RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Corder, Jim W. and Kendall, Lyle H. A College Rhetoric. New York: Random House, 1962.
The young Winston Churchill, although a terrible student in many ways, was a master of the English language. His method for mastery was simple: find those who were good at writing and copy them. This textbook is not quite so glorious, but the general point is true. Few of us are good enough writers that we cannot improve. The following are more suggestion from the textbook than an actual review of the book.
The Power of the Subordinate Clause
A good essay has subordinate clauses, but a better essay knows the effect they have in certain orders. For example, if one wants to highlight the “effect” in a cause/effect relationship, one can place it first in the sentence by introducing it with “Since….” (47).
The authors argue that the key element in one’s style is the complex sentence, an expression of a major and minor thought (53). Indeed, complex sentences “form an act of judgment.” The clauses in a complex sentence show the reader that the individual units in the sentence are not equal.
Key ideas: The writer “must avoid lumping ideas together haphazardly, making no distinctions between them. Second, the writer must where possible avoid putting into separate sentences ideas that logically belong together in one” (55).
One should avoid having the major idea of a sentence in the dependent clause. Unfortunately, this can be tricky when combined with the above rules about subordinating cause and effect (see p.47). Nevertheless, one should strive to put major ideas into major sentence elements. One way to remove this tension is to have the major element in the major clause, albeit at the most important part of the sentence, which is the end of the sentence.
Clarity through Coordination
Coordinate clauses and conjunction signal that the ideas are equal. Although this is a relatively simple idea, the danger lies in piling them up. The advanced writer, like a Johnson or a Gibbon, will use coordinate clauses in parallelism. For example:
“With the hopeless labor of uniting heterogenous ideas, digesting independent hints, and collecting into one point the several rays of borrowed light, emitted often with contrary directions” (R No. 23).
When done rightly, the reader actually will feel the force of these clauses.
Writing in General
Although this review focuses more on refining one’s skill in writing essays, and those usually dealing with cause and effect, the authors suggest a number of other methods. For example, when using chronology, avoid the temptation to write “First….Next….Next…Finally.” Rather, treat time differently. Not every moment is important. Sometimes two minutes is more important than fifty eight (97).
When describing nature or some other visual event, spatial arrangement is preferable. In that case, as the authors note, one should move from:
In other words, move from one extreme to another, depending on what one wants to minimize and maximize.
The Classical Oration
Not every essay is worthy of a classical format, but some are and the writing of such can even be fun. A classical oration follows the paradigm below (132-133):
Examples: Sydney, “An Apologie for Poetrie”; Milton, “Areopagitica”; Dryden, “An Essay of Dramatic Poesy’; Swift, “On Abolishing Christianity”.
Unity in Writing
This mainly applies to descriptive writing, but it works well as a general principle. “Unity in writing…is that quality characteristic of a piece of writing that is controlled by a central, dominating idea” (238). The best way to capture this, at least for descriptive writing, is “exploitation of the dominant impression.” One achieves this by subordinating “every other impression to this central characteristic, or by describing all other features of the subject in such a way as to contribute directly to the establishment of the dominant impression.”
Nota Bene
“The pronouns this or it should be used sparingly, if at all, as transition devices beginning a sentence. Strictly speaking, this or it must refer to a noun or a noun clause” (137).
“If comparing or contrasting two or more works, deal with the same aspects of these works side by side, so to speak; do not discuss the works separately and then summarize your findings” (139).
Humor
On not using cliches: “Every shot I hit was flying straight and true as an arrow.”
Response: “This was old the day after arrows were invented” (42).
“Evidently the author has been exposed to a course in psychology, whose jargon has left scar tissue on an otherwise fairly adequate and unpretentious vocabulary” (173).
“Burst forth,” “with renewed vigor,” and “idolized football team,” aside from being cliches, are specimens of flowery writing, the author here operating under the misapprehension that sounds and syllables equal good writing” (262).
Conclusion
Writing a book on rhetoric is akin to playing on the offensive line in football. One’s name will never get in the papers, and since the book is almost always aimed at freshmen in college, it will remain a thankless book. As such, one supposes, its true value lies in being found in second-hand stores for those writers who want to polish their abilities.
The young Winston Churchill, although a terrible student in many ways, was a master of the English language. His method for mastery was simple: find those who were good at writing and copy them. This textbook is not quite so glorious, but the general point is true. Few of us are good enough writers that we cannot improve. The following are more suggestion from the textbook than an actual review of the book.
