HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: zamierow@SAGE.CC.PURDUE.EDU ((Mark Zamierowski))
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Re: A sophistic rhetoric of hypertext?
Date: 18 Nov 92 19:33:18 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
              "mcmorg@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU" at Nov 17, 92 4:34 pm

Michael--

No, you're not lost in the nodes.  Hypertext specifically and the
hyper-multi-media possibilities of computer mediated communications
technologies generally encourage precisely the sort of
invention-driven rhetoric that you're working on.  Of course, it also
requires a critique of all extant notions of invention as well as
their location in arrangements of other rhetorical "offices"
(arrangement, style, delivery, memory [which may also be completely
reconceptualized via CMC]), right?  Which means that getting lost in
the nodes might be safer than trying to work through all of these
interrelations.

If Marty Rosenberg has read your post, you're sure to get some very
useful info from him (if he doesn't take you to task for your use of
the word "singularity").  If you haven't already read it, you might
want to take a look at _Laws of Media_ (I hope that's right) by Eric
and Marshall McLuhan.  Their chapter on the post-Euclidean acoustic
space of new information technologies might offer up a good context
for dealing with Classical rhetorical concepts in a post-modern
hypertextual context.

And more power to you!

--Mark

P.S.  Of course, there's always Deleuze n' Guattari's _1,000
Plateaus_, too.
--

Mark Zamierowski   _.,-~'`^`'~*-,._    zamierow@sage.cc.purdue.edu
From: JRAYMOND@ENGLISH.AS.UA.EDU (Jim Raymond)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Re: getting a "C"
Date: 18 Nov 92 17:50:56 GMT
Organization: University of Alabama English Dept.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Priority:     normal
X-mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R4).

>Note the root of pedagogy.  I suppose it's traced back to foot,

Is this true?  I thought the root was paidos" (child), not podos"
(foot).  Both roots were reduced to ped" in Latin, but I think the
Greek originals were quite distinct.  Indo-European roots are
different too: *pau (boy) becomes paidos in Greek, puer in Latin;
*ped (foot) becomes podos in Greek, pes in Latin, pedestrian in
English, etc.

We can't afford to put pedagogy on the wrong footing!




--Jim Raymond
  Director of Freshman Composition
  English Department
  University of Alabama
  (205) 348-6488
  JRaymond@English.as.ua.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:17:05 EST
From:         mer <MROSE01@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Dene's lurking

Dene:

              I've been lurking,
              lurk and smirking,
              I've been smirking at statements and claims,
              I've been lurking,
              and I've got nothing whatsoever to say,

              I've been peeking,
              then deleting,
              and filing away scores of messages to read,
              but I don't need them,
              I just will hope that I will read them someday,

              Ladada, da, ta, da, ti dah dedah!

              See the entry on post-modernism,
              Can't you tell she's reading Lyotard and Irigaray
              With a differend, and a differance, and a speculum,
              Its nothing but another totalism!

                             (or)

              See the entry on portfolios,
              Can't you see they're just causing embroglios,
              With a stimulus here and a post-test there, its
              Just like the methods at Mt. Holyoke!

              I feel nervy,
              Awfully vervy, but
              I think I'm actually gonna type something and post,
              But I'm squirmy,
              At the thought of it being sent coast to coast,

              I've been lurking,   ......
                                                      mer
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Sun, 22 Nov 1992 19:12:18 EST
From:         Karla Saari Kitalong <KITALONG@MTUS5.CTS.MTU.EDU>
Subject:      message volume

May I also humbly suggest (since I am primarily a lurker) that messages
such as "Right on, mer" and "Thanks, John" be sent directly to the
party being lauded? They don't contribute significantly to the discussion,
but are necessary feedback to an individual. They are also fun to read
when the message volume is low, but annoying when the volume is high,
especially if Fred is limiting the messages to 50 a day, which, I agree,
is a reasonable number.

BTW: My mail system uses a command called "reply from" to accomplish this,
while "reply" goes to the whole list.

 ------------------------
 Karla Saari Kitalong
 ------------------------------
 Academic Computing Specialist - Department of Humanities
 Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI  49931
 -----------------------------------------
 E-mail:  kitalong@mtus5.bitnet * kitalong@mtu.edu
 Voice:   work - (906) 487-3262 * home - (906) 482-3656
 ----------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1992 08:25:37 -0600
From:         RONRON@USU.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Multimedia

Tim -- St. Augustine, Nietzsche, and the March Hare?  With Adam Smith as the
moderator?  Ron Shook
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Sun, 15 Nov 1992 20:54:25 MST
From:         "David E. Schwalm" <IACDES@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      getting a "C"

