European Studies Logo

Linda Ferreira-Buckley


Associate ProfessorPh. D.,

Contact

Courses


E 387R • Writ The Hist Of English Stds

35635 • Fall 2016
Meets W 6:00PM-9:00PM CAL 221

Writing the History of English Studies

Why was “English studies” created and how has it evolved over time? Why do English departments today have different forms, include or exclude sub-disciplines, and articulate different missions?

This seminar traces the history of English studies in Great Britain and in America. Tensions within English departments between those who devote themselves primarily to rhetoric and/or writing and those who devote themselves primarily to literary studies can be traced to the changes in rhetorical and literary theory and the changing pedagogical approaches that developed in language study between 1600 and 1950. These changes will be central to our discussions.

In so doing, we will confront and attempt to answer problematic questions such as these: How have theorists and practitioners defined terms like “rhetoric,” “ composition,” “linguistics,” “classics,” and “literature”? How have conceptions of these disciplines changed over time? To what extent were these disciplines distinct at any given period? How do we define these disciplines today? How (and why) do we make distinctions between them? How does scholarship characterize these differences today? Why does most scholarship examining splits between disciplines ignore theoretical conflicts with a discipline? As these questions suggest, studying these histories is not just a way to satisfy our historical curiosity (although these histories are both interesting and curious)—it should help us to understand our work as researchers and teachers in the 21st century.

To help make sense of the various bases on which histories are constructed, we will also read theoretical and methodological pieces in historiography. Additionally, we will do occasional exercises with archival materials.

Seminar members should be encouraged by the significant work still to be done in the history and identity of these disciplines. (Seminar members may choose to work with archival materials for their major project.)

Whether their primary interest is in rhetoric and writing, in “literary” studies, in communication studies, in classics, or in education more generally, participants should find our investigations a compelling way to be self-reflexive about their own critical theories and practices.

For the major project, each seminar member will identify a scholarly problem in the history or practice of his or her discipline. He or she will complete a book review (10%), a conference proposal (10%), a literature review (20%), and, finally, a paper suitable for submission to a journal or for presentation at a conference (60%). During the semester, we will look carefully at each of these genres to identify disciplinary conventions.

The final list of readings will be determined by the research needs and professional interests of seminar members but will include recent articles from major journals in literary, rhetorical, and writing studies.

It will also include excerpts from some of the following: Guy & Small, Politics and Value in English Studies; Palmer, The Rise of English Studies; Engler and Haas, European English Studies: Contributions towards the History of a Discipline;Brereton, The Origins of Composition Studies in the American College, 1875-1925;Graff and Warner, The Origins of Literary Studies in America, Miller, The Formation of College English; Saunders, The Profession of English Letters; Scholes, The Rise and Fall of English: Restructuring English as a Discipline; Watkins, Work Time: English Departments and the Circulation of Cultural Value; Benson, Speech Communication in the Twentieth Century; Cohen, History of Speech Communication; Council of UCD, Classics Departments in British Universities; Law, History of Linguistics in Europe.

RHE 330E • Film As Rhetoric

44145 • Fall 2016
Meets MW 3:30PM-5:00PM PAR 103

This course is designed to examine films as rhetorical acts that serve as powerful function in the American polis. Their status as popular entertainment sometimes obscures viewers’ perception of films as a vehicle of persuasion. In what ways does film function as rhetoric, which Kant labeled as “the art of deceiving by a beautiful show” aiming “to win minds to the side of the orator before they have formed a judgment and to deprive them of their freedom”?  Is the director the rhetor, or is the message framed more collaboratively by, say, the director, screen writer, actors? 

We will attempt to answer these and similar question as we discuss approximately 7 to 10 films that students have viewed for class (no more than 1 film per week).  The syllabus will be organized around signal rhetorical concepts, which we discuss in class and which students will use to analyze films in 8 short response papers.  Additionally, students will keep a dialectical journal. Students will develop one longer paper on a film of their choice not viewed or discussed in class.  They develop their over the second half of the semester, during which time it will be reviewed by peers,  presented in a conference with the instructor and, finally, revised and submitted for a grade.

This course does not study cinematic technique though we will occasionally draw on technical terminology and concepts as we discuss how film makers use images, movements, and sound to rhetorical effect.

 

Assignments and Grading

  • 40%     8 response papers, 1 to 2 pages each
  • 40%     1 longer paper, 6 to 9 pages
  • 10%     quizzes
  • 10%     final exam
  • Peer reviews, revisions, attendance, participation  all required to pass course.

 

Required Texts and Course Readings

Films:

  • Crash
  • Lincoln
  • Mulan
  • Thank You for Smoking
  • The Great Debaters
  • The King’s Speech
  • Film nominated and selected by students to be integrated into syllabus

 

Texts:

  • Barry Brummett, Rhetorical Dimensions in Popular Culture
  • Course packet to include:
  • Robert Arnett, “The Enthymeme and Contemporary Film Criticism.”
  • Laurence Behrens, “The Argument in Film: Applying Rhetorical Theory to Film Criticism.”
  • Wayne Booth, “Is There an ‘Implied’ Author in Every Film?”
  • Michael Carter, “Stasis and Kairos: Principles of Social Construction in Classical Rhetoric”
  • Pauline Kael, “Pauline Kael Talks About Violence, Sex, Eroticism and Women & Men in the Movies,”
  • from Conversations with Pauline Kael.
  • James Naremore, “Death and Rebirth of Rhetoric,” In Senses of Cinema
  • Chaim Perelman, “The Social Contexts of Argumentation.”
  • Colleen Tremonte, “Film, Classical Rhetoric, and Visual Literacy”
  • Annalee R. Ward, “Disney, Film, and Morality”  &  “Mulan: East Meets West”
  •               in Mouse Morality: Rhetoric in Disney Animated Films
  • Trinh T. Minh-ha. “‘Who Is Speaking?’ Of Nation, Community, and First-Person Interviews”
  •               from Feminisms in the Cinema

Other:

  • Dartmouth Writing Program, “Writing About Film,” http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/humanities/film.shtml
  • Movie Speeches.” American Rhetoric. <http://www.americanrhetoric.com/moviespeeches.htm>
  • Internet Movie Database (IMDb), http://www.imdb.com/
  • Yale, “Film Analysis Website 2.0,” http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/index.htm

RHE F330E • Film As Rhetoric

85420 • Summer 2016
Meets MTWTHF 10:00AM-11:30AM WAG 208

This course is designed to examine films as rhetorical acts that serve as powerful function in the American polis. Their status as popular entertainment sometimes obscures viewers’ perception of films as a vehicle of persuasion. In what ways does film function as rhetoric, which Kant labeled as “the art of deceiving by a beautiful show” aiming “to win minds to the side of the orator before they have formed a judgment and to deprive them of their freedom”?  Is the director the rhetor, or is the message framed more collaboratively by, say, the director, screen writer, actors? 

We will attempt to answer these and similar question as we discuss approximately 7 to 10 films that students have viewed for class (no more than 1 film per week).  The syllabus will be organized around signal rhetorical concepts, which we discuss in class and which students will use to analyze films in 8 short response papers.  Additionally, students will keep a dialectical journal. Students will develop one longer paper on a film of their choice not viewed or discussed in class.  They develop their over the second half of the semester, during which time it will be reviewed by peers,  presented in a conference with the instructor and, finally, revised and submitted for a grade.

This course does not study cinematic technique though we will occasionally draw on technical terminology and concepts as we discuss how film makers use images, movements, and sound to rhetorical effect.

 

Assignments and Grading

  • 40%     8 response papers, 1 to 2 pages each
  • 40%     1 longer paper, 6 to 9 pages
  • 10%     quizzes
  • 10%     final exam
  • Peer reviews, revisions, attendance, participation  all required to pass course.

 

Required Texts and Course Readings

Films:

  • Crash
  • Lincoln
  • Mulan
  • Thank You for Smoking
  • The Great Debaters
  • The King’s Speech
  • Film nominated and selected by students to be integrated into syllabus

 

Texts:

  • Barry Brummett, Rhetorical Dimensions in Popular Culture
  • Course packet to include:
  • Robert Arnett, “The Enthymeme and Contemporary Film Criticism.”
  • Laurence Behrens, “The Argument in Film: Applying Rhetorical Theory to Film Criticism.”
  • Wayne Booth, “Is There an ‘Implied’ Author in Every Film?”
  • Michael Carter, “Stasis and Kairos: Principles of Social Construction in Classical Rhetoric”
  • Pauline Kael, “Pauline Kael Talks About Violence, Sex, Eroticism and Women & Men in the Movies,”
  • from Conversations with Pauline Kael.
  • James Naremore, “Death and Rebirth of Rhetoric,” In Senses of Cinema
  • Chaim Perelman, “The Social Contexts of Argumentation.”
  • Colleen Tremonte, “Film, Classical Rhetoric, and Visual Literacy”
  • Annalee R. Ward, “Disney, Film, and Morality”  &  “Mulan: East Meets West”
  •               in Mouse Morality: Rhetoric in Disney Animated Films
  • Trinh T. Minh-ha. “‘Who Is Speaking?’ Of Nation, Community, and First-Person Interviews”
  •               from Feminisms in the Cinema

Other:

  • Dartmouth Writing Program, “Writing About Film,” http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/humanities/film.shtml
  • Movie Speeches.” American Rhetoric. <http://www.americanrhetoric.com/moviespeeches.htm>
  • Internet Movie Database (IMDb), http://www.imdb.com/
  • Yale, “Film Analysis Website 2.0,” http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/index.htm

E 328 • British Novel In 19th Century

34540 • Spring 2016
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM PAR 302

E 328  l  The British Novel in the Nineteenth Century

Instructor: Ferreira-Buckley, L

Unique #:  34540

Semester:  Spring 2016

Cross-lists:  n/a

Restrictions:  n/a

Computer Instruction:  No

Prerequisite: Nine semester hours of coursework in English or rhetoric and writing.

Description: What does the nineteenth-century novel tell us about how British writers viewed themselves, their communities, their nation, and the world? What do they reveal about shifts in social order, gender relations, and established institutions? How do they stake out personal and social identities in the midst of bewildering change? This class will examine how six novels confronted and answered these and other challenges of the period.

We will work through discussions based on your reading, and I will provide occasional brief lectures to provide additional background information. You should think of this course as an ongoing conversation with other class members. As we enjoy these novels, we will examine what they reveal about their relation to the culture that produced them—a culture they both reflect and challenge. Over the course of the semester, you will become better able to develop your ideas in order to discuss these novelists and their work with greater sophistication, confidence, and skill, both in discussion and on paper.

Texts: Six of the following novels: Austen, Pride and Prejudice; C. Bronte, The Professor; Dickens, Hard Times; Eliot, Mill on the Floss; Gaskell, North & South; Kipling, Kim; M. Shelley, Frankenstein; Hardy, Jude the Obscure; Stoker, Dracula.

Requirements & Grading: Three Papers 20% each, 60% total; Quizzes 10%; Midterm Exam 15%; Final Exam 15%. Reading/Writing Journal, Exercises, Peer Reviews, Attendance, and Participation are all mandatory to pass course.

RHE 321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

43315 • Spring 2016
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM PAR 208

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a  long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day.  Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethospathoslogos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analysis but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course introduces students to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies.  Assignments in the class will offer students the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting “texts”—oral, print, and/or electronic.   The course will meet all necessary requirements to qualify as an writing flag course.

At the end of the term, students should be able to:

(1) Write an effective rhetorical analysis.

(2) Write a responsible argument relevant to a contested issue.

(3) Discourse about some of the major issues in the field (such as: What is the relationship between truth and language? How do technologies of communication affect discourse? What is "good" public argument? What constitutes a quality rhetorical education? and so on.)

(4) Situate the significance of some of the canonical figures in rhetorical studies.

(5) Apply the basic principles of rhetorical study, as mentioned above, to contemporary situations.

E 349S • Eliot And Hardy

34515 • Fall 2015
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM PAR 206

E 349S  l  Eliot and Hardy

Instructor:  Ferreira-Buckley, L

Unique #:  34515

Semester:  Fall 2015

Cross-lists:  n/a

Flags:  Writing

Restrictions:  n/a

Computer Instruction:  No

Prerequisite: Nine semester hours of coursework in English or rhetoric and writing.

Description: In this class we’ll closely read works by two great Victorian novelists, George Eliot and Thomas Hardy. While we will first examine each novel on its own terms, we will also consider each in relationship to others we’ve read. How does each novel represent the world it seeks to portray? How do characters respond to challenges posed by others, by society, and by the world? What limitations do they confront, and what is the nature of those limitations? Why do the characters in Eliot's novels discover, challenge, and ultimately work within their place in the greater scheme of things, whereas those in Hardy’s challenge that place to their detriment? What historical, social, cultural, and personal contexts inform their works? We’ll also explore form and genre to understand the ways Eliot’s and Hardy’s novels, are, despite keen differences, considered nineteenth-century realist fiction.

Texts: Three Eliot novels: The Mill on the Floss (1860); Silas Marner (1861); Middlemarch (1871). • Three Hardy novels: Far from the Madding Crowd (1874); Tess of the D’Urbervilles (1891); Jude the Obscure (1895). • Occasional brief readings from the novelists’ other genres: poetry, letters, reviews.

Requirements & Grading: The course grade will be determined as follows:

65% Papers: Short Paper 1 (3 pages, 15%); Short Paper 2 (3 pages, 20%); Longer Paper (6-8 pages, 30%)

15% Reading journal

20% Quizzes

Attendance and participation are required.

RHE 330E • Film As Rhetoric

43355 • Fall 2015
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM PAR 103

“The words, too, ought to set the scene before our eyes;  for events ought to be seen

in progress rather than in prospect.” Aristotle, Rhetoric 

“[S]ight engraves upon the mind images of things which have been seen. And many frightening impressions linger, and what lingers is exactly analogous to [what is] spoken.” Gorgias, “Encomium of Helen”

This course is designed to examine films as rhetorical acts that serve as powerful function in the American polis. Their status as popular entertainment sometimes obscures viewers’ perception of films as a vehicle of persuasion. In what ways does film function as rhetoric, which Kant labeled as “the art of deceiving by a beautiful show” aiming “to win minds to the side of the orator before they have formed a judgment and to deprive them of their freedom”?  Is the director the rhetor, or is the message framed more collaboratively by, say, the director, screen writer, actors? 

We will attempt to answer these and similar question as we discuss approximately 7 to 10 films that students have viewed for class (no more than 1 film per week).  The syllabus will be organized around signal rhetorical concepts, which we discuss in class and which students will use to analyze films in 8 short response papers.  Additionally, students will keep a dialectical journal. Students will develop one longer paper on a film of their choice not viewed or discussed in class.  They develop their over the second half of the semester, during which time it will be reviewed by peers,  presented in a conference with the instructor and, finally, revised and submitted for a grade.

This course does not study cinematic technique though we will occasionally draw on technical terminology and concepts as we discuss how film makers use images, movements, and sound to rhetorical effect.

 

Assignments and Grading

40% - 8 response papers, 1 to 2 pages each

40% - 1 longer paper, 6 to 9 pages

10% - quizzes

10% - final exam

Peer reviews, revisions, attendance, participation  all required to pass course.

