Cinnabar and Alabaster

passages
7. accounting for the dialogic nature of scholarship: "it is important to remember" that the discourse community definition working w/bartholomae's position in "inventing" was "defined against work that labeled struggling academic writers as linguistically and cognitively deficient"
8. now, "almost twenty years" later, "defining 'academic discourse' is a more complex task...which concomitantly complicates the pedagogical strategies needed to teach it....traditional academic discourse....still has many adherents, and students will encounter its hidebound proponents in more than one college class. but in many, many academic disciplines today, traditional academic discourse must share the field with new forms of discourse that are clearly doing serious intellectual work and are received and evaluated as such, even as they violate many of the conventions of traditional academic discourse"--these are what she calls "'hybrid' academic discourses"
11. "these new discourses are still 'academic,' in that they are doing the intellectual work of the academy--rigous, reflective scholarship....but they have combined elements of traditional academic discourses with elements of other ways of using language that are more comfortable for the new academics." and "perhaps these new discourses are gaining ground, too, because they enable new kinds of intellectual work."
12. some of the scholars exemplifying these hybrids: mike rose in lives on the boundary, helen fox's listening to the world, keith gilyard's voices of the self, and villanueava's bootstraps, which she particularly examines here.
13-14. differences from the academic standard of old: "the grapholect issue" (12), "personal experience, which is absolutely taboo in traditional academic discourse, may be used in hybrid forms to add peruasive force to a point by invoking an emotional response from the reader," "'offhand refutation'" wherein "a casual critical remark" is used rather than "a rigorous frontal assault on an opposed scholarly position"
15. others include the "free use of humor" & in some "form[s] of English other than American," "a stylistic preference for indirection" which some students explain "they intend to show respect for the reader's powers of inference...as well as to tantalize the reader into reading on"
16. the thing to remember: "these traits describe writing that does serious intellectual work--just not in the way favored by traditional american academic discourse"
17. bizzell suggests a "thought experiment"--that teachers practice writing such a hybrid--including personal experience in writing about a scholarly influence & imagining a scholarly audience. for teaching, she says, "i do not recommend taking into class a taxonomy of hybrid discourses...and requiring your students to produce texts that conform to it. that can hardly be done even with long-established, traditional, and exhaustively analysed academic genres....rather, it seems to me that what we have to do is to create conditions in which students are encouraged to experiment with their own forms of hybrid discourse."

& as an aside--talk about personifying the text as the author's human offspring in really creepy ways--> "i like to encourage students to cannibalize earlier papers for parts to use in later papers" (20). there's nothing wrong w/the idea at all, of course, but the metaphor's a little violent!