COURSE FOCUS AND GOALS, COURSE OVERVIEW
AL 805 will examine the theory of rhetoric, or the art of communicating, as it has developed and evolved historically, ebbed and waned, from the classical era up to postmodernism. (AL 882 Contemporary Theories of Rhetoric picks up where AL 805 leaves off.) The chief goal of AL 805 is to help you develop an historical perspective on theories of rhetoric, literacy, and composition. You should emerge from the course with a deeper understanding of what it means to "do rhetoric" and a deeper respect for the contributions of our rhetorical ancestors. (Note: While we will do some reading and discussion in rhetoric historiography, this is NOT primarily a course about how to do historical research in the field.)

Mostly this class will focus on the Western, academic tradition of rhetoric — the so-called "traditionalist account" (Berlin, 1994) or Heritage School of classical rhetoric (Welch, 1994) — of which Aristotle is the central character and The Rhetorical Tradition the principle anthology. Mainly we will be tracking one particular intellectual rhetorical migration — the one from ancient Athenian Greece to Rome to Western Europe to the United States. It is certainly an important migration, because it is the dominant one that has influenced literacy practices, particularly educational practices, in the United States. However it is not the only one. As we track this migration, we will see that much of the art of rhetoric has been lost or skewed over time; that there is much the art obscures or neglects; that there are other rhetorical traditions we should encounter and explore. And so we will continually ask the critical question, Why THIS history?

As we track the Heritage School of Graeco-Roman, Anglo-American rhetoric, we will see that this heritage focuses largely on theory, on pedagogy, and on the relationship between the two. We will also see that this tradition on the whole rests on a particular assumption about the status of the rhetor: that the rhetor (speaker/writer) has a relatively powerful, or potentially powerful, status. The assumption is that the rhetor is a literate, educated citizen (usually male), with access to power and the means to speak and to persuade others. Alternatives voices within this tradition have typically not been anthologized because those voices have often been historically silenced (e.g., Aspasia, Sor Juana). (The second edition of The Rhetorical Tradition is just beginning to acknowledge those voices.) Rhetoricians in this second tradition tend to focus less on academic theory and pedagogy and more on establishing one's right to speak in the first place (or to be educated to speak); on issues of exclusion, silencing, and censorship; on access to communication media and to literacy education; on achieving identity and respect; on preserving language and rhetorical customs; and on basic issues of justice and power. Subordinated and silenced traditions have a different kind of struggle — establishing the right to speak and to be heard for those who have historically been denied those rights (particularly women, marginalized ethnic and racial groups, and persecuted religious communities), not only in society at large but in the academy as well.

In a sense, then, we will be considering TWO kinds of rhetorical/oratorical stances: (1) the rhetor within and assumed by the Graeco-Roman tradition of Aristotle and his descendants; (2) the rhetor marginalized, excluded, or ignored by this tradition who nonetheless speaks from it and/or to it. As we explore these two tracks in "the" tradition of rhetoric, it will be apparent that they invoke and develop different kinds of rhetoric theory, but also that there are resources, themes, and strategies common to both.

WHY DO RHETORIC? WHY STUDY RHETORIC HISTORY AND THEORY?

A key question guiding my thinking these days is this one: What does rhetoric DO? What difference does it make? What useful, important, or valuable function does it serve as a discipline, as a methodology, as a critical/scholarly approach, as a tool? Why should anyone DO rhetoric? In terms of AL 805, the key subquestions to ask are these: What does rhetoric THEORY do(for us, for anyone)? How does the study of the HISTORY of rhetoric help us? By the time the course ends, you should be prepared to answer these questions for yourself.

Here's a provisional attempt to address these questions — largely underdeveloped and unsatisfactory, but it will do to get us started: Understanding history/ies of rhetoric is vital to understanding the role and status of writing in the educational curriculum today. Do we really understand what "writing" is? Most of our theories/practices for teaching it arise from a rhetoric for oral discourse — is that appropriate? Most of our actual venues for writing these days are multimodal and hypertextual — do theories/practices for speech and print discourse actually apply any more? It does help to understand where our theories and practices come from. Why is style still (yes, STILL) the dominant focus of composition instruction in K-12 education and in first-year composition? The answer to that has something to do with Peter Ramus's view of logic, with the Puritans and the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre, with John Locke's philosophy of language, with Hugh Blair's emphasis on taste, and with Matthew Arnold's views of culture and literature. Unpacking the history can help us understand why we are where we are, and how we could do things differently.

I believe that it is vitally important for those in rhetoric and writing, literacy and pedagogy, and professional writing to understand and respect the Western rhetorical tradition and its influence — it affects how we think about texts, writing, persuasion, language use, and both public and professional discourse. (Operative principle: Respect your intellectual ancestors.) I beleve that it is also important to critique this tradition — to understand its limitations, its prejudices, its failings, even its injustices. We'll do both — pay homage and apply withering critique — as appropriate and needed.