 

Required Texts and Course Readings

Films:

  • Crash
  • Lincoln
  • Mulan
  • Thank You for Smoking
  • The Great Debaters
  • The King’s Speech
  • Film nominated and selected by students to be integrated into syllabus

 

Texts:

  • Barry Brummett, Rhetorical Dimensions in Popular Culture
  • Course packet to include:
  • Robert Arnett, “The Enthymeme and Contemporary Film Criticism.”
  • Laurence Behrens, “The Argument in Film: Applying Rhetorical Theory to Film Criticism.”
  • Wayne Booth, “Is There an ‘Implied’ Author in Every Film?”
  • Michael Carter, “Stasis and Kairos: Principles of Social Construction in Classical Rhetoric”
  • Pauline Kael, “Pauline Kael Talks About Violence, Sex, Eroticism and Women & Men in the Movies,” from Conversations with Pauline Kael.
  • James Naremore, “Death and Rebirth of Rhetoric,” In Senses of Cinema
  • Chaim Perelman, “The Social Contexts of Argumentation.”
  • Colleen Tremonte, “Film, Classical Rhetoric, and Visual Literacy”
  • Annalee R. Ward, “Disney, Film, and Morality”  &  “Mulan: East Meets West” in Mouse Morality: Rhetoric in Disney Animated Films
  • Trinh T. Minh-ha. “‘Who Is Speaking?’ Of Nation, Community, and First-Person Interviews” from Feminisms in the Cinema

Other:

E 328 • British Novel In 19th Century

34690 • Spring 2015
Meets MW 5:00PM-6:30PM PAR 204

E 328  l  The British Novel in the Nineteenth Century

Instructor: Ferreira-Buckley, L

Unique #:  34690

Semester:  Spring 2015

Cross-lists:  n/a

Restrictions:  n/a

Computer Instruction:  No

Flags:  Global Cultures, Writing

Description: What does the nineteenth-century novel tell us about how British writers viewed themselves, their communities, their nation, and the world? What do they reveal about shifts in social order, gender relations, and established institutions? How do they stake out personal and social identity in the midst of bewildering change? This class will examine how seven novels confronted and answered these and other challenges of the period.

We will work through intensive discussion based on your reading, and I will provide occasional brief lectures to provide you with additional background information. You should think of this course as an ongoing conversation among all of you. As we enjoy these novels, we will examine what they reveal about their relation to the culture that produced them and which they both reflect and challenge. You will become better able to develop your ideas in order to discuss these novelists and their work with greater sophistication, confidence, and skill, both in discussion and on paper.

Texts: Seven of the following novels and novellas: Austen, Pride and Prejudice; C. Bronte, The Professor; Dickens, Hard Times; Eliot, Mill on the Floss; Gaskell, North & South; Kipling, Kim; M. Shelley, Frankenstein; Hardy, Jude the Obscure; Stoker, Dracula; H.G. Wells, The Time Machine.

Requirements & Grading: Four papers: 15% each, 60% total; Quizzes 10%; Midterm exam 15%; Final exam 15%; Reading/Writing Journal, Exercises, Peer Reviews, Class Attendance & Participation: mandatory to pass course.

E 375L • Victorian Literature

34920 • Spring 2015
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM GAR 1.134

E 375L  l  Victorian Literature

Instructor:  Ferreira-Buckley, L

Unique #:  34920

Semester:  Spring 2015

Cross-lists:  n/a

Restrictions:  n/a

Computer Instruction:  No

Flags:  Global Cultures; Writing

Prerequisites: Nine semester hours of coursework in English or rhetoric and writing.

Description: This class will examine how Victorian writers addressed pressing social, political, and aesthetic concerns for specific audiences (which includes considering varying and sometimes conflicting notions of “the public”). Looking closely at a range of fiction, drama, poetry, and nonfiction prose, we will construct a lively sense of the historical period and its literary productions.

As we do so, we will also confront and attempt to answer questions that challenge literary scholars of all periods: How do scholars create a context in which to understand a particular text? How do different theoretical lenses change what readers get from texts? How and why do we draw boundaries between historical periods, and what are the benefits and dangers of doing so? How did the Victorians – and how do we – define “literature”? How do we decide what texts are “canonical”? What dangers are involved in generalizing about an author based on a small part of his or her work? Our investigations should compel us to be self-reflexive about our own reading and writing practices.

We will also examine nineteenth-century British materials housed in the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center and study the methodologies archival scholars use.  Students may choose to design their projects around archival materials.

By the end of the semester, we should emerge with a robust engagement with the literary texts of the Victorian period and as more confident critical readers and writers conversant with a range of scholarly practices and genres.

Texts (tentative): Carlyle, Past and Present (excerpts); Dickens, Hard Times; Eliot, Silas Marner; Arnold, “Function of Criticism at the Present Time”; Pater, Renaissance (excerpts); Mary Prince, The History of Mary Prince; Carlyle, The Nigger Question; Mill, “The Negro Question”; Nightingale, Cassandra; Hardy, Jude the Obscure; Shaw, Pygmalion; Poetry of Barrett Browning, Browning, Kipling, C. Rossetti, Tennyson, and others.

Requirements & Grading: Three short papers, all to be revised (15%, 20%, 20%); Journal & Homework 10%; Quizzes 10%; Midterm Exam 10%; Final Exam 15%; Exercises, peer reviews, class attendance & participation: mandatory.

Plus/Minus grading.

RHE 330E • Film As Rhetoric

43810 • Spring 2015
Meets TTH 5:00PM-6:30PM MEZ 1.102

“The words, too, ought to set the scene before our eyes;  for events ought to be seen

in progress rather than in prospect.” Aristotle, Rhetoric

“[S]ight engraves upon the mind images of things which have been seen. And many frightening impressions linger, and what lingers is exactly analogous to [what is] spoken.” Gorgias, “Encomium of Helen”

This course is designed to examine films as rhetorical acts that serve as powerful function in the American polis. Their status as popular entertainment sometimes obscures viewers’ perception of films as a vehicle of persuasion. In what ways does film function as rhetoric, which Kant labeled as “the art of deceiving by a beautiful show” aiming “to win minds to the side of the orator before they have formed a judgment and to deprive them of their freedom”?  Is the director the rhetor, or is the message framed more collaboratively by, say, the director, screen writer, actors? 

We will attempt to answer these and similar question as we discuss approximately 7 to 10 films that students have viewed for class (no more than 1 film per week).  The syllabus will be organized around signal rhetorical concepts, which we discuss in class and which students will use to analyze films in 8 short response papers.  Additionally, students will keep a dialectical journal. Students will develop one longer paper on a film of their choice not viewed or discussed in class.  They develop their over the second half of the semester, during which time it will be reviewed by peers,  presented in a conference with the instructor and, finally, revised and submitted for a grade.

This course does not study cinematic technique though we will occasionally draw on technical terminology and concepts as we discuss how film makers use images, movements, and sound to rhetorical effect.

Assignments and Grading

40%            8 response papers, 1 to 2 pages each

40%            1 longer paper, 6 to 9 pages

10%            quizzes

10%            final exam

Peer reviews, revisions, attendance, participation  all required to pass course.

Required Texts and Course Readings

Films:

Crash

Lincoln

Mulan

Thank You for Smoking

The Great Debaters

The King’s Speech

Film nominated and selected by students to be integrated into syllabus

Texts:

Barry Brummett, Rhetorical Dimensions in Popular Culture

Course packet to include:

Robert Arnett, “The Enthymeme and Contemporary Film Criticism.”

Laurence Behrens, “The Argument in Film: Applying Rhetorical Theory to Film Criticism.”

Wayne Booth, “Is There an ‘Implied’ Author in Every Film?”

Michael Carter, “Stasis and Kairos: Principles of Social Construction in Classical Rhetoric”

Pauline Kael, “Pauline Kael Talks About Violence, Sex, Eroticism and Women & Men in the Movies,”

from Conversations with Pauline Kael.

James Naremore, “Death and Rebirth of Rhetoric,” In Senses of Cinema

Chaim Perelman, “The Social Contexts of Argumentation.”

Colleen Tremonte, “Film, Classical Rhetoric, and Visual Literacy”

Annalee R. Ward, “Disney, Film, and Morality”  &  “Mulan: East Meets West”

              in Mouse Morality: Rhetoric in Disney Animated Films

Trinh T. Minh-ha. “‘Who Is Speaking?’ Of Nation, Community, and First-Person Interviews”

              from Feminisms in the Cinema

Other:

Dartmouth Writing Program, “Writing About Film,” http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/humanities/film.shtml

Movie Speeches.” American Rhetoric. <http://www.americanrhetoric.com/moviespeeches.htm>

Internet Movie Database (IMDb), http://www.imdb.com/

Yale, “Film Analysis Website 2.0,” http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/index.htm

RHE 321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

44755 • Fall 2014
Meets TTH 5:00PM-6:30PM PAR 206

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day. Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethos, pathos, logos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analyses but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course will introduce you to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies. Assignments in this class will offer you the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting "texts"—oral, print, and/or electronic. (We’ll work on revision and peer review though out the course.) Assignments will include one major collaborative project, six 2-page papers, rhetorical exercises, a midterm and final exam.

You’ll read and discuss significant works from major historical periods (including Classical, Medieval/Renaissance, Early Modern/Modern, and Contemporary) and examine the development of rhetorical practices specific to oral, print, and electronic technologies of interaction. You’ll also do rhetorical analyses of different kinds of texts (e.g., political speeches, advertisements, judicial decisions) to engage with both mainstream and culturally specific rhetorics  (feminist, African American, Native American, queer, etc.) and to read, discuss, and apply at least two different contemporary rhetorical approaches.

TEXTS (tentative)

Crowley & Hawhee, Classical Rhetoric for Contemporary Students

Bizzell & Herzberg, The Rhetoric Tradition

Course packet of readings

Six short papers (& revisions to each): 60%

Collaborative project 20%

Midterm exam 10%

Final exam 10%

Exercises, peer reviews & class participation: mandatory

RHE S330E • Film As Rhetoric

87355 • Summer 2014
Meets MTWTHF 10:00AM-11:30AM CLA 0.118

“The words, too, ought to set the scene before our eyes;  for events ought to be seen

in progress rather than in prospect.” Aristotle, Rhetoric

 “[S]ight engraves upon the mind images of things which have been seen. And many frightening impressions linger, and what lingers is exactly analogous to [what is] spoken.” Gorgias, “Encomium of Helen”

 This course is designed to examine films as rhetorical acts that serve as powerful function in the American polis. Their status as popular entertainment sometimes obscures viewers’ perception of films as a vehicle of persuasion. In what ways does film function as rhetoric, which Kant labeled as “the art of deceiving by a beautiful show” aiming “to win minds to the side of the orator before they have formed a judgment and to deprive them of their freedom”?  Is the director the rhetor, or is the message framed more collaboratively by, say, the director, screen writer, actors? 

We will attempt to answer these and similar question as we discuss approximately 7 to 10 films that students have viewed for class (no more than 1 film per week).  The syllabus will be organized around signal rhetorical concepts, which we discuss in class and which students will use to analyze films in 8 short response papers.  Additionally, students will keep a dialectical journal. Students will develop one longer paper on a film of their choice not viewed or discussed in class.  They develop their over the second half of the semester, during which time it will be reviewed by peers,  presented in a conference with the instructor and, finally, revised and submitted for a grade.

This course does not study cinematic technique though we will occasionally draw on technical terminology and concepts as we discuss how film makers use images, movements, and sound to rhetorical effect.

Assignments and Grading

40%            8 response papers, 1 to 2 pages each

40%            1 longer paper, 6 to 9 pages

10%            quizzes

10%            final exam

Peer reviews, revisions, attendance, participation  all required to pass course.

Required Texts and Course Readings

Films:

Crash

Lincoln

Mulan

Thank You for Smoking

The Great Debaters

The King’s Speech

Film nominated and selected by students to be integrated into syllabus

Texts:

Barry Brummett, Rhetorical Dimensions in Popular Culture

Course packet to include:

Robert Arnett, “The Enthymeme and Contemporary Film Criticism.”

Laurence Behrens, “The Argument in Film: Applying Rhetorical Theory to Film Criticism.”

Wayne Booth, “Is There an ‘Implied’ Author in Every Film?”

Michael Carter, “Stasis and Kairos: Principles of Social Construction in Classical Rhetoric”

Pauline Kael, “Pauline Kael Talks About Violence, Sex, Eroticism and Women & Men in the Movies,”

from Conversations with Pauline Kael.

James Naremore, “Death and Rebirth of Rhetoric,” In Senses of Cinema

Chaim Perelman, “The Social Contexts of Argumentation.”

Colleen Tremonte, “Film, Classical Rhetoric, and Visual Literacy”

Annalee R. Ward, “Disney, Film, and Morality”  &  “Mulan: East Meets West”

              in Mouse Morality: Rhetoric in Disney Animated Films

Trinh T. Minh-ha. “‘Who Is Speaking?’ Of Nation, Community, and First-Person Interviews”

              from Feminisms in the Cinema

Other:

Dartmouth Writing Program, “Writing About Film,” http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/humanities/film.shtml

Movie Speeches.” American Rhetoric. <http://www.americanrhetoric.com/moviespeeches.htm>

Internet Movie Database (IMDb), http://www.imdb.com/

Yale, “Film Analysis Website 2.0,” http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/index.htm

E 387R • Writ Outside Acad, 18th-19th C

36275 • Spring 2014
Meets W 6:00PM-9:00PM CAL 200

Rhetoric Outside the Academy in the 18th, 19th, & 20th Centuries

This seminar focuses on the ways that the rhetorical practices of reading, writing, and speaking have been studied outside of traditional classrooms.

The aim is not to map out a chronological or comprehensive history but rather to investigate practices and sites of significance that represent the diversity and complexity of rhetorical education: debating societies, literary circles and salons, speaking societies, libraries, writing groups, and letter writing manuals, etc.

In reading histories of what David Gold terms “competing and complementary rhetorical traditions,” we will examine not only what was studied and practiced and for what end but how each developed to meet the real or imagined needs of particular people. Equally important, we will examine and evaluate the basis for the conclusions each scholar draws.  We will also work through readings in research methodologies, with special attention to working with archival materials.

Although most course readings focus on the nineteenth through mid-twentieth centuries, participants are encouraged to design projects that investigate practices in a period and place related to their own research program in rhetoric or literary studies.   Whether their primary interest is in rhetoric and writing, in “literary” studies, in communication studies, in classics, or in education more generally, participants should find our investigations relevant.

For the major project, each seminar member will work with the instructor  to design and complete a scholarly project.  Sequenced exercises and assignments are designed both to familiarize participants with scholarly genres and to develop his or her particular project. Members will complete a book review (10%), a conference proposal (10%), a literature review (20%), and, finally, a paper suitable for submission to a journal or for presentation at a conference (60%).  During the semester, we will look carefully at each of these genres to identify disciplinary conventions.

