[Teaching_Composition] Asao's Post--Defining Ownership

[Debra Dew]

Yes-- rhetoric and comp scholars have gotten excited about *ownership* [ the 
WPA List offers a clear record of such excitement ], but in what sense would 
we cast the excited or the anxious as *overly* excited, which implies an 
undue measure of worry or excitement maybe not linked to real experiences on 
the ground?

I would link the *excitement* as a justified response to a common and 
recurring pattern of both public and institutional advances upon and/or 
clear appropriations of writing's assessment and instructional zone of 
academic authority.

What do you think causes the excitement?

Debra
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Irvin Peckham" <ipeckh1@lsu.edu>
To: <teaching_composition@mailman.eppg.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 6:47 AM
Subject: RE: [Teaching_Composition] Asao's Post--Defining Ownership


> Just to second russ on this and maybe to add:
> Isn't this entire business of ownership the consequence of having been
> socially structured into believing in ownership?  This applies to
> "owning" a writing program or "owning" one's pedagogy, etc.  to my mind,
> all of these things can more profitably be thought of in terms of social
> exchange--with even the "exchange" needed a little connotative
> cleansing.  It's really social participation.
>
> I think rhetoric and composition programs and scholars have frequently
> gotten overly excited about owning their field.  You see that when they
> make self-elevating claims about rhetoric's centrality, etc.  Probably
> the new rhetoricians got into that (everything's an argument) & it was
> certainly picked up by berlin.
>
> =========================================
> Irvin Peckham
> Director of the University Writing Program
> Louisiana State University
> ipeckh1@lsu.edu
> http://www.english.lsu.edu/programs/dept/ugrad/firstyear/
> 225-772-5963
> ==========================================
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: teaching_composition-admin@mailman.eppg.com
> [mailto:teaching_composition-admin@mailman.eppg.com] On Behalf Of Russ
> Hunt
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 12:19 PM
> To: teaching_composition@mailman.eppg.com
> Subject: Re: [Teaching_Composition] Asao's Post--Defining Ownership
>
> I've been unable to follow this as closely as I'd have liked,
> but this question seems to me pretty central.
>
>> How do we reconcile the concept of text ownership with the
>> notion of text (genre) as social action, and with the idea
>> that writing has the social role--through generic structure
>> and rhetorical functions-- to act as a mediator of social
>> relationships, and therefore belongs to the social group in
>> which it performs its actions ?
>
> I'd argue that using "ownership" as a metaphor for what we're
> talking about runs some pretty serious rhetorical risks.
>
> What culture is it that says you can only be sure you own
> something when you succeed in giving it away?
>
> -- Russ
>
> St. Thomas University
> http://www.stu.ca/~hunt/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teaching_Composition maillist  -  Teaching_Composition@mailman.eppg.com
> http://mailman.eppg.com/mailman/listinfo/teaching_composition
>
> To unsubscribe, please visit
> http://mailman.eppg.com/mailman/listinfo/teaching_composition and update
> your information.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teaching_Composition maillist  -  Teaching_Composition@mailman.eppg.com
> http://mailman.eppg.com/mailman/listinfo/teaching_composition
>
> To unsubscribe, please visit 
> http://mailman.eppg.com/mailman/listinfo/teaching_composition and update 
> your information.
>