Reading Response: “God Don’t Never Change: Black English form a Black Perspective”

Reading On Writing (p. 189-193)

Reading Response

“God Don’t Never Change: Black English form a Black Perspective”

By Geneva Smitherman

Summary:

In “God Don’t Never Change: Black English form a Black Perspective,” Geneva Smitherman attempts to express her thoughts on Black English (Idiom) history and the way today’s society views it. Smitherman argues that Black English cannot be studied without reviewing Black culture- and that Black culture cannot be studied without understanding White Culture. Throughout her text, Smitherman writes in Black Idiom to demonstrate that, though different from the typical academic writing, the same ideas can be presented and Black Idiom- and thus, those who write that way are no less intelligent. Smiterman describes the history of this language and questions its stigma. She also talks about mechanics/grammar. Her advice to teachers is to not let “sloppy” writing pass: that is, don’t let general statements be made with no detail- but do not dwell on what they believe to be “improper” phrasing or grammar.

Reading Response: “The Politics of Teaching Literate Discourse”

Readings on Writing (p. 181-188)

Reading Response

“The Politics of Teaching Literate Discourse” by Lisa Delpit

Summary:

In “The Politics of Teaching Literate Discourse,” Lisa Delpit attempts to explain the current trend among teachers and writers about discourse acquisition as it pertains to the poor and colored races. Delpit argues that many teachers today do not try to teach to minorities or, at least, they do not believe they can. Delpit states that her interest in this topic began as she was reviewing an article by James Paul Gee. She contests that though she first agreed with much of what Gee had to say, after careful review- she found two main issues with his claims. Delpit disagrees with Gees claim that if not born into a dominant discourse- it is (or nearly is) impossible to enter. She also disagrees with Gee’s argument that a person born into one discourse with certain values will have a difficult time joining a different discourse with different values. To counter these claims, Delpit provides several examples of overcoming oppression among the poor and colored in ways that contradict Gee’s arguments. (These include bell hooks and nearly an entire class of poverished African Americans who grew up around the 1930’s). Finally, Delpit offers suggestions as to how teachers can incorporate new teaching methods to reach out to outliers. She suggests that teachers should acknowledge home environments, but not in a limiting way. Also, they should understand that some students may choose to avoid classroom teaching in order to stay true to themselves- and thus, teachers should try to incorporate aspects of the students’ home discourses into the “mainstream” discourse. Lastly, Delpit wants teachers to recognize (and try to minimize) the “discourse stacking” that occurs in today’s society. 

Reading Response: Flynn Articles

Readings on Writing

Reading Response

Flynn Articles

Summary:

In “Composing as a Woman,” Elizabeth Flynn attempts to explore the differences between men and women in composition and writing. She calls for a feminist approach to composition studies. This approach would focus on questions of disparity and power in written language. Flynn surveys the research of Chodorow, Gilligan, and Belenky et al, to explore the social and psychological development of men versus women. Flynn then uses that research to relate to works from her own students. She details the stories of two men and two women and claims that the students’ use different ways of writing based on their gender. Flynn’s main argument is that ignoring the different compositions of women would “silence women” because the current practices and models are designed for teaching males.

“Contextualizing ‘Composing as a Woman’” was just a reflection by Flynn on her past article. She states that even when writing the article she was uneasy on some of its contents. She also said that her previous article was pivotal in the research of feministic composition at that time period even though some of its claims have been contradicted. Flynn talked about how the article has been reprinted several times and she hopes that readers value its historical context and recognize its importance.

Synthesis:

This article can be related to the work of Berger, Elbow, and Porter. Berger’s article encompassed old European Art of women and that the social presence of men and women is very different. It has evolved to be that way. He states that, “Men act and women appear.” Berger also explains that the way we view things is determined by what we already know- thus he questions if the true meaning of an image has been disguised over time (because of photographic reproduction and changing cultural construction). Flynn also distinguishes the social differences between men and women and their different ways of writing. Flynn talks about writing being a product of what we already understand, just as Berger says the same determines our view.

Elbow’s article detailed using “voice” in paper. Flynn stated, in response of the work of Belenky et al., “They found that the quest for self and voice plays a central role in transformations of women’s ways of knowing” (159). Flynn’s article touched upon the ways in which women write and how their way of knowing the world influences that practice. Voice, as Elbow explained can make or break a paper- thus a particular way of knowing, and expressing such, can greatly influence women’s composition.

Porter’s article was about intertextuality, or how other texts are combined to make a new argument in text. Flynn’s article actually demonstrates this since she frequently refers to the works of several feministic pioneers, such as Chodorow and Gilligan. She uses the texts of other authors within her own work to frame her ideas. Also, Flynn’s actual argument can be related to Porter’s work because she describes how women’s composition can differ from that of men simply due to the fact that they have different ways of knowing the world and learn in different ways. In this sense, it is not the actual texts that are being entwined to make a new text, but it is the history and characteristics of the writer that are entwined to make an original text. 

Reading Response: “Memoria as a Friend of Ours: On the Discourse of Color”

Readings on Writing (p. 169-176)

Reading Response

“Memoria as a Friend of Ours: On the Discourse of Color” by Victor Villanueva

Summary:

In “Memoria as a Friend of Ours: On the Discourse of Color,” Victor Villanueva attempts to relate narratives and poetry with memory. He does this to explain how conventional academic discourse today does not set a place for emotion or memory. He argues that discourse today is too “logo centric” (in Aristotelian terms) and that we need to recognize that “the personal” doesn’t necessarily disaffirm the academic tendency toward objectivity. Instead he argues that “the personal” can cause affect and thus complement intellect since he says that “the personal” is intellect. Villanueva emphasizes the works from “those of color” and how memory directs “possibility realized” and “openings found.” He ultimately wants to bolster the part of memory in rhetoric through narrative and poetry. 

Reading Response: "Autism as Rhetoric"

Readings on Writing  (p. 261-269)

Reading Response

“Autism and Rhetoric” by Paul Heilker and Melanie Yergeau

Abstract:

Authors Paul Heilker and Melanie Yergeau introduce the idea of autism as rhetoric. The work of Jim Corder, and presentation of the authors’ personal experiences, suggest the idea of autism as a rhetorical phenomenon rather than a sense of “otherness.” In the article autism is simply “a way of being in the world through language.”