Readings (not finalized)

McHenry, Forgotten Readers: Recovering the Lost History of African American Literary Societies (2002)

Miller et al,  Rhetorical Women: Roles and Representations (2006), excerpts

Ramsey, Sharer, L’Eplattenier, and Mastrangelo, Working in the Archives (2009)

Ronald and  Ritchie, Teaching Rhetorica: Theory, Pedagogy, Practice (2006), excerpts

Royster and Kirsch, “Re-visioning History, Theory, and Practice” & “Conclusion,” Feminist Rhetorical Practices: New Horizons for Rhetoric, Composition, and Literacy Studies (2012)

Royster, Traces Of A Stream: Literacy and Social Change Among African American Women (2002), excerpts

Ulman, Minutes of the Aberdeen Philosophical Society  (1990), excerpts

RHE 330E • Film As Rhetoric

45145 • Spring 2014
Meets MW 3:30PM-5:00PM GAR 0.128

“The words, too, ought to set the scene before our eyes;  for events ought to be seen in progress rather than in prospect.” Aristotle, Rhetoric

“[S]ight engraves upon the mind images of things which have been seen. And many frightening impressions linger, and what lingers is exactly analogous to [what is] spoken.” Gorgias, “Encomium of Helen”

This course is designed to examine films as rhetorical acts that serve as powerful function in the American polis. Their status as popular entertainment sometimes obscures viewers’ perception of films as a vehicle of persuasion. In what ways does film function as rhetoric, which Kant labeled as “the art of deceiving by a beautiful show” aiming “to win minds to the side of the orator before they have formed a judgment and to deprive them of their freedom”?  Is the director the rhetor, or is the message framed more collaboratively by, say, the director, screen writer, actors? 

We will attempt to answer these and similar question as we discuss approximately 7 to 10 films that students have viewed for class (no more than 1 film per week).  The syllabus will be organized around signal rhetorical concepts, which we discuss in class and which students will use to analyze films in 8 short response papers.  Additionally, students will keep a dialectical journal. Students will develop one longer paper on a film of their choice not viewed or discussed in class.  They develop their over the second half of the semester, during which time it will be reviewed by peers,  presented in a conference with the instructor and, finally, revised and submitted for a grade.

This course does not study cinematic technique though we will occasionally draw on technical terminology and concepts as we discuss how film makers use images, movements, and sound to rhetorical effect.

Assignments and Grading

40%            8 response papers, 1 to 2 pages each

40%            1 longer paper, 6 to 9 pages

10%            quizzes

10%            final exam

Peer reviews, revisions, attendance, participation  all required to pass course.

Required Texts and Course Readings

Films:

Crash

Lincoln

Mulan

Thank You for Smoking

The Great Debaters

The King’s Speech

Film nominated and selected by students to be integrated into syllabus

Texts:

Barry Brummett, Rhetorical Dimensions in Popular Culture

Course packet to include:

Robert Arnett, “The Enthymeme and Contemporary Film Criticism.”

Laurence Behrens, “The Argument in Film: Applying Rhetorical Theory to Film Criticism.”

Wayne Booth, “Is There an ‘Implied’ Author in Every Film?”

Michael Carter, “Stasis and Kairos: Principles of Social Construction in Classical Rhetoric”

Pauline Kael, “Pauline Kael Talks About Violence, Sex, Eroticism and Women & Men in the Movies,”

from Conversations with Pauline Kael.

James Naremore, “Death and Rebirth of Rhetoric,” In Senses of Cinema

Chaim Perelman, “The Social Contexts of Argumentation.”

Colleen Tremonte, “Film, Classical Rhetoric, and Visual Literacy”

Annalee R. Ward, “Disney, Film, and Morality”  &  “Mulan: East Meets West”

              in Mouse Morality: Rhetoric in Disney Animated Films

Trinh T. Minh-ha. “‘Who Is Speaking?’ Of Nation, Community, and First-Person Interviews”

              from Feminisms in the Cinema

Other:

Dartmouth Writing Program, “Writing About Film,” http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/humanities/film.shtml

Movie Speeches.” American Rhetoric. <http://www.americanrhetoric.com/moviespeeches.htm>

Internet Movie Database (IMDb), http://www.imdb.com/

Yale, “Film Analysis Website 2.0,” http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/index.htm

E 379R • Women In 19th-Cen Brit Novel

36050 • Fall 2013
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM CAL 323

Instructor:  Ferreira-Buckley, L            Areas:  VI / I

Unique #:  36050            Flags:  Independent Inquiry; Writing

Semester:  Fall 2013            Restrictions:  n/a

Cross-lists:  n/a            Computer Instruction:  No

Prerequisites: Nine semester hours of coursework in English or rhetoric and writing.

Description: How are women depicted in nineteenth-century British novels, and what do those depictions reveal about their authors’ social, political, religious, and aesthetic concerns? By what means do these authors construct gender? What kinds of historical research provide insight into these novels? These and similar questions will ground our work as we construct a lively sense of both the novels we’ll read and of the types of research scholars conduct to open up literary texts.

            As we do so, we will also confront and attempt to answer some of the questions that challenge literary scholars of all periods. How do different theoretical lenses change what readers get from texts? What dangers are involved in over-generalizing about a period’s novels? Our investigations will engage us in a range of scholarly practices and should compel us to be self-reflexive about our own interpretive practices.

            The class will primarily consist of intensive discussions based on our reading and your research projects, but the instructor will occasionally offer brief lectures. Discussions and activities will prepare students to propose, design, conduct, and complete a research project. Students will also participate in ongoing conversations in their small research groups, and each group will make a presentation to the class. Students will of course revise their work several times based on their own reviews and on feedback from their peers and instructor.

            In addition to using resources available in the PCL and online, we will also work with nineteenth-century British materials housed in the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center to study the methodologies archival scholars use. Although all students will complete a research exercise there, some students may choose to design their major project around archival materials.

            By the end of the semester, students should emerge with a robust engagement with nineteenth-century British novels; they should also emerge more confident in their ability to read, write, and speak critically about their own and others’ inquiries into the nineteenth-century British novel.

Texts: We will read six of the following novels: Austen, Pride and Prejudice; C. Bronte, Villette; Eliot, Middlemarch; Gaskell, North and South; Gissing, The Odd Women; Hardy, Tess of the D’Urbervilles; Meredith, Amazing Marriage; Stoker, Dracula.

Requirements & Grading: 2-page project proposal & written project updates: 5%; annotated bibliography: 5%; research paper: 70%; research journal: 10%; collaborative presentation: 10%. Research exercises, peer reviews, class attendance & participation are all mandatory to pass course.

RHE 330E • Film As Rhetoric

44865 • Fall 2013
Meets TTH 5:00PM-6:30PM MEZ 1.208

 “The words, too, ought to set the scene before our eyes;  for events ought to be seen in progress rather than in prospect.” Aristotle, Rhetoric

“[S]ight engraves upon the mind images of things which have been seen. And many frightening impressions linger, and what lingers is exactly analogous to [what is] spoken.” Gorgias, “Encomium of Helen”

This course is designed to examine films as rhetorical acts that serve as powerful function in the American polis. Their status as popular entertainment sometimes obscures viewers’ perception of films as a vehicle of persuasion. In what ways does film function as rhetoric, which Kant labeled as “the art of deceiving by a beautiful show” aiming “to win minds to the side of the orator before they have formed a judgment and to deprive them of their freedom”?  Is the director the rhetor, or is the message framed more collaboratively by, say, the director, screen writer, actors? 

We will attempt to answer these and similar question as we discuss approximately 7 to 10 films that students have viewed for class (no more than 1 film per week).  The syllabus will be organized around signal rhetorical concepts, which we discuss in class and which students will use to analyze films in 8 short response papers.  Additionally, students will keep a dialectical journal. Students will develop one longer paper on a film of their choice not viewed or discussed in class.  They develop their over the second half of the semester, during which time it will be reviewed by peers,  presented in a conference with the instructor and, finally, revised and submitted for a grade.

This course does not study cinematic technique though we will occasionally draw on technical terminology and concepts as we discuss how film makers use images, movements, and sound to rhetorical effect.

Assignments and Grading

40%            8 response papers, 1 to 2 pages each

40%            1 longer paper, 6 to 9 pages

10%            quizzes

10%            final exam

Peer reviews, revisions, attendance, participation  all required to pass course.

