Faith | ENG 5020: Writing Theory & Practice

I don’t know if anyone else had the same experience, but I was somewhat shocked to read that rhetoric had a reemergence during the 1960’s. In the practice of ‘good’ rhetoric, I took a page from Kyla Wazana Tompkins. Though she isn’t discussed exclusively in this reading, chapter two of Rhetoric and Composition by Janice M. Lauler, I still found some overlaps between the two:

“This brings me to another exercise I do in class, which is to actually write out the model that I learned as an undergrad across the top of a blackboard (Wollstonecraft then Friedan then National Organization of Women then Radical feminism then Women of Color feminism etc etc, an obviously reductive and flawed genealogy) and then underneath to chart out other revolutionary timelines…” (p. 5, “We Aren’t Here to Learn What We Already Know”)

That brings me back to my initial shock of rhetoric in the 1960’s. The first revolution that came to mind to chart out was, the civil rights movement. Never in my educational career did it even come to mind that both sides, those for and opposing civil rights, used, studied, and analyzed rhetoric. Take, for example, Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” written in 1963, written at the height of the civil rights movement, which heavily “persuaded” the masses of the injustice of Jim Crow segregation.

If Rhetoric and Composition are now synonymous with one another, then why am I learning about it just now?

Traditional English Teaching

That’s because, as Lauler reveals:

“…teaching also focused on reading and discussing essays, completing exercises on style, and repeating drills on grammar. Little, if any, attention was paid to helping students get started, investigate ideas, consider readers, receive feedback on drafts, or revise.” (p. 7)

All of these aspects are of huge importance when it comes to composition. Without rhetoric, how does a student even begin to form a thought or question that engages and challenges themselves and their readers? Sure, I learned about Martin Luther King; no, I did not learn about his letter and what makes it successful writing. Successful in that it made people think, question, and eventually change their behavior, beliefs, and even racial laws:

He uses ethos by presenting himself as a minister and a scholar, thereby establishing credibility. He appeals to pathos by vividly describing the suffering and injustice faced by African Americans in Birmingham. King writes about the brutality of segregation, the bombings of African American homes, and the emotional toll it takes on the community. These emotional appeals elicit empathy and anger from the readers. King also uses logos by presenting a logical argument for the necessity of nonviolent direct action. He explains that negotiations with white authorities have failed, and waiting for justice is no longer an option. He argues that civil disobedience is a moral duty when faced with unjust laws. King invokes the moral and ethical principles of justice and equality, drawing upon his deep knowledge of philosophy and theology.” (ProfessorCatMaster607)

How can we expect students, or anyone, from that matter to write using rhetoric if there’s still a major emphasis on ‘correct’ grammar (p.20), which, ironically enough, makes grammar worse.