Weekly Schedule and Preparation Guide

January 28

February 4 11 18 25

March 4 11 25

April 1 8 15 22 29

May 5

Texts

Barzun, Jacques, and Henry F. Graff. The Modern Researcher. 6th ed. San Diego: Cengage, 2003. ISBN-13: 9780495318705.
Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, and Joseph M. Williams. The Craft of Research. 3rd ed. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2008. ISBN-13: 9780495318705.
Nothstine, William L., Carole Blair, and Gary A. Copeland. Critical Questions: Invention, Creativity, and the Criticism of Discourse and Media. Boston: McGraw, Hill, 2003. ISBN-13: 9780072875232

There are other books that you should have at your elbow:

An unabridged dictionary. Webster's is the best. An unabridged dictionary and a thesaurus work together. The question on these two is your convenience. I find it convenient to have the unabridged open on my desk and the thesaurus on my lap as I write. You may find another method easier. An unabridged dictionary has about 300,000 words. You need those as a writer. I have yet to find an internet dictionary with that many entries. (Let me know if you do.) You can access one through the university library's website, but then it kicks you off when you want to use it again. If you look for sales you can usually pick a good unabridged up for about $25 or less.
A thesaurus. Roget's is the best. Alphabetized is not as good as indexed.
At least one publication style manual you have mastered. For humanists, generally, the Chicago Manual of Style is the best. Not even as outrageous as it used to be on price (because other books have gotten more expensive). Turabian is an abridgement of Chicago. In communication sometimes we need APA as well. Learn one of these cold and have the other handy.
A writing style or usage manual. The standard is Strunk and White. I use a Webster's. Some dictionaries include these and these are probably sufficient. Don't trust Microsoft's style judgment. Wow! Is it bad!

There are some other essays that I am assuming you have read. If you have not, I recommend that you read them early in the semester:

Wichelns, Herbert. "The Literary Criticism of Oratory." Rhetoric and Public Speaking in Honor of James A. Winans. Ed. A. M. Drummond. New York: Century, 1925. 181-216. Reprinted in Methods of Rhetorical Criticism: A Twentieth Century Perspective. 2nd ed. Detroit: Wayne State Univ. Press, 1980.
Brockriede, Wayne. "Rhetorical Criticism as Argument." Quarterly Journal of Speech 60 (April 1974): 165-74.
Rosenfield, Lawrence W. "The Experience of Criticism." Quarterly Journal of Speech 60 (December 1974): 489-96.
Wrage, Ernest J. "Public Address: A Study in Social and Intellectual History." Quarterly Journal of Speech 33 (1947): 451-457.

There are lots of other basic essays for rhetorical criticism, but these are the best of the lot.

Weekly Schedule

Wednesday, January 28

Introduction and Administration

Activity assigned: Visit to an archive. You will select an archive in the Washington area to visit for the purpose of the assignment in two weeks.

Wednesday, February 4

Part I: Where do project ideas come from?

I have two objectives in this first part of the course. Primarily, I want to explore the invention process – the birth of ideas for projects. In doing so, however, I want your judgment working as well: What is it about an essay that provides insight? We will ask that question about the essays we read in discussion.

Reading: Nothstine, Blair, and Copeland, cc. 1, 3-7.

Exercise: Time to begin thinking about your project for the semester. Prepare a one page presentation: (1) What you want to look at? (2) What you want to know about it? (3) Why you want to know? (How you came to the problem?)

Seminar Activities:

Discussion of Readings.

How does Nothstine, Blair, and Copeland's notions of criticism relate to your own?
How do your assumptions about criticism differ from Hart's?
How would you answer Osborn's three questions differently than he does?
What surprises do you find in Dow's commentary? What do you find in her criticism that would like to emulate? to avoid?
What is the relationship of curiosity and criticism revealed in the Mechling's commentary? What do you find in their criticism that you would like to emulate? to avoid?
Nothstine, Blair, and Copeland play a lot with the relationship between media and rhetorical criticism? Does Frentz and Rushing's commentary illuminate this relationship? What do you find in their criticism that you would like to emulate? to avoid?

Exercise: Be prepared to discuss the topic you would like to pursue for your criticism this summer. Explain how you became interested in the topic. Relate your discussion to these readings.

Wednesday, February 11

Part II: Historical Method

A. The Purposes and Forms of History

Reading: BG, c. 1.

Exercise: In the journals in communication or a collection of essays on the History of Public Address, find (1) an article that is written to reconstruct a communication event or theory of communication from the past, and (2) an article that is written to make a particular argument about an event or theory from the past. Bring them to class. Write a page (no more than 250 words) addressing the significance of the research in one of the articles. Evaluate how well the author establishes the significance of his/her work.

We start tonight by meeting the historian. Why does s/he do what they do? What motivates their work. We will discuss the essays you found.

B. Digging up the bones of history: history as discovery

Reading: BG, cc. 2, 4. Wilbur Samuel Howell, "The Declaration of Independence: Some Adventures with America's Political Masterpiece." Quarterly Journal of Speech 62 (1976): 221-33.

We are concerned with the gathering of historical fact. The process involves two sensations: a "hypothesis-proof" cycle and a "solving the mystery" puzzle. The text provides some advice, Howell provides a glimpse of the ecstasy of discovery.