Required Texts and Course Readings

Films:

Crash

Lincoln

Mulan

Thank You for Smoking

The Great Debaters

The King’s Speech

Film nominated and selected by students to be integrated into syllabus

Texts:

Barry Brummett, Rhetorical Dimensions in Popular Culture

Course packet to include:

Robert Arnett, “The Enthymeme and Contemporary Film Criticism.”

Laurence Behrens, “The Argument in Film: Applying Rhetorical Theory to Film Criticism.”

Wayne Booth, “Is There an ‘Implied’ Author in Every Film?”

Michael Carter, “Stasis and Kairos: Principles of Social Construction in Classical Rhetoric”

Pauline Kael, “Pauline Kael Talks About Violence, Sex, Eroticism and Women & Men in the Movies,”

from Conversations with Pauline Kael.

James Naremore, “Death and Rebirth of Rhetoric,” In Senses of Cinema

Chaim Perelman, “The Social Contexts of Argumentation.”

Colleen Tremonte, “Film, Classical Rhetoric, and Visual Literacy”

Annalee R. Ward, “Disney, Film, and Morality”  &  “Mulan: East Meets West” in Mouse Morality: Rhetoric in Disney Animated Films

Trinh T. Minh-ha. “‘Who Is Speaking?’ Of Nation, Community, and First-Person Interviews” from Feminisms in the Cinema

Other:

Dartmouth Writing Program, “Writing About Film"

Movie Speeches - American Rhetoric

Internet Movie Database (IMDb)

Yale, “Film Analysis Website 2.0,”

RHE 321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

44365 • Spring 2013
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM PAR 304

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day. Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethos, pathos, logos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analyses but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course will introduce you to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies. Assignments in this class will offer you the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting "texts"—oral, print, and/or electronic. (We’ll work on revision and peer review though out the course.) Assignments will include one major collaborative project, six 2-page papers, rhetorical exercises, a midterm and final exam.

 You’ll read and discuss significant works from major historical periods (including Classical, Medieval/Renaissance, Early Modern/Modern, and Contemporary) and examine the development of rhetorical practices specific to oral, print, and electronic technologies of interaction. You’ll also do rhetorical analyses of different kinds of texts (e.g., political speeches, advertisements, judicial decisions) to engage with both mainstream and culturally specific rhetorics  (feminist, African American, Native American, queer, etc.) and to read, discuss, and apply at least two different contemporary rhetorical approaches.

Texts (Tentative)

Crowley & Hawhee, Classical Rhetoric for Contemporary Students

Bizzell & Herzberg, The Rhetoric Tradition

Course packet of readings

Assignments and Grading

Six short papers (& revisions to each): 60%

Collaborative project 20%

Midterm exam 10%

Final exam 10%

Exercises, peer reviews & class participation: mandatory

E 375L • Victorian Literature

35645 • Fall 2012
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM MEZ 1.102

Instructor:  MacDuffie, E            Areas:  II / F

Unique #:  35645            Flags:  Writing

Semester:  Fall 2012            Restrictions:  n/a

Cross-lists:  n/a            Computer Instruction:  No

Prerequisites: Nine semester hours of coursework in English or rhetoric and writing.

Description: In this course we will study a number of major works of prose and poetry from the Victorian era.  We will pay close attention to the scientific background of the period, and discuss the way in which debates about evolutionary biology, prompted by the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species, helped shape the thematic and formal concerns of a number of Victorian writers.

Texts: Authors include George Eliot, Thomas Hardy, Matthew Arnold, Robert Browning, H.G. Wells, and Joseph Conrad.

Requirements & Grading: Class participation and in-class writing assignments, 20%; 4-5-page essay, 20%; 6-7-page essay, 25%; 8-9-page essay, 35%.s

E 379R • Women In 19th-Cen Brit Novel

35560 • Fall 2011
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM CAL 323

Prerequisites: Nine semester hours of coursework in English or rhetoric and writing.

Description: How are women depicted in nineteenth-century British novels, and what do those depictions reveal about their authors’ social, political, religious, and aesthetic concerns? By what means do these authors construct gender? What kinds of historical research provide insight into these novels? These and similar questions will ground our work as we construct a lively sense of both the novels we’ll read and of the types of research scholars conduct to open up literary texts.

            As we do so, we will also confront and attempt to answer some of the questions that challenge literary scholars of all periods. How do different theoretical lenses change what readers get from texts? What dangers are involved in over-generalizing about a period’s novels? Our investigations will engage us in a range of scholarly practices and should compel us to be self-reflexive about our own interpretive practices.

            The class will primarily consist of intensive discussions based on our reading and your research projects, but the instructor will occasionally offer brief lectures. Discussions and activities will prepare students to propose, design, conduct, and complete a research project. Students will also participate in ongoing conversations in their small research groups, and each group will make a presentation to the class. Students will of course revise their work several times based on their own reviews and on feedback from their peers and instructor.

            In addition to using resources available in the PCL and online, we will also work with nineteenth-century British materials housed in the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center to study the methodologies archival scholars use. Although all students will complete a research exercise there, some students may choose to design their major project around archival materials.

            By the end of the semester, students should emerge with a robust engagement with nineteenth-century British novels; they should also emerge more confident in their ability to read, write, and speak critically about their own and others’ inquiries into the nineteenth-century British novel. 

Texts: We will read seven of the following novels: Austen, Pride and Prejudice; C. Bronte, The Professor or Villette; Eliot, Middlemarch; Gaskell, Wives and Daughters; Hardy, Tess of the D’Urbervilles; Meredith, Amazing Marriage; M. Shelley, Frankenstein; Stoker, Dracula; Wollstonecraft, Maria, or the Wrongs of Woman.

Requirements & Grading: 2-page project proposal & written project updates: 5%; annotated bibliography: 5%; research paper: 70%; research journal: 10%; collaborative presentation: 10%. Research exercises, peer reviews, class attendance & participation are all mandatory to pass course.

RHE 321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

44035 • Fall 2011
Meets TTH 5:00PM-6:30PM PAR 208

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day. Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethos, pathos, logos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analyses but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course will introduce you to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies. Assignments in this class will offer you the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting "texts"—oral, print, and/or electronic. (We’ll work on revision and peer review though out the course.) Assignments will include one major collaborative project, six 2-page papers, rhetorical exercises, a midterm and final exam.

You’ll read and discuss significant works from major historical periods (including Classical, Medieval/Renaissance, Early Modern/Modern, and Contemporary) and examine the development of rhetorical practices specific to oral, print, and electronic technologies of interaction. You’ll also do rhetorical analyses of different kinds of texts (e.g., political speeches, advertisements, judicial decisions) to engage with both mainstream and culturally specific rhetorics  (feminist, African American, Native American, queer, etc.) and to read, discuss, and apply at least two different contemporary rhetorical approaches.

TEXTS (tentative)

Crowley & Hawhee, Classical Rhetoric for Contemporary Students

Bizzell & Herzberg, The Rhetoric Tradition

Course packet of readings

GRADING

Six short papers (& revisions to each): 60%

Collaborative project 20%

Midterm exam 10%

Final exam 10%

Exercises, peer reviews & class participation: mandatory

RHE F321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

88000 • Summer 2011
Meets MTWTHF 8:30AM-10:00AM GEA 127

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day. Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethos, pathos, logos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analyses but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course will introduce you to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies. Assignments in this class will offer you the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting "texts"—oral, print, and/or electronic. (We’ll work on revision and peer review though out the course.) Assignments will include one major collaborative project, six 2-page papers, rhetorical exercises, a midterm and final exam.

