Communication 48C:189g Rhetorical Criticism Catherine H. Palczewski, Ph.D.

TuTh 2:00-3:15 Lang 341: 273-2714

Lang 345 office hours: tba

Description: This class will teach you various research methods used in rhetorical criticism. In order to determine how texts work rhetorically, analysis is required of both the elements of the text and the rhetorical situation in which the text is presented. However, different questions are asked of the text depending on the theoretical assumptions one takes into the act of criticism. Thus, this course will introduce you to a range of methods, including: rationalistic criticism (neo-Aristotelian), psychosocial criticism (fantasy-theme criticism, feminist criticism, and afro-centric criticism), and dramatistic criticism (cluster criticism, generic criticism, metaphoric criticism, narrative criticism, and pentadic criticism). In order to understand how theories influence the outcome of criticism, each student will focus his or her semester's work on a single text, to which the student will apply multiple critical methods.

Reading:

Karlyn Kohrs Campbell and Thomas R. Burkholder, Critiques of Contemporary Rhetoric, 2nd edition. (CB)

Foss, Sonja K. Rhetorical Criticism, 2nd edition. (Foss)

Packet, available from UNI's copy services, located in the basement of the library.

Graduate students also are required to read:

Nothstine, William L., Carole Blair, and Gary A. Copeland. Critical Questions: Invention, Creativity, and the Criticism of Discourse and Media (NBC)

Requirements: This class will focus on generating a presentation or publication quality paper. To do this, assignments center around a progressive paper &endash; meaning, the first paper becomes the introduction for the 2nd, the 2nd becomes the intro for the 3rd and 4th, and the 2nd, 3rd and 4th papers are combined to become the foundation for the final paper. You will need to learn appropriate citation format (APA or MLA), and will be expected to revise and edit your work as the paper progresses.

1) Text Selection/neo-Aristotelian criticism: (10) [5 pages]. Write a 5 page justification for studying your text. The justification should include:

A) an introduction that situates the topic within a larger context,

B) background on when, where and to whom the text was delivered,

C) a description of the rhetor,

D) a description of the text,

E) a description of reactions to the text (this may include an assessment of the text's effects -- see Foss Ch. 3),

F) a review of relevant scholarly literature on the text,

G) an explanation on why the text is rhetorically interesting, and

H) a preview paragraph that outlines your research questions (this paragraph will transform into your thesis paragraph).

I suggest you find a text that is 5-10 pages long. Bring enough clean copies of your text to class so that all class members can have their own copy. Due: January 25.

Link to Cate's text.

2) Descriptive analysis of the text: (10) [8 pages]. Conduct a detailed criticism of the text using the methods outlined in CB Chs. 2-3. This paper expands upon the short description of the text provided in subpoints B, C and D from above. Due: February 8. Attach an outline of answers to questions on pages 28-30, 50-56 in CB. Remember, your answers to these questions form the background work to writing the paper. The outline of answers should NOT be the outline of the paper.

3) Psychosocial criticism: (15) [10 pages]. This paper should focus on explaining audience reaction to the text. Thus, this paper develops subpoint E above. You are expected to do research on how others' have responded. You may conduct a criticism of your text using one of the following methods: psycho-social criticism as outlined in CB, ideological criticism, fantasy-theme criticism, feminist criticism, or afro-centric criticism. Due: March 1.

4) Dramatistic criticism: (10) [10 pages]. Conduct a criticism of your text using one of the following methods: cluster criticism, generic criticism, metaphoric criticism, narrative criticism, or pentadic criticism. This paper gives you a chance to expand upon subpoint F from above. Due: April 5.

5) Final paper: (25) [20 pages]. Using the work done in earlier papers, write a holistic (generative) criticism of your text. The final paper should include additional research and may include additional arguments. Due: 1:00 pm, Wednesday, May 2.

6) Peer editing: (10) We will use peer editing as a way to improve the papers. When peer editing, you are expected to provide both stylistic and substantive suggestions. Use the sample editing marks provided on the 1st day of class. Throughout the semester, you will have 9 opportunities to edit each others' work.

A. Papers 1, 2, and 3: For the 1st three assignments, bring two (2) copies to class: one to turn in to me, and another to share with a peer editor. For each paper, your peer editor will change so that you may get as much diverse advice as possible. Peer editors should return the paper within one week of receiving it (edits for paper 1 due February 1, paper 2 February 15, paper 3 March 8). Peer editors should make a copy of the edited paper to turn into me on the same day they return it to the author. Remember to sign the paper you edit so you can get credit for the work.

B. Papers 4 and 5: With the 4th and 5th papers, peer editing will happen in class, prior to turning the paper in. Please check the syllabus for in-class peer editing days, and bring a copy of your paper to class on those days for feedback. When this occurs, the editor should sign the paper. When the final version of the paper is turned in, the author should include all copies of peer edited papers.