Wednesday, February 18

C. Using an archive

Exercise: Bring in a one page photocopied report on your archive. What is there? How are the finding aids? What is the process for access? How is security?

We want to begin by discussing some rules, etiquette, and techniques for using archives. Your historical report will require that you work in an archive and we want to get started on that.

D. Interpreting the Past: history as narrative experience

Reading: Thoughts on Narrative; Marie Hochmuth Nichols, "Lincoln's First Inaugural: Part I." Methods of Rhetorical Criticism: A Twentieth Century Perspective. Ed. Bernard L. Brock, Robert L. Scott and James W. Chesebro. 3rd ed. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1989. 32-54.

Exercise: Think of the most exciting speech you ever encountered. This might be when you were ten or, who knows, it might have been Barock Obama's speech on election night. Write a page in which you narrate the speech to your reader in such a way that you produce the say sense of excitement in the reader.

We are concerned with telling a story as a skill. This is, in fact, an essential skill of qualitative research. Even in modern ethnography understanding the forces that merge in a moment and providing an account of how they create the moment are essential skills.

Wednesday, February 25

E. Historical Evidence and Logic

Reading: BG, cc. 5-8. Terry Croy on Carrie Chapman Catt

We will study different kinds of historical evidence, rules for establishing their reliability, and pitfalls for the unwary. And how we work with that evidence for form arguments. Much of historical work is finding and creating linkages. There is (I probably should say are) a logic (or many logics) of history. Discussing it (or them) leads us to discuss paradigms, sufficiency of proof, and concepts of causality.

Wednesday, March 4

F. Writing History

Exercise: Write two short (no more than 2 pages each) accounts of the events surrounding the speech you selected for last week's exercise. Write it from two different perspectives.

We will discuss the historical work you have read and problems you have encountered in writing history. We also want to review the primary writers' skills in history -- arguing and constructing narrative.

Part III: Writing.

A. Outlining

Reading: Outlining handout.

Exercise: Outline your historical report

No skill in writing contributes as much to different dimensions of the activity as the ability to outline. Tonight we will talk about how to make it pay off.

Wednesday, March 11

B. Envisioning Your Reader

Reading: BCW, cc. 1-2. NBC, cc.8-10.

Exercise: Write no more than one page that describes the reader for your research. You should identify the reader and some of the expectations that you have about what they can understand, and can accept.

The importance of the reader cannot be overestimated. You must always write with a reader in mind, making choices that will communicate your position. We will explore the implications of this.

C. Formulating Your Argument

Reading: BCW, part III.

We have identified both historical logic and critical logic. This reading focuses on the more common problem of identifying your claim and providing support.

Wednesday, March 25

D. Quoting and Footnoting

Reading: BG, cc. 12-13.

There is a right and a wrong way to insert quotations and footnotes into works. That way has little to do with impressing the instructor with how much you have researched. We will talk about the right and wrong ways.

Wednesday, April 1

Assignment Due: First submission of Criticism

E. The art of revising

Reading: BG, cc. 13-14.

The secret of good writing -- revision. We want to talk about the process. In the process we will talk about the life of the critic.

F. The Mechanics of Writing

Reading: The Table of Contents of either the Chicago or the APA manual.

Yuk!! Form!! It is important to you. It tells a lot about you. So come with questions. Try to stump me on how to's.

Wednesday, April 8

G. Using Theories in Criticism: Schools of Criticism

Reading: NBC, cc. 11-14 (including Leff essay).

What is the role and the dangers of seeing criticism as derivative of theory?

H. Creating Images

Reading: BCW, c. 16. BG, cc. 10-11. Edwin Black, "The Sentimental Style as Escapism, or the Devil with Daniel Webster." Form and Genre. Ed. Karlyn Kohrs Campbell and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. Falls Church VA: SCA, 1976. 75-86.

Good historical/critical writing not only argues, it creates in its audience the experience of the rhetorical act. These chapters in Barzun and Graff are also splendid. Does Black succeed in creating nineteenth Century America for you? Why or why not? How does he try? We want to talk about techniques for putting drama in writing.

Wednesday, April 15 through May 6

Part IV: Critics Workshop.

We will be reading and writing, working on particular problems. Problems in writing are natural to critics. Every critic learns to work on specific problems. You are invited to bring your specific problems to class. So will I. We will concentrate on them and work toward specific objectives in regards to them. We will also treat some additional topics in criticism. We will select from among the following and even add some possibility to the list based on a feel for where there might be benefit.

Criticism as Intellectual Activity. History and criticism are not apart from other intellectual trends of our time. We make these connections using the work of Stephen Pepper.
Critical Logics. There are several logics used by critics. Sometimes identifying your project consciously with one of them is beneficial. We will talk about some of the patterns.
Contextual Criticism. The dominant mode of criticism over the last three decades has been contextualism. We will define it and talk about it.
Perspective on the Rhetorical Act. Much criticism fails because it does not fully understand the perspective it takes on the rhetorical act. We will raise this to the surface and deal with it.
Layering in Criticism. One of the skills of good critical writing is being able to give depth to your criticism by layering insights. We will talk about this art.
Writing Dialectical Criticism. How does a critic move from a causal logic to a dialectical logic in criticism? We will discuss the move.

Last Revised 8 April 2009