You’ll read and discuss significant works from major historical periods (including Classical, Medieval/Renaissance, Early Modern/Modern, and Contemporary) and examine the development of rhetorical practices specific to oral, print, and electronic technologies of interaction. You’ll also do rhetorical analyses of different kinds of texts (e.g., political speeches, advertisements, judicial decisions) to engage with both mainstream and culturally specific rhetorics  (feminist, African American, Native American, queer, etc.) and to read, discuss, and apply at least two different contemporary rhetorical approaches.

Assignments and Grading

Six short papers (& revisions to each): 60%

Collaborative project 20%

Midterm exam 10%

Final exam 10%

Exercises, peer reviews & class participation: mandatory

Texts (tentative)

Crowley & Hawhee, Classical Rhetoric for Contemporary Students

Bizzell & Herzberg, The Rhetoric Tradition

Course packet of readings

 

E 375L • Victorian Literature

35773 • Spring 2011
Meets MWF 2:00PM-3:00PM PAR 204

Prerequisites: Nine semester hours of coursework in English or rhetoric and writing.

Course Description: This class will examine how Victorian writers addressed pressing social, political, and aesthetic concerns for specific audiences (which includes considering varying and sometimes conflicting notions of “the public”). Looking closely at a range of fiction, drama, poetry, and nonfiction prose, we will construct a lively sense of the historical period and its productions.

As we do so, we will also confront and attempt to answer questions that challenge literary scholars of all periods: How do scholars create a context in which to understand a particular text? How do different theoretical lenses change what readers get from texts? How and why do we draw boundaries between historical periods, and what are the benefits and dangers of doing so? How do the Victorians – and how do we – define “literature”? How do we decide what texts are “canonical”? What dangers are involved in generalizing about an author based on a small part of his or her work? Our investigations should compel us to be self-reflexive about our own reading practices.

We will also work with nineteenth-century British materials housed in the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center and study the methodologies archival scholars use.  Students may choose to design their projects around archival materials.

By the end of the semester, we should emerge with a robust engagement with the literary texts of the Victorian period and as more confident critical readers and writers conversant with a range of scholarly practices and genres.

Texts (tentative): Carlyle, Past and Present (excerpts); Dickens, Hard Times; Eliot, Middlemarch, Silas Marner; Arnold, “Function of Criticism at the Present Time”; Pater, Renaissance (excerpts); Mary Prince, The History of Mary Prince; Carlyle, The Nigger Question; Mill, “The Negro Question”; Nightingale, Cassandra; Hardy, Jude the Obscure; Shaw, Pygmalion; Poetry of Barrett Browning, Browning, C. Rossetti, Tennyson, and others.

Grading: Three papers, all to be revised: 20% each, 60% total; Collaborative project 10%; Midterm exam 15%; Final exam 15%; Exercises, peer reviews, class attendance & participation: mandatory. Plus/Minus grading.

E 375L • Victorian Literature

34875 • Fall 2010
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM PAR 303

Course Description: This class will examine how Victorian writers addressed pressing social, political, and aesthetic concerns for specific audiences (which includes considering varying and sometimes conflicting notions of “the public”). Looking closely at a range of fiction, drama, poetry, and nonfiction prose, we will construct a lively sense of the historical period and its productions. As we do so, we will also confront and attempt to answer questions that challenge literary scholars of all periods: How do scholars create a context in which to understand a particular text? How do different theoretical lenses change what readers get from texts? How and why do we draw boundaries between historical periods, and what are the benefits and dangers of doing so? How do the Victorians – and how do we – define “literature”? How do we decide what texts are “canonical”? What dangers are involved in generalizing about an author based on a small part of his or her work? Our investigations should compel us to be self-reflexive about our own reading practices. We will also work with nineteenth-century British materials housed in the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center and study the methodologies archival scholars use.  Students may choose to design their projects around archival materials. By the end of the semester, we should emerge with a robust engagement with the literary texts of the Victorian period and as more confident critical readers and writers conversant with a range of scholarly practices and genres.

Texts (tentative): Carlyle, Past and Present (excerpts); Dickens, Hard Times; Eliot, Middlemarch, Silas Marner; Arnold, “Function of Criticism at the Present Time”; Pater, Renaissance (excerpts); Mary Prince, The History of Mary Prince; Carlyle, The Nigger Question; Mill, “The Negro Question”; Nightingale, Cassandra; Hardy, Jude the Obscure; Shaw, Pygmalion; Poetry of Barrett Browning, Browning, C. Rossetti, Tennyson, and others.

Grading: Three papers, all to be revised: 20% each, 60% total; Collaborative project 10%; Midterm exam 15%; Final exam 15%; Exercises, peer reviews, class attendance & participation: mandatory. Writing Flag, Plus/Minus grading.

Prerequisites: Nine semester hours of coursework in English or rhetoric and writing. 

RHE 321 • Principles Of Rhetoric

44080 • Fall 2010
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM PAR 208

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day. Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethos, pathos, logos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analyses but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course will introduce you to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies. Assignments in this class will offer you the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting "texts"—oral, print, and/or electronic. (We’ll work on revision and peer review though out the course.) Assignments will include one major collaborative project, six 2-page papers, rhetorical exercises, a midterm and final exam.

You’ll read and discuss significant works from major historical periods (including Classical, Medieval/Renaissance, Early Modern/Modern, and Contemporary) and examine the development of rhetorical practices specific to oral, print, and electronic technologies of interaction. You’ll also do rhetorical analyses of different kinds of texts (e.g., political speeches, advertisements, judicial decisions) to engage with both mainstream and culturally specific rhetorics  (feminist, African American, Native American, queer, etc.) and to read, discuss, and apply at least two different contemporary rhetorical approaches.

Texts (tentative)
Crowley & Hawhee, Classical Rhetoric for Contemporary Students
Bizzell & Herzberg, The Rhetoric Tradition
Course packet of readings

Grading
Six short papers (& revisions to each): 60%
Collaborative project 20%
Midterm exam 10%
Final exam 10%
Exercises, peer reviews & class participation: mandatory

RHE S321 • Principles Of Rhetoric-W

87555 • Summer 2010
Meets MTWTHF 8:30AM-10:00AM MEZ 1.202

The study of rhetoric, one of the original seven Liberal Arts (along with logic, grammar, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), has a long and proud history, stretching back to the 5th century BCE and up to the present day. Both a productive and interpretive art, it is decidedly cross-disciplinary: the principles of rhetoric (audience, context, kairos, exigency, ethos, pathos, logos, and so forth) are consistently employed, for example, not only in literary analyses but in law, politics, education, science, and religion.

This course will introduce you to common rhetorical principles and to the disciplinary history of rhetoric and writing studies. Assignments in this class will offer you the chance to identify and apply these rhetorical principles while composing, interpreting, and presenting "texts" oral, print, and/or electronic. (We'll work on revision and peer review though out the course.) Assignments will include one major collaborative project, six 2-page papers, rhetorical exercises, a midterm and final exam.

You'll read and discuss significant works from major historical periods (including Classical, Medieval/Renaissance, Early Modern/Modern, and Contemporary) and examine the development of rhetorical practices specific to oral, print, and electronic technologies of interaction. You'll also do rhetorical analyses of different kinds of texts (e.g., political speeches, advertisements, judicial decisions) to engage with both mainstream and culturally specific rhetorics (feminist, African American, Native American, queer, etc.) and to read, discuss, and apply at least two different contemporary rhetorical approaches.