REQUIRED TEXTS

Aristotle, Rhetoric. —> either the George Kennedy translation (Aristotle on rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse, Oxford University Press, 1991, $28) or the Corbett edition/Rhys Roberts translation (The rhetoric and the poetics of Aristotle, Modern Library College Edition, 1984, $10)

Bizzell, Patricia, & Herzberg, Bruce, eds. (2001). The rhetorical tradition: Readings from classical times to the present (2nd ed). Bedford St. Martin's. Abbreviated RT. ($87 new, $24 and up used) —> GET THE 2ND EDITION, NOT THE 1ST!

Crowley, Sharon. (1998). Composition in the university: Historical and polemical essays. University of Pittsburgh Press. ($20)

Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. (1983). The printing revolution in early modern Europe. Cambridge University Press/Canto. ($16)

Murphy, James J., ed. (2001). A short history of writing instruction: From ancient Greece to modern America (2nd ed). Hermagoras Press/Erlbaum. ($28) —> GET THE 2ND EDITION, NOT THE 1ST!

Terrill, Robert E. (2004). Malcolm X: Inventing radical judgment. Michigan State University Press. ($33)

RECOMMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL TEXTS

Lanham, Richard, ed. (1992). A handlist of rhetorical terms (2d ed.). University of California Press. ($20) --> a good one to have on hand for the course, and for your permanent library ... how else will you know whether "palilogia" is a good thing or a bad thing in your writing?

Lunsford, Andrea, ed. (1995). Reclaiming Rhetorica: Women in the rhetorical tradition. University of Pittsburgh Press. ($23)--> an important collection in feminist rhetorical historiography

* prices listed are from Amazon.com; texts listed are on library reserve

COURSE PROJECTS, REQUIREMENTS, AND GRADING

—> FOR BA AND MA STUDENTS

• Participation, including in-class discussion, in-class writing, and online discussion board postings in ANGEL — 20%
There will be occasional in-class writing opportunities — aka, "reading quizzes" — that will test your knowledge of the readings for that day's class. For oral participation in class and for online discussion board postings (in ANGEL), an especially important criterion is your contributions to others' projects and to the community learning effort. Regularity, substance, helpfulness, and relevance of participation count more than frequency: Do you attend class; participate regularly; provide interesting, helpful, and substantive comments; and ask good questions? Are you responsive to your classmates and the instructor? Do you provide helpful feedback? Do you engage others' ideas with respect and in a spirit of cooperation and mutual inquiry and learning? In general, do you contribute to the intellectual community of the class? The ANGEL discussion boards provide an opportunity for ongoing class discussion outside of regular class time — feel free to make new discussion forums in the online space.

• Terminology paper (maximum 2 pp singlespaced including references) and in-class presentation — 20%
Take a rhetoric term from the classical era and track its meaning and significance historically, focusing on the range of variation of use. Who used the term and how? How has the term developed or diminished over time? How significant is the term? In what ways has the term been a site of disagreement, conflict, or diversity of views? What new potential do you see for expanding, reinvigorating, or reinventing the term? Identify a small number of key resources (4-8). Check topic choice with instructor in advance. Schedule your in-class presentation with instructor to coordinate with related class period. Key references for this assignment include Sloane, Encyclopedia of Rhetoric; Enos, Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition; and Lanham, A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. Samples: Porter, on "Audience" and "Author"; hypertext essay on “kairos” http://english.ttu.edu/kairos/layers/rebirth.html.

• Take-home midterm exam — 15%
One or two short essays covering material from the first half of the course.

• Historical investigation paper (5 pp singlespaced + bibliography) — 30%
Explore an issue, topic, or question in the history of rhetoric and show its current relevance and application to professional writing. You can explore in greater depth a topic we treated in class. Or you can explore a topic/question that we didn't cover sufficiently but that is worthy of treatment. Check topic choice with instructor in advance. Assignment can be done in the form of a traditional academic paper or as a web essay.

• Take-home final exam — 15%
One or two short essays covering material from the second half of the course.

—> FOR PHD STUDENTS

• Participation, including in-class discussion, in-class writing, and online discussion board postings in ANGEL — 20%
There will be occasional in-class writing opportunities — aka, "reading quizzes" — that will test your knowledge of the readings for that day's class. For oral participation in class and for online discussion board postings (in ANGEL), an especially important criterion is your contributions to others' projects and to the community learning effort. Regularity, substance, helpfulness, and relevance of participation count more than frequency: Do you attend class; participate regularly; provide interesting, helpful, and substantive comments; and ask good questions? Are you responsive to your classmates and the instructor? Do you provide helpful feedback? Do you engage others' ideas with respect and in a spirit of cooperation and mutual inquiry and learning? In general, do you contribute to the intellectual community of the class? The ANGEL discussion boards provide an opportunity for ongoing class discussion outside of regular class time — feel free to make new discussion forums in the online space.