7) Presentation: (5). During the final exam period (1:00-2:50 Wednesday, May 2), we will have a formal presentation of all the papers. These presentations will be modeled after conference presentations of papers. Students will have five (5) minutes to present their papers. (Most conference presentations last 10 minutes). Depending on class size, the length of the presentation may be lengthened. The presentation should provide sufficient background on the text and outline the core argument made in the paper. The student should also provide evidence to support the main argument.

8) Discussion: (15) Being a good participant does not mean that you always have the answer; it can also mean that you know when to ask the right questions and when to recognize that the answers have already been offered by the class but need to be synthesized. Discussion is a central component of this class insofar as each person's analysis of the text can be enhanced by others' insights. For a detailed description of the criteria used in the assessment of discussion, see my website at http://www.uni.edu/palczews/discussion.htm.

General Information: see my website, at www.uni.edu/palczews/general.htm. This site includes my late policy, the university accommodation policy, as well as paper format descriptions. If you lose this syllabus, a copy is available on my website: www.uni.edu/palczews

Syllabus: (This syllabus is subject to change, although that rarely happens.) If changes happen, they will be in hot pink.

Week 1: January 9, 11: Introduction to class.

Read: CB 1, Foss 1

Week 2: January 16, 18: Doing criticism, rationalistic and neo-Aristotelian criticism

Read: Foss 2-3, CB pp. 75-81.

Week 3: January 23, 25: Descriptive analysis

Read: CB 2

Packet: Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs. "Style and Content in the Rhetoric of Early Afro-American Feminists." Quarterly Journal of Speech 72 (1986): 434-445.

January 25: text selection paper due, remember to bring a copy for peer editing.

***Remember to bring enough copies of your text for the entire class. Henceforth, bring copies of all texts to class. We will use the class texts as examples for the purpose of discussion. Read and be familiar with all your classmate's texts.

Week 4: January 30, February 1: The rhetorical situation

Read: CB 3

Packet: Dow, Bonnie J. and Mari Boor Tonn. ""Feminine Style" and Political Judgment in the Rhetoric of Ann Richards." Quarterly Journal of Speech 79 (1993): 286-302.

Week 5: February 6, 8: Descriptive analysis, con't.

Read: CB pp. 134-159

February 8: descriptive analysis paper due, remember to bring an extra copy for peer editing.

Week 6: February 13, 15: Psychosocial approaches, Fantasy-theme analysis

Read: CB 82-91, Foss 5

Week 7: February 20, 22: Feminist, Afro-centric, and Asian criticism

Read: Foss 6, CB pp. 213-265

Packet: Olson, Lester C. "On the Margins of Rhetoric: Audre Lord Transforming Silence into Language and Action." Quarterly Journal of Speech 83 (February 1997): 49-70.

Week 8: February 27, March 1: Ideological criticism

Read: Foss 8, CB 190-212

March 1: psychosocial analysis due, remember to bring an extra copy for peer editing.

Week 9: March 6, 8: Dramatistic criticism, pentadic analysis

Read: CB 92-107, Foss 11

Packet: Olson, Kathryn M. "The Controversy over President Reagan's Visit to Bitburg: Strategies of Definition and Redefinition." Quarterly Journal of Speech 75 (1989): 129-151.

Week 10: March 13, 15: spring break

Week 11: March 20, 22 (peer editing) Cluster and metaphor analysis

Read: Foss 4, 9

Packet: Goodnight, G. Thomas. "Ronald Reagan's Re-formulation of the Rhetoric of War: Analysis of 'Zero Option,' 'Evil Empire,' and 'Star Wars,' Addresses." Quarterly Journal of Speech 72 (1986): 390-414.

March 22 (peer editing of 4th paper)

Week 12: March 27 and 29 (peer editing of 4th paper): At the end of this week, everyone's 4th paper should have gone through at least 3 close edits. All those edits should be marked on the paper, and the edited paper/s should be turned in with the final draft. If the paper is revised after each editing session, then turn in all edited versions.

Week 13: April 3, 5: Generic analysis

Read: Foss 7

Packet: Lee, Sang-Chul and Karlyn Kohrs Campbell. "Korean President Roh Tae-Woo's 1988 Inaugural Address: Campaigning for Investiture." Quarterly Journal of Speech 80 (1994): 37-52.

April 5: dramatistic analysis due &endash; remember to turn in all edited versions with your paper.

Week 14: April 10, 12 (USIP): Narrative analysis

Read: Foss 10, CB 266-292

Packet: Rushing, Janet Hocker. "Ronald Reagan's 'Star Wars' Address: Mythic Containment of Technical Reasoning." Quarterly Journal of Speech 72 (1986): 415-433.

April 12 (peer editing of final paper &endash; focus this edit on organization of the combined parts).

Week 15: April 17, 19: The evaluation process and generative criticism

Read: Foss 12, CB 5

Packet: Palczewski, Catherine H. "Bodies, Borders and Letters: Gloria Anzaldúa's 'Speaking in Tongues: A Letter to 3rd World Women Writers.'" The Southern Communication Journal 62 (Fall 1996): 1-16.

Week 16: April 24, 26: Peer editing of final paper.

Final 1:00-2:50 Wednesday May 2