From: David E. Schwalm
IN a household with a faculty members at a community college and a university,
we often discuss the problem we are circling around here. It has to do with
whether the educational institution focuses on the individual student or on a
social demand for students educated in certain ways. Another way to put
it--but not a neutral way--is to see this as a conflict between "learning" and
"credentialing." These two activities are not necessarily at odds. The reall
difference has to do with who defines learning--the student or the
institution. Comunity Colleges (and university extended education programs)
tend to offer a range of "life-long learning" (code for non-credit) courses in
which students are invited to come and get what they want from the course.
Some may get what they want in a week, some may not think they want what the
course offers, some may stick it out all semester, others are fitting the
course into some sort of life matrix that may be totally unimaginable to the
instructor. It's an interesting kind of education, often very puzzling to the
instructor, since most participants in the course (including the instructor)
are on different vectors. In some sense, life-long learning courses are
structured versions of going to the library. At most colleges and universities
(and in the transfer courses at community colleges), we want students to learn
what we want them to learn and to demonstrate that they have learned it.
That's because we are "credentialling" institutions. Students may learn what
THEY want, but they also have to learn what WE want. Now, the student centered
(androgogical) model of education is extremely attractive in many ways. It is
tempting to try to move more in that direction, stop giving so many tests and
grades. But I wonder. . . . I am occasionally guilty of either/or thinking
when some middle ground might serve. Is there a middle ground here? Some have
suggested that the less structured European system with big tests at the end
of a less structured period of study might work. But I think that's worse than
eaither system. Students are left on their own to guess what they are supposed
to be learning. At least we're more up front about it.

-- David E. Schwalm, Assoc. Provost for Academic Programs
___Arizona State University West
___4701 West Thunderbird Rd.
___Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100___(602) 543-4500
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:35:21 -0800
From:         allen@SONOMA.EDU
Subject:      Bakhtin

     mer's latest posting on Bakhtin is important, I think, because in it he
 points out the *political* nature of Bakhtin's writings.  When, writing in the
1920's, Bakhtin uses the (albeit here translated) phrase "centralizing
 tendencies in the life of language" (DI 273), he is not just talking about
 language.
In his own heteroglossic way, he is commenting on the takeover of the revolution
 by the Bolsheviks, the centralization of authority and the stripping of power
from the soviets (workers' councils).

Julie
allen@sonoma.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:48:57 CST
From:         Eric Crump <C509379@MIZZOU1.BITNET>
Subject:      JOB in rhetoric/comp

(apologies to anyone who sees this more than once....     --Eric Crump)

----------------------- Rhetoric and composition job -------------------

Rhetoric and Composition
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA
Associate or Advanced Assistant

Our current MA and Ph.D concentrations focus on the
history and theory of rhetoric with emphases on
rhet/comp theory, critical theory, reading-writing
pedagogy and the UMC interdisciplinary writing program.
Responsibilities will include teaching (2/2), significant
direction of graduate program, and a theoretical research
focus on rhetoric. Ph.D.  and publication in rhet/comp
required. Women and minorities encouraged to apply.

Send letter and CV to Professor Ellie Ragland Sullivan,
Department of English, 107 Tate Hall, University of
Missouri-Columbia, Columbia MO 65211.
AA/EOE.
From: USERTFSH@UMICHUM.BITNET (Ann Green)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: re: at-risk students
Date: 17 Nov 92 04:52:52 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

Irv, sometimes I believe we as teachers are pushed to extremes out of
frustration or perhaps despair, the feeling that our institutions are
setting agendas without consulting or even thinking of us.  My sense of
people on MBU is that we are a group of instructors who care particularly
strongly about our students and if/when we rail about students' lack of
preparation, our fist-shaking is more upwardly directed than directed
to the people in our classes.  But we need to be aware of that.  The
concern I was expressing had to do with faculty only to propogate the
traditional to the best(dang, last sentence should read ". . . with
faculty who only want to propagate the traditional to the be.") (The
way this garbles my msgs is disconcerting.  In fact the long message
I wrote that you refer to here had its entire middle gouged out.
Amazing that we understand each other at all!).  Ann/JCC
(double dang - "the traditional to the best.")  arrgghhh
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 17:31:27 CST
From:         locke <EIDX576@UTXVM.BITNET>

Does anyone know of anyone who is using Gateway 2000 computers in the class-
room?  I believe they are pretty solid machines, but I haven't heard of
anyone using them to make a network.
  Locke Carter
  University of Texas
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 08:54:00 CST
From:         GOS@UHDBIT.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Over-admission of remedial students

I think another reason for lack of support of remedial students might be
philosophical conflict with larger powers.  Many state universities are
required by law to admit any resident.  Yet the want to keep the integrity
of their degrees, and hence, their reputations.  That leaves only one option.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Posted-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 03:13:06 -0200
Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 03:13:06 -0200
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 23 Nov 1992 03:13:06 -0200
From:         "(Leland Emerson McCleary)" <mccleary@CAT.CCE.USP.BR>
Subject:      Lurker query

David Schwalm asks:

>What in heaven's name keeps this discussion afloat?

