure culture to allow for these new voices?
Have a wonderful day, everyone. Thanks for this wonderfully thought-provoking class.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Having spoken with plenty of communication majors well versed in public speaking, persuasion, argumentation, etc. I think I'd conclude that the "freshly trained rhetoricians" all want to be in public relations. Whether they want to exercise power/control over others, or see this profession as being where the money is, is not important. I think its more important that we consider what it means for our democracy that the public relations industry is growing so rapidly, and that students tend to view participation in that machine as glamorous and desirable. I see bad things. How's that for pessimistic?
I agree with Mark. When our students think about rhetorical argument, they don't want Lincoln-Douglas debates, they want Taco Bell commercials.
This is, or seems to be at least, at odds with what I was told when I brought up the idea of cultural discussions in the class--apparently, some believe that the students have trouble viewing popular culture in academic ways--while I haven't experienced this yet, it's still a bit strange...
Post a Comment