1. In the excerpts from Naming What We Know, it discusses how "texts get their meaning from other texts" and how this goes against Western ideals of authorship. Is this more of a stealing/borrowing of meaning from another text OR a sharing of meaning in the vain of making writing communicational? How can this be incorporated in the classroom regardless of either answer?
2. Dirk discusses the value in genres and how teaching genres prepares students to recognize their rhetorical situation and response in the appropriate way. However, does anyone think that this could restrict a student's voice in their writing by following this rules and norms of the respective genre? Why or why not?
Hi Antonio - In response to question number 2, I can see how we might think that this would restrict a student's voice but I believe that in many ways, if discussed and presented in the classroom almost like we did in Dr. McElroy's class on Monday, students would feel as though they had more of a voice. The genre gives students an understanding of how to approach a particular rhetorical situation but allowing them to also understand the fluidity and flexibility of genre would give them an opportunity to bend those genres to meet their needs.
ReplyDeleteHi Antonio - Responding to question 2, we discussed this in my class today. I got my students to make memes that remediated the argument from their research paper. Some students were incapable of outlining the argument in a way that fits with the genre's concise and punchy nature. We also talked about how, because memes are typically humorous in tone, the language they'd use to discuss certain topics significantly changed and made the arguments less poignant than, say, a documentary or paper. So yeah, I absolutely think genre norms can inhibit a student's voice or at least make them write less effectively about a given topic. I.E.: I feel like I'm capable of discussing materials for this course in a Facebook post, presentation, or essay, but maybe not a heavy metal song: the conventions seems stifling to me and I don't see how the genre compliments the content.
ReplyDeleteHey Antonio,
ReplyDeleteIn regards to question 1, I think it has to be conversation, or perhaps unintentional borrowing. I believe that this is the case because a text can change meaning all through time, along side the texts that come after it whether they address that text or not. These new entries into the conversation necessarily force our text to take a different place within the conversation as the context around the text changes. As to how to implement this in the classroom, I'm not quite sure. It could be taught on a historical level - looking at texts alongside their original contexts to see why they had the impact that they did. It could also be used to help students decide their writing topic. That is, they will learn that in order for their writing to be effective, it needs to respond to and fit within its own contexts. This could teach them that a text is composed as much by them as it is by the world around them. Alongside this, it could teach them that they need to fill their audience in on an appropriate amount of context in order for their message to come through. But now I feel that I am just rambling, so I'll stop it here.