Before turning off the tap on the lurker discussion, David, sorry, I
have a few more things to say.  I have a more than passing interest in
the mechanisms of electronic dialoging, so I've been fascinated by
the interest in lurker status and the lurker role.  I've wondered why
a corresponding label for the loquacious listmember hasn't appeared.
As I see it, most of us start out as lurkers (though a recent posting
came from someone who unlurked after a mere 50 messages read), and at
some point feel comfortable enough, or piqued enough, or inspired
enough to break into reply mode.  I'm sure for many (as it was for me)
that can be a thrilling moment, and some have expressed the anxiety of
waiting to see how their posting is received, whether it merits
attention from the regulars, and what kind.  I would guess that getting
a response to a posting is a kind of initiation into the community.
It's curious that at the very same time this list was discussing
lurking, another list I'm on was doing the same, so it's not an
isolated preoccupation.  I wondered out loud on this list why lurkers
tend to identify themselves as such when they find their voice.  I
suspect it has something to do with Goffmann's communication requirements.
Rhoda wondered why talking about lurking provides an excuse for so many
lurkers to unlurk.

I would like to collect recollections of listmember's first unlurking
experience on this or other lists, how long they had lurked previously,
why they chose to unlurk when they did, how they felt, whether that
was the beginning of a chat mode, or whether it was exceptional, after
which they continued lurking, whether they remember their first posting,
whether they commented in the posting on it's being their first.
Whether they are lurkers on some lists
and talkers on others and why, whether they lurk through some topical
strings and get engaged in others.  If they distinguish between lurking
and simply sitting out a discussion.

I DO NOT MEAN TO EXTEND THE LURKING DISCUSSION ON THE LIST, so anyone
interested in my query may reply to me personally, and I will summarize
the results for the list.

Ex-lurker, Leland McCleary / U Sao Paulo / mccleary@cat.cce.usp.br
From: JCROSS@OREGON.BITNET (James Crosswhite)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Re: Still defending reason
Date: 18 Nov 92 18:08:35 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

David Schwalm, Since you asked, and off the top of my head (after
thinking it over for 5 years), I'd say that reason is a kind of
rhetoric, and logic is one form that reasoning takes. Of course, this
makes logic a kind of rhetoric, which is fine with me. The audience that
would follow the rules of what we think of as logic would be a very
specific kind of human being. ..the kind we defer to in some
situations, but not all. This gives us the counter-intuitive result
that it is sometimes unreasonable to be logical. The Canadian logician
John Woods has shown why this is so,though. He claims that human beings
must reason on the basis of cognitive finitufde, while logical subjects
need not. Interesting, I think.
  Jim Crosswhite  jcross@oregon.uoregon.edu
From: IACDES@ASUACAD.BITNET (David E. Schwalm)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Taking Offense at Reason
Date: 17 Nov 92 06:11:16 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

From: David E. Schwalm
Yo, Sharon! Long time no hear or see! Didn't know you were on here. Good to
hear your voice.

-- David E. Schwalm, Assoc. Provost for Academic Programs
___Arizona State University West
___4701 West Thunderbird Rd.
___Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100___(602) 543-4500
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:05:07 CST
From:         mcmorg@VAX1.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU
Subject:      responses to Sophistic Rhet of Hypertext

MDay, Nick, and Mark Z:

Thanks for your comments and references; they've helped me re-open the
problem I was getting bogged down in.

Nick: I was (at one time) familiar with Fulwiler's piece; perhaps it
was lurking in the back of my mind as I was working through the first
formulation.  It reminds me that, more and more I think, we're talking
of student texts in terms hinting at hypertext (as in Paul's mention
of links).  I have tended to use "paths" through the text to talk to
my students concerning their drafts--especially in trying to help them
move from the straightforward-eyes-to-the-front-don't-let-anything-
distract-you kind of writing I see when students first enter the
university towards the more complexly intertwined kinds of arguments that
we tend to value in academia.  I've found, however (as we probably all
have found) that _talking_ isn't enough, of course; but I've also found
in running protocols of student writers using Storyspace that simply
giving them the tool and showing them the options doesn't automatically
help them reformulate a text in multiple paths, multiple arguments.  (
I didn't really expect that it would, of course, but there's no harm in
checking!).  That multiple paths don't tend to occur in the text
spontaniously drives me to try to formulate a (provisional) rhetoric--
to find a way of talking about this stuff that might help us figure
out where hypertext might play into teaching writing.

