My initial response to the essay by Kathleen Blake Yancey
titled Made Not Only in Words: Composition in a New Key is how creative
her display of this written talk appears on the pages of the book. She shares
information on side panels and in bolded boxes – including a somewhat behind
the scenes perspective for her readers and states on the first page this
specific paper was more of a dramatic performance than address when given. She
questions her genre almost a decade ago in 2004 - when this Chair’s address was
delivered alongside a power point slide show of images she had collected - and
these were shown parallel and in dialogue with her words.
Writing and composing have both become diverse in their
singular and combined definitions – and composing is more than words composed
on the page but also includes word processors, the internet and a variety of
new ways readers, students and others are writing on their own – outside of the
classroom. In the new millennium writing is interfacing she says – it’s about
both technology and the medium according to Yancey, as well as her colleague
James E. Porter in his article Recovering Delivery for Digital Rhetoric.
Porter’s paper opens with the desire to position delivery as
a Techne, also meaning an art – and to frame delivery in broader ways and
terms. The delivery is the final
persuasive force from the human to computer and/or to the viewer.
Reading circles held in the 19th century that are
mentioned in these papers interest me - and show multimodality happening in
writing long ago. The performance and delivery of writing still plays a major
role in how a text is consumed – and a development of a reading public is
happening again …through the Internet and social media web sites.
Yancey shared this sentiment on page 65: “Today we are
witnessing a parallel creation, that of a writing public made plural, and as in
the case of the development of a reading public, it’s taking place largely
outside of school - and this is an age of universal education. Moreover, unlike
what happens in our classes, no one is forcing the public to write.”
How the ‘screen’ plays a role in writing stuck with me after
reading Yancey’s piece too; it is the third literacy paralleling with oral and
print literacy. More folks are finishing on the high school diploma level these
days, and folks are using cell phones as mini computers more and more. Yancey
states the screen is the language of the vernacular, and the
modern/educated student should know how to combine words, pictures, audio and
video. And, this would be the reason I took this class despite the learning
curve I faced in terms of experience with digital programs. I feel a little bit
of fear still…and possible inadequacy in terms of my geeky computer-usage
knowledge – but I am determined to crossover digitally to become a writing
composer.
According to Porter, the concept of the body plays a key
part in the impact of delivery …as a performer myself this intrigued me. His
description of certain portraits chosen for promotional reasons to send
subliminal messages without words to their audiences is revealing. He says that
both the visual and oral play a role in digital documents on page 213:
“Voice and aurality are a central concern in digital
rhetoric, as the World Wide Web supports multimedia discourse that enmeshes
textual, video/visual, and aural elements. In digital spaces we have to
consider not only textual presentation but oral performance, the very qualities
of voice that were central to classical rhetoric.”
Porter shares that the human being and technology are
merging and the hybrid form is the cyborg – which takes the reader back to
circulation relating to how messages are recycled in digital places. Digital
messages often have life of their own and are redistributed without the
original writer’s input too.
The new model of composing suggested by Yancey involves
circulation of composition, canons of rhetoric, and deicity of technology.
Circulation equals Intertextuality - hmmm - this is the aesthetic dimension of
composing she relates. Yancey then spills these ideas into remediation. I
particularly appreciate the story about the professor taking hourly breaks
during her editing to work on laundry – and how her writing is better due to
the breaks used for reflection. The term deicity is one that is applicable to
life in general – nothing remains permanent, change happens fleetingly and as
humans our lives are in a constant state of flux.
Envisioning is a term Yancey brings up near the end of her
paper; she defines it as taking technology tools and repurposing them - using
them in a different way from which they were designed. The action of
envisioning appears to be pushing the public along to write more and more on
their own, a phenomenon fueled along as well by the screen and the Internet.
This idea seems to also include social justice advocacy intertwined in writing,
because of delivery to a wider and more interested audience, who might respond
and/or act is now more guaranteed. And, Porter finally assures that developing
a robust rhetorical cannon for digital delivery is the real key for the
continued and future production of effective online documents.
No comments:
Post a Comment