Grading Policy

Six short papers (& revisions to each): 60%
Collaborative project 20%
Midterm exam 10%
Final exam 10%
Exercises, peer reviews & class participation: mandatory

Texts

Crowley & Hawhee, Classical Rhetoric for Contemporary Students

Bizzell & Herzberg, The Rhetorical Tradition
Course packet of readings

RHE 368C • Writing Center Internship

44070 • Spring 2006
Meets MW 11:00AM-12:30PM FAC 7

RHE 368C is a course designed to prepare undergraduates to serve as peer tutors in the Undergraduate Writing Center (UWC). During the first part of the term, students will study issues related to writing center theory and practice. They will analyze the goals and practices of writing centers, examine elements of contemporary rhetorical and composition theory (including the writing process), survey typical course syllabi and assignments, and review basics of grammar, mechanics, and usage. Later in the term, they will work under supervision for six hours a week as a consultant in the Undergraduate Writing Center.

Course Requirements

Coursework includes a variety of writing assignments (including a literacy biography and an argument), quizzes on grammar and mechanics, observations of UWC tutoring sessions, participation in mock UWC tutorials, midterm and final self evaluations, and supervised tutoring in the UWC itself. Students will download all written assignments to the Blackboard course site or course where classmates may read and comment on them. Instructor's permission is required for registration in RHE 368C.

Grading Policy

Literacy Biography: 5%

Argument: 20%

Midterm self-assessment: 15%

Grammar quizzes: 20%

UWC Observation reports: 15%

Mock Tutorial report: 5%

Class participation and attendance: 5%

Final self-assessment: 15%

Texts

Gillespie and Lerner, The Allyn and Bacon Guide to Peer Tutoring / 2nd edition

Ruszkiewicz, Friend, Hairston, The Scott, Foresman Handbook for Writers, 8th edition

HMN 101 • Community Service

36287 • Spring 2004
Meets W 4:00PM-5:00PM BAT 215
 
A Community Based Service Learning course in which students mentor elementary level students struggling with literacy through the SEAL student organization. This course will entail guest speakers, weekly discussion, weekly journal entries, and supplemental readings.
 

Students must be available from 2:45 to 4:45, once per week, on either Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, to volunteer at their assigned school.

If you are interested, email davey.seal.literacy@gmail.com for approval and further information.

HMN 101 • Community Service

36290-36295 • Spring 2004
 
A Community Based Service Learning course in which students mentor elementary level students struggling with literacy through the SEAL student organization. This course will entail guest speakers, weekly discussion, weekly journal entries, and supplemental readings.
 

Students must be available from 2:45 to 4:45, once per week, on either Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, to volunteer at their assigned school.

If you are interested, email davey.seal.literacy@gmail.com for approval and further information.

HMN 101 • Community Service-Wb

37145 • Fall 2003
 
A Community Based Service Learning course in which students mentor elementary level students struggling with literacy through the SEAL student organization. This course will entail guest speakers, weekly discussion, weekly journal entries, and supplemental readings.
 

Students must be available from 2:45 to 4:45, once per week, on either Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, to volunteer at their assigned school.

If you are interested, email davey.seal.literacy@gmail.com for approval and further information.

RHE 309S • Crit Read & Persuasive Writ-W

42157 • Fall 2003
Meets T 5:00PM-8:00PM PAR 206



HMN 101 • Community Service

36208 • Spring 2003
Meets F 3:00PM-4:00PM BAT 217
 
A Community Based Service Learning course in which students mentor elementary level students struggling with literacy through the SEAL student organization. This course will entail guest speakers, weekly discussion, weekly journal entries, and supplemental readings.
 

Students must be available from 2:45 to 4:45, once per week, on either Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, to volunteer at their assigned school.

If you are interested, email davey.seal.literacy@gmail.com for approval and further information.

HMN 101 • Community Service

36215-36220 • Spring 2003
 
A Community Based Service Learning course in which students mentor elementary level students struggling with literacy through the SEAL student organization. This course will entail guest speakers, weekly discussion, weekly journal entries, and supplemental readings.
 

Students must be available from 2:45 to 4:45, once per week, on either Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, to volunteer at their assigned school.

If you are interested, email davey.seal.literacy@gmail.com for approval and further information.

HMN 101 • Community Service

36732 • Fall 2002
Meets TH 5:00PM-6:00PM GEB 4.200C
 
A Community Based Service Learning course in which students mentor elementary level students struggling with literacy through the SEAL student organization. This course will entail guest speakers, weekly discussion, weekly journal entries, and supplemental readings.
 

Students must be available from 2:45 to 4:45, once per week, on either Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, to volunteer at their assigned school.

If you are interested, email davey.seal.literacy@gmail.com for approval and further information.

HMN 101 • Community Service-Wb

36733 • Fall 2002
 
A Community Based Service Learning course in which students mentor elementary level students struggling with literacy through the SEAL student organization. This course will entail guest speakers, weekly discussion, weekly journal entries, and supplemental readings.
 

Students must be available from 2:45 to 4:45, once per week, on either Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, to volunteer at their assigned school.

If you are interested, email davey.seal.literacy@gmail.com for approval and further information.

HMN 101 • Community Service

36052 • Spring 2002
 
A Community Based Service Learning course in which students mentor elementary level students struggling with literacy through the SEAL student organization. This course will entail guest speakers, weekly discussion, weekly journal entries, and supplemental readings.
 

Students must be available from 2:45 to 4:45, once per week, on either Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, to volunteer at their assigned school.

If you are interested, email davey.seal.literacy@gmail.com for approval and further information.

RHE 360M • Rhet/Comp For H S Eng Tchrs-W

42200 • Fall 2001
Meets MWF 11:00AM-12:00PM FAC 9

Designed for students planning a career teaching English, this course will introduce you to scholarship in composition that informs the teaching of writing today. Theories will be examined in terms of their assumptions about the nature of language and learning. Among the topics we'll discuss are the writing process; the rhetorical situation; the relationship between language and identity; the place of grammar and usage; curriculum for basic and developmental writers; collaborative learning; and creating and evaluating assignments.

Although this isn't a methods course, it will have a practical orientation: we'll discuss the implications of each approach for designing courses and for evaluating writing. In addition to reading about writing, you'll write about writing. You'll compose a number of writing assignments, each to be revised after receiving written critiques both from me and from your peers. You'll also write critiques of your peers' work as a way to sharpen your own analytical abilities and to develop the ability to offer writers detailed, pointed, tactful advice. Additionally, you'll keep a reading journal; do writing, style, and grading exercises; and investigate a contemporary educational debate on the issue of your choice. A mid-term exam will allow you to demonstrate your understanding of the information studied.

This class is not for the timid or narrow-minded. Participation is a must as we try to hash out in a conversational setting important questions about contemporary education.

RHE 360M • Rhet/Comp For H S Eng Tchrs-W

41920 • Fall 2000
Meets MWF 10:00AM-11:00AM PAR 102

Designed for students planning a career teaching English, this course will introduce you to scholarship in composition that informs the teaching of writing today. Theories will be examined in terms of their assumptions about the nature of language and learning. Among the topics we'll discuss are the writing process; the rhetorical situation; the relationship between language and identity; the place of grammar and usage; curriculum for basic and developmental writers; collaborative learning; and creating and evaluating assignments.

Although this isn't a methods course, it will have a practical orientation: we'll discuss the implications of each approach for designing courses and for evaluating writing. In addition to reading about writing, you'll write about writing. You'll compose a number of writing assignments, each to be revised after receiving written critiques both from me and from your peers. You'll also write critiques of your peers' work as a way to sharpen your own analytical abilities and to develop the ability to offer writers detailed, pointed, tactful advice. Additionally, you'll keep a reading journal; do writing, style, and grading exercises; and investigate a contemporary educational debate on the issue of your choice. A mid-term exam will allow you to demonstrate your understanding of the information studied.

This class is not for the timid or narrow-minded. Participation is a must as we try to hash out in a conversational setting important questions about contemporary education.

Curriculum Vitae


Profile Pages


External Links



  • Center for European Studies

    University of Texas at Austin
    158 W 21st Street
    A1800
    Austin, Texas 78712
    512-232-3470