Here I move away from the idea I've read a few times on MBU and else-
where: that we develop rhetorics of hypertext from hypertexts as they
are written, that the text preceeds rhetoric.  I would suggest that
we're better off working dialectically between text and formulation and
text, etc.  I'm responding here to Coover's article from a few months
ago: he mentioned that discontinuity, fluidity, contingency, etc had
become "hypertext buzzwords."  My reckoning is that they had/will become
buzzwords because hypertext was in need of a rhetoric in which the
words might be something more than air.  It was time to come to ground.

Mark: Thanks for the reference to McLuan; I'll check that one.  Part of the
reason I'm trying to work with "classical" rhetoric (whatever that is
this week!) is that appealing to Those Who Came Before provides a
strong argument when discussing hypertext with those skeptical of it (or,
in alternative terms, if provides some common ground to work from).  I
have to deal with people who cast a doleful eye on McLuan, Bakhtine, et al,
but who will grant a sophistic point of view, and are even more willing
to accept an Aristotelian notion of topics as redefined in hypertext (as
Jay Bolter does in _Writing Space_).  From that grounding, I might be
able to move them to an understanding of hypertext that they find
valuable on their own terms--

Thanks again.

Michael Morgan
BSU
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 23 Nov 1992 14:42:33 -0800
From:         allen@SONOMA.EDU
Subject:      master's house

Forgive me if I am repeating information already posted.  I had to delete half
a day's worth of messages as I got overwhelmed.

     I do think, as I've mentioned before regarding Bakhtin, that it is
 important
to keep in mind the sources and locations of criticl commentary before we begin
to use or misue them out of context.  In the case of the "maxim" from Audre
 Lorde--
this line is the title of an essay, originally comments on a panel entitled
"The Personal nd the Political" at the Second Sex Conference in 1979.
The comments are specifically about racism and homophobia in the academic
 women's
movement.  Another part of the essay:  "Those of us who stand outside the circle
of this society's definition of acceptable women; those of us who have been
forged in the crucibles of difference; those of us who are poor, who are
 lesbins,
who are black, who are older, know that *survival is not an academic skill*.
It is learning how to stand alone, unpopular and sometimes reviled, and how to
mke common cause with those other identified as outside the structures, in order
to define and seek a world in which we can all flourish."

     Audre Lorde was an African-Americn lesbin feminist poet.  She died last
Tuesday after a lengthy struggle with breast cancer.  Her essay can be found in
among other places This Bridge Called My Back:  Writings by Radical Women of
 Color.
ed. Cherrie Moraga and Gloria Anzaldua.

Julie
allen@sonoma.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:49:45 -0800
From:         "(Tim McGee)" <tmcgee@GARNET.BERKELEY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Multimedia

To Ron's question of two days ago (Does Einstein's claim that his
ideas were visual "mean that his concepts had no propositional,
syntactic, rhetorical content until it was imposed on them?") I'll say
"no," in the broader meaning of those adjectives and "yes" in the
narrow interpretation of them.  And I would hypothesize that the more
image-illiterate the reader (tutored neither in ideographic language
nor the reading of iconographic/narrative painting), the more likely he
or she would be to insist upon the narrower interpretation, which, I'll
speculate, would probably be accompanied by a tendency to
derogate emotion and sacralize reason.  Where does that leave
the compostion instructor (perhaps already torn between the
sometimes incompatible practices of credentialing and fostering
learning) who is attempting to respond to a student's hypertext?
Caught in the never-never land called Academe where I dreamed I
saw St. Augustine in dialogue with Nietzsche and the March Hare.


Tim McGee
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Posted-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 02:11:57 -0200
Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 02:11:57 -0200
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 23 Nov 1992 02:11:57 -0200
From:         "(Leland Emerson McCleary)" <mccleary@CAT.CCE.USP.BR>
Subject:      Music and Imagery

In the debate over whether visuals are propositional, I am reminded
of a truism I heard eloquently demonstrated by linguist and
fiddler Talmy Givon, that music has syntax but no semantics.

How many would object to the statement that imagery has semantics
but no syntax.  Is that so different from the metaphor that
imagery is 'out there'?

Propositions require both syntax and semantics, which may be why
rhetoric, reason, logic have flourished in the medium of language.
Particularly (Ong and others) after the linearity of language became
visual.

Interesting to note that music is emminently linear (in time) and
that imagery is emminently atemporal and multi-dimensional (in space).  Language
has one foot in linear sound and the other foot in non-linear, image-keyed
concepts.

That could have something to do with why language is so effective in
modeling other kinds of social behaviour (like violence).

Anything here worth developing?

--Leland McCleary / U Sao Paulo / mccleary@cat.cce.usp.br
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU