Inside out: Getting personal about what's at stake in academic discourse.

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/187271
Title:
Inside out: Getting personal about what's at stake in academic discourse.
Author:
Hindman, Jane E.
Issue Date:
1995
Publisher:
The University of Arizona.
Rights:
Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Abstract:
My dissertation examines issues of authority and authorship in academic discourse by considering questions such as these: How does the discipline of rhetoric and composition authorize texts generated by its classic figures, professionals in the field, and students in those professionals' classrooms? How does that authorization, and the discursive practice involved in authoring and teaching it, inscribe or preserve the dominant hegemony? How might those of us dedicated to counter-hegemonic discursive and pedagogical projects review and revise the discipline's notions of what constitutes authoritative discourse? It argues that denying authors the opportunity to use their positionality and personal convictions to challenge the position and ideology of the detached, dispassionate style of academic discourse is to deny not only the experience and material conditions but also the body of the author. Such denial makes one's professional work insincere. As an antidote to such insincerity, I theorize a revised notion of academic discourse that combines the contextualizing effects of Marxist theory and feminist theories of women's autobiography with the destabilizing, subversive effects of deconstructive practice. Subsequent chapters enact the language and the method that might constitute those new practices. I examine the pedagogical implications of a deconstructive analysis of our discipline's discursive practice and map out a curriculum designed not only to teach authoritative writing but also to empower students to critique rather than reproduce dominant hegemonic discursive practices. Applying my revised notion of discursive practice to classical rhetoric, I present not only a rhetorical analysis of the textual mechanics of one of the discipline's classical texts (Gorgias, but also demonstrate of other non-academic texts and autobiographical responses call into question the authority of that text and its traditions. Finally, I examine the dissonance between academic accounts of the composing process and my own female personal experience with writing as a woman in the academy.
Type:
text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
Degree Name:
Ph.D.
Degree Level:
doctoral
Degree Program:
English; Graduate College
Degree Grantor:
University of Arizona

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.titleInside out: Getting personal about what's at stake in academic discourse.en_US
dc.creatorHindman, Jane E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHindman, Jane E.en_US
dc.date.issued1995en_US
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.description.abstractMy dissertation examines issues of authority and authorship in academic discourse by considering questions such as these: How does the discipline of rhetoric and composition authorize texts generated by its classic figures, professionals in the field, and students in those professionals' classrooms? How does that authorization, and the discursive practice involved in authoring and teaching it, inscribe or preserve the dominant hegemony? How might those of us dedicated to counter-hegemonic discursive and pedagogical projects review and revise the discipline's notions of what constitutes authoritative discourse? It argues that denying authors the opportunity to use their positionality and personal convictions to challenge the position and ideology of the detached, dispassionate style of academic discourse is to deny not only the experience and material conditions but also the body of the author. Such denial makes one's professional work insincere. As an antidote to such insincerity, I theorize a revised notion of academic discourse that combines the contextualizing effects of Marxist theory and feminist theories of women's autobiography with the destabilizing, subversive effects of deconstructive practice. Subsequent chapters enact the language and the method that might constitute those new practices. I examine the pedagogical implications of a deconstructive analysis of our discipline's discursive practice and map out a curriculum designed not only to teach authoritative writing but also to empower students to critique rather than reproduce dominant hegemonic discursive practices. Applying my revised notion of discursive practice to classical rhetoric, I present not only a rhetorical analysis of the textual mechanics of one of the discipline's classical texts (Gorgias, but also demonstrate of other non-academic texts and autobiographical responses call into question the authority of that text and its traditions. Finally, I examine the dissonance between academic accounts of the composing process and my own female personal experience with writing as a woman in the academy.en_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeDissertation-Reproduction (electronic)en_US
thesis.degree.namePh.D.en_US
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineEnglishen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
dc.identifier.proquest9603718en_US
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.