• Class presentation on a major historical figure or key topic — 25%
Each PhD student will be responsible for teaching a 30-minute segment of the course, focusing on a major figure or topic treated in AL 805 (e.g., do a class presentation that provides an in-depth treatment of Gorgias, or of Plato, of Sor Juana, or of Kenneth Burke; or of kairos, of ethos, of issues in rhetoric historiography, or of the role of the progymnasmata in rhetoric pedagogy). Doing this assignment requires the following: (1) give a short (~15 minutes) in-class presentation; (2) provide a short (2-3 page) handout with relevant information (e.g., key quotations, timeline, key primary and secondary sources, outline of key points and questions); and (c) lead a class discussion. Check topic choice with instructor in advance. Schedule your in-class presentation with instructor to coordinate with related class period. (Note: More than one person can cover the same or a related topic: e.g., somebody could cover the sophists; somebody else could do a presentation on Isocrates. Two students could propose to collaborate on a longer presentation treating a more comprehensive topic.) The main purpose of this assignment is for you to dig into a figure/topic in greater depth, engaging a broad range of primary and secondary sources.

• Historical investigation paper (8-10 pp singlespaced + bibliography) — 30%
Explore an issue, topic, or question in the history of rhetoric and show its current relevance and application to writing and/or the teaching of writing. You can explore in greater depth a topic we treated in class. Or you can explore a topic/question that we didn't cover sufficiently (or at all) but that is worthy of treatment. Use the assignment as an opportunity to expand and deepen your knowledge of a particular area in the history of rhetoric. Check topic choice with instructor in advance. Assignment can be done in the form of a traditional academic paper or as a web essay.

• Take-home final exam — 25%
Exact format to be determined. Probably 2 questions co-developed by instructor and students.

EXPECTATIONS AND GRADING

You are expected to do ALL the required reading, and on time. (PhD students should read a significant portion of the supplemental reading as well as the required reading.) Come to class prepared to discuss the readings and to write about them. You are expected to attend class always, to participate intensely, and to contribute substantively to the intellectual community of the class. Your class participation — which includes in-class oral discussion, in-class writing, and online discussion board entries (in ANGEL) — will be graded on your understanding of the material, the depth of engagement with the topic, and on your contributions to the overall learning of the community and to your engagement with others in the class.

Your written work should show that you understand the course material (readings, discussion); that you are familiar with major topics and issues in the field related to your research project (and the subtleties thereof); that you are doing original thinking and innovative work; that you have read beyond the required reading for the course; that you can write clearly, cogently, and fluently about the material; that you are familiar with both primary and secondary materials; and that you are developing your own intellectually potent viewpoint toward that material.

POLICY ON RECYCLING OLD WORK. The writing that you do in AL 805 should be your own original writing; it should not be writing that you have done (or are doing) for other courses or purposes. That said, you can certainly rework projects that you have done previously. You can also work on the same project for two different courses this term — if you write separate papers for those two courses and if you have the permission of both instructors to do so. In other words, you can work on the same project across courses, but you cannot reuse the same paper (or piece of writing) twice.

Toward the middle of the semester, the instructor will send out a short progress report informing each student of her/his grade in the course at that point.

HELPFUL RESOURCES

• ONLINE BIBLIOGRAPHIES
Rhetoric Resources (Carnegie Mellon)
http://eserver.org/rhetoric/

Stephen Tyler, ANTH 412: Rhetoric [reading list]
http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~anth412/

Enculturation links and resources
http://enculturation.gmu.edu/links.html

CompPile Rhetoric and Composition Bibliography
http://compPile.tamucc.edu/about.htm

The CCCC Bibliography of Composition and Rhetoric 1984-1999
http://www.ibiblio.org/twtaylor/links.html

• ENCYCLOPEDIAS, GLOSSARIES
Gideon Burton, Silva Rhetoricae: The Forest of Rhetoric
http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/
- see "Recommended Readings in Rhetoric"

A glossary of rhetorical terms
http://www.uky.edu/ArtsSciences/Classics/rhetoric.html

Georgia Tech Rhetoric Resources
http://www.lcc.gatech.edu/gallery/rhetoric/

Sloane, Thomas (Ed). (2001). Encyclopedia of rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Enos, Theresa (Ed.). (1996). Encyclopedia of rhetoric and composition: Communication from ancient times to the information age. New York: Garland.

Lanham, Richard (Ed.). (1992). A handlist of rhetorical terms (2d ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.

• ORGANIZATIONS
Rhetoric Society of America -- http://rhetoricsociety.org/
- holds biennial conference (next one: May 26-29, 2006, Memphis, TN)

American Society for the History of Rhetoric -- http://www.ashr.org/

International Society for the History of Rhetoric -- http://ishr.cua.edu/

• JOURNALS
Ars Rhetorica -- http://www.ars-rhetorica.net/

Philosophy and Rhetoric -- http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/par/

Rhetorica -- http://ishr.ucdavis.edu/rhetorica.htm | http://www.ucpress.edu/journals/rh/

Rhetoric Review -- http://www.rhetoricreview.com/index.htm

Rhetoric Society Quarterly -- http://rhetoricsociety.org/

Comas, "Periodicals in Rhetoric" -- http://www.missouri.edu/~engjnc/rhetoric/periodicals.html

Rhetorical Review: The Electronic Review of Books on the History of Rhetoric
http://www.nnrh.dk/RR/index.html

• DISCUSSION LISTS
H-RHETOR -- http://www.h-net.org/~rhetor/