The Power of the Subordinate Clause
A good essay has subordinate clauses, but a better essay knows the effect they have in certain orders. For example, if one wants to highlight the “effect” in a cause/effect relationship, one can place it first in the sentence by introducing it with “Since….” (47).
The authors argue that the key element in one’s style is the complex sentence, an expression of a major and minor thought (53). Indeed, complex sentences “form an act of judgment.” The clauses in a complex sentence show the reader that the individual units in the sentence are not equal.
Key ideas: The writer “must avoid lumping ideas together haphazardly, making no distinctions between them. Second, the writer must where possible avoid putting into separate sentences ideas that logically belong together in one” (55).
One should avoid having the major idea of a sentence in the dependent clause. Unfortunately, this can be tricky when combined with the above rules about subordinating cause and effect (see p.47). Nevertheless, one should strive to put major ideas into major sentence elements. One way to remove this tension is to have the major element in the major clause, albeit at the most important part of the sentence, which is the end of the sentence.
Clarity through Coordination
Coordinate clauses and conjunction signal that the ideas are equal. Although this is a relatively simple idea, the danger lies in piling them up. The advanced writer, like a Johnson or a Gibbon, will use coordinate clauses in parallelism. For example:
“With the hopeless labor of uniting heterogenous ideas, digesting independent hints, and collecting into one point the several rays of borrowed light, emitted often with contrary directions” (R No. 23).
- uniting heterogenous ideas
- digesting independent hints
- collecting into one point the several rays
When done rightly, the reader actually will feel the force of these clauses.
Writing in General
Although this review focuses more on refining one’s skill in writing essays, and those usually dealing with cause and effect, the authors suggest a number of other methods. For example, when using chronology, avoid the temptation to write “First….Next….Next…Finally.” Rather, treat time differently. Not every moment is important. Sometimes two minutes is more important than fifty eight (97).
When describing nature or some other visual event, spatial arrangement is preferable. In that case, as the authors note, one should move from:
- Large to small
- Small to large
- Right to left
- Left to right
In other words, move from one extreme to another, depending on what one wants to minimize and maximize.
The Classical Oration
Not every essay is worthy of a classical format, but some are and the writing of such can even be fun. A classical oration follows the paradigm below (132-133):
- Exordium or Proem: The beginning or introduction.
- Narratio: the general statement of content or summary of background matter.
- Propositio: The statement of what the writer intends to demonstrate or prove.
- Partitio. Analysis of the proposition. One is announcing the way the subject is to be divided.
- Confirmatio: The body of the discussion.
- Reprehensio: Refutation of the opposition.
- Digressio: Subsidiary or non essential remarks. Designed to reduce tension.
- Peroratio: General conclusion.
Examples: Sydney, “An Apologie for Poetrie”; Milton, “Areopagitica”; Dryden, “An Essay of Dramatic Poesy’; Swift, “On Abolishing Christianity”.
Unity in Writing
This mainly applies to descriptive writing, but it works well as a general principle. “Unity in writing…is that quality characteristic of a piece of writing that is controlled by a central, dominating idea” (238). The best way to capture this, at least for descriptive writing, is “exploitation of the dominant impression.” One achieves this by subordinating “every other impression to this central characteristic, or by describing all other features of the subject in such a way as to contribute directly to the establishment of the dominant impression.”
Nota Bene
“The pronouns this or it should be used sparingly, if at all, as transition devices beginning a sentence. Strictly speaking, this or it must refer to a noun or a noun clause” (137).
“If comparing or contrasting two or more works, deal with the same aspects of these works side by side, so to speak; do not discuss the works separately and then summarize your findings” (139).
Humor
On not using cliches: “Every shot I hit was flying straight and true as an arrow.”
Response: “This was old the day after arrows were invented” (42).
“Evidently the author has been exposed to a course in psychology, whose jargon has left scar tissue on an otherwise fairly adequate and unpretentious vocabulary” (173).
“Burst forth,” “with renewed vigor,” and “idolized football team,” aside from being cliches, are specimens of flowery writing, the author here operating under the misapprehension that sounds and syllables equal good writing” (262).
Conclusion
Writing a book on rhetoric is akin to playing on the offensive line in football. One’s name will never get in the papers, and since the book is almost always aimed at freshmen in college, it will remain a thankless book. As such, one supposes, its true value lies in being found in second-hand stores for those writers who want to polish their abilities.
