This week’s readings provided a historical survey of the development of the theory of style and helped situate contemporary debates in a broader historical perspective. Style in the pre-classical era, as Ray argues, enjoyed almost universal employment as the idea of a schism between language and thought was not prevalent in this period. This gave the rest of the reading a postlapsarian tone, almost in the way T. S. Eliot writes in nostalgic fashion about the unification of thought and feeling in the Metaphysical poetry. Ray’s suggestion that contemporary composition instructors could learn from this period in the Western history sounds relevant to subsequent debates surrounding the relative position of truth, subjectivity, and agency. Butler’s position foregrounds the tension and the push-pull dynamic of the relative virtues of various aspects of style which is also the primary argument of Ray’s historical survey.
The Sophists and Aristotle represented pole positions, though their seminal nature is acknowledged by both Ray and Butler. I am, however, mindful of the fact that the Greek period privileged verse form over the prose, and these debates did have a context. Plato’s distrust of the poets stemmed from his centering of ‘truth’ and his belief that language could/should offer plain facts sounds a touch naïve today, and I can imagine why the composition scholars of the 90’s offered a more nuanced reading of the Sophists. With the poststructuralist positioning of language as an inherently slippery medium, and the postmodernist distrust of any stable notion of truth, the position of the Sophists seems more aware of the inherent limitations of language. This impression is further supported by Ray’s idea that style offered a range of aesthetic and strategic choices to the Sophists whose end goal was persuasion rather than an accurate description of the truth. Almost uninterrupted reign of the Aristotelian notion of clarity or transparency in the post-Enlightenment history of writing is an evidence of the emergence of science as the most significant discursive force which, in hindsight, seems to have had its seeds in the Renaissance period.
I find Cicero’s focus on context and appropriateness as the lasting virtues of style. Cicero’s three tiers of styles is also interesting because they have remained relevant for much of the history of writing instruction. Quintilian elaborated his notions and made them a part of the curriculum whereas St. Augustine used them in preaching. This suggests that Cicero’s recognition of the context as an important determinant of the degree of stylization of the language can be relevant for a composition instructor who might offer instruction for a wide range of genres today. I also think that Cicero and Quintilian remain central in the field of writing instruction until the elevation of science to the preeminent position during the Enlightenment. Ray’s analysis of the Roman curriculum and the later relevance of Demetrius and Longinus for the teaching of writing is insightful. Although Ray does not provide a detailed analysis of the curriculum in the medieval period, the focus on letter writing foregrounds the utilitarian deployment of style. The Renaissance emphasis on imitation, translation, and analysis is still prevalent in most schools that I am familiar with.
Butler’s summation of contemporary debates about the myth of plain style as a democratic form of writing accessible to all as a problematic position resonated with me. What passes as plain style is often an erasure of subjectivity, and its current position as a norm is, at the very least, troubling. This is where the Black TCP writer’s position statement becomes instrumental in highlighting the privileges that any erasure of difference and subjectivity instantiates. I loved Patricia Bizzell’s idea of ‘discourse community’ when I took pedagogy course with Dr. Lewis, but I have had a troubling relationship with the idea since then.
As a Writing Center consultant and a writing instructor, I find Nora Bacon’s essay incredibly useful and reassuring. Reading Bacon in tandem with Butler, I think that academic writing and style can cohabit productively, and can actually encourage young writers to express themselves with greater freedom. Academic writing is more vital when, as Bacon says, the writer is making choices.
Salman's Blog 