JAC: A Journal of Composition Theory, Volume 21, Number 4, Spring 2001 Page: 756
733-962 p. : ill. (some col.), ports. ; 22 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
756
tions of writing remain as situated in the late 1960s and 1970s as our
theories of ideology.
The difference-or, at least, the difference for composition theory-
is that unlike philosophy or theory as understood in other areas of English
studies, composition theorizes the act of writing in the belief that
interventions in this unavailable (unobservable, untheorizable) act can
and must be made. In other words, composition is interested in improving
writing processes and products, whatever that might mean at a given time.
So it must assume the presence of, on the one hand, an empirically
identifiable act and, on the other hand, a pedagogically available subject
that performs this act. Composition, like writers, must proceed on faith,
in the full belief that writing is the production of meaning and in the full
belief that the writing subject controls this production. But it must also
renounce that faith, as I have been suggesting here, in order to explain the
act of writing more accurately.
And, as I have been suggesting, ideology theory plays a part in this
near-theological drama. Despite its theoretical problems, I think it is still
possible to say that "ideology" understood as action or practice is needed
for theoretical explanations of writing, which is to say the development
of textual rhetoric. I have tried to show how ideology theory has
mistakenly been used to frame or ground composition rather than to help
articulate it rhetorically, thus making discussion of "rhetoric and ideol-
ogy in the writing class" a discussion of rhetoric in ideology for the
interpreting class. By going back to Althusser and highlighting theoreti-
cal problems in ideology theory itself, I have tried to show how and why
this subordination of rhetoric to ideology is a consequence of those prior
problems. In the discourse of ideology of which Althusser is the source,
ideology's quasi-ontological status is almost axiomatic. Only its particu-
lar dimensions and contours are fruitfully debated. Yet, Althusser himself
seems to argue against this position, particularly when the question of
agency arises. My position, that "ideology" is a term to be deployed
within a framework of rhetorical theory rather than a master concept
explaining all features of existence, might help composition theorists
better conduct their own future investigations.
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utahjac
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Association of Teachers of Advanced Composition (U.S.). JAC: A Journal of Composition Theory, Volume 21, Number 4, Spring 2001, periodical, 2001; (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28634/m1/32/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; .