« Blogging Annoyance | Main | The project I'm not doing »
January 11, 2007
Of Reading and not writing
I've been reading for my upcoming exams. I had originally planned to takes notes, the same way that I would take notes from a book I was using to work up a seminar paper. But this reading is different. I'm not preparing to write an argumentative paper, not really. What I'm really hoping for is to synthesize a broad base of knowledge in response to a question that is generated to allow me to demonstrate my understanding of the field.
Thus, taking notes on each separate text in my usual manner--where I pull out many pithy or interesting quotes and sometimes, but not often, add my own responsive comments to them--doesn't seem very helpful. What seems more useful here is to talk about these many texts in terms of their relationship to each other and to the larger topic and my goals for understanding it.
I came to this realization with some clarity this morning while considering The Changing Tradition: Women in the History of Rhetoric, a collection of essays edited by Christine Mason Sutherland and Rebecca Sutcliffe. I obtained this book through Interlibrary Loan, and had to specially negotiate a two-week renewal after I missed the original due date (tip: check both the ILLiad system and the library patron info when accounting for the over 100 books checked out for exam purposes). The looming deadline for returning the book put me in front of the computer with it next to me. But there I got stumped. Should I take notes on each essay? Did I even care about each essay? what was really important to me about having read this book? What did I learn that pertains to my exam purpose?
I found the answer in the preface. This collection emerged from an international conference about 10 years ago. Editor Mason Sutherland makes note in the preface about two other collections already in print: Reclaiming Rhetorica and Listening to Their Voices. In the afterword, she discusses how those collections contributed to this and how this one differs. Voila! I had my answer. I have read Listening. So what I'll do next is read Reclaiming and then write about the three taken together under more general prompts like: what common themes appear through these texts? What are these editors/authors saying about the history of rhetoric and the role/place of women in it? What is rhetoric in this frame and how does it differ from the traditional rhetorical canon these texts are challenging?
Yes, there are sure to be some key quotes along the way, but the idea is broad understanding and dialogue between sources (gee.... where have I heard that assignment before?) across the history - my take on it, and how it makes sense to me.
Now that I have this little ah-ha, it seems so much easier to approach all the other texts I've read and have an idea what to do with them in terms of notes and preparation. 5 weeks or so to go. Don't anybody start a countdown.
Posted by cageyer at January 11, 2007 11:46 AM