1.)
Yancey essentially cites our current discipline
as a growing “anachronism,” becoming less relevant as the digital age
progresses. Do you agree or disagree with this assessment? Why or why not? How
could this sense of “anachronism” (therefore implying a sense of relevance)
affect disciplines such as literary studies?
2.)
After reading on voice and the rhetorical
situation in Royster and Bitzer, respectively, questions can be raised on the
relationship between subjective voice and the rhetorical situation, and one
could argue that this relationship is rather tense. With this tension in mind,
does knowledge of “ the rhetorical situation” affect how you approach the
classroom since it is arguably a space that is considered “a rhetorical
situation”? Will the rhetorical situation and subjective voice change how you
view a student's classwork (in class participation, assignments, writing, etc)?
Rosalyn,
ReplyDeleteI honestly can’t see how our department is truly a growing anachronism. I can see the misunderstanding of it, especially after reading about the impact of technology on the discipline. I see the growth of technology as an opportunity for composition and literature to evolve, something that can already be observed in writing influenced by technology or adopted to it. People are writing blog posts, condensing Shakespearean plays into tweets. The last of these might bear a humorous intent but I think is nevertheless relevant to the discipline. My one fear is that there would be a decrease in students who care about the discipline. But perhaps for students who might require a little more convincing about the continuous relevance of English, that’s where teachers come into play to illustrate how it is relevant to their lives. Perhaps I am too stubbornly optimistic about this, though.
Rosalyn,
ReplyDeleteI mirror Stephanie's response in that I feel as though the field has a great opportunity to evolve and incorporate these genres and continue to consider the impact of technology on the field. We are preparing students for paths that will undoubtedly require the understanding and use of technology so it seems to be logical to grow the field in this area. This address was thirteen years ago and I feel as though there are many experiences to prove that we are moving in the right direction. While I love technology and truly embrace the pedagogical opportunities that it holds, I often wonder about the negative effects this technology has on our language. The "writing publics" that students are becoming members of in the digital world call for such acronymic writing, I wonder if this is to our and their detriment?