| -
1
- 2 -
For Cioffi, the entire
essay should be guided by a process of questioning. Borrowing
from classical Greek terminology, he uses the term erotesis to
describe the opening up of "a wide variety and a large number
of questions of all kinds," while he uses the term prolepsis
for the act of "anticipating--inferring what kind of questions,
and even exactly what questions, might interest the audience"
(92). Where erotesis casts a wide net over the kinds of issues
to explore, as in brainstorming, prolepsis eventually reins in
ideas and promotes audience oriented rhetorical choices. Later,
Cioffi calls this dialectical process a "Development Demon"
(96). Far more than echoing classical stasis theory, with its
main inventive strategy of asking prescribed questions, Cioffi
suggests his approach as a method of internalizing an audience's
interests. However, his demon here raises all kinds of pedagogical
issues: putting aside for a moment Walter Ong's insistence that
"The Writer's Audience is Always a Fiction" (an argument
that is also the title of his famous essay), how can students
avoid constructing an implied or fictional audience that does
not resemble actual readers? And at what point can students distinguish
between "micro-questions" and "macro-questions,"
or arrive at the main "research question," as Wayne
Booth, Gregory Colomb, and Joseph Williams suggest in The Craft
of Research (University of Chicago Press, 2003). And most urgent
of all, at what point are students supposed to stop asking questions
altogether and start writing, especially when the essay is due
tomorrow even though they may still be unsure about their ideas?
Development
and its Demons
The main challenge in using Cioffi's "Development Demon"
concept to encourage audience sensitivity is that students would
need to practice recognizing what the relevant questions about
their topics would be, a skill that does not come easily during
their first college writing class. Although Cioffi does provide
examples of questions to ask, understanding an audience requires
constant contact with those we seek to persuade, to learn their
biases, values and sensibilities. To reach an advanced, professional
level, this dialectical skill requires years of practice with
various mentors; but at its most expedient classroom level, it
is a skill that could be set up through a sequence of assignments
teaching students to arrive at a research question or insights
about a text. Most reading anthologies include such questions
at the ends of chapters, but to follow through with Cioffi's "Development
Demon," very close mentoring would be required, often taking
more time than students would have to complete one essay assignment.
However, with practice and patience, students can get accustomed
to this dialectical approach to rhetorical invention, perhaps
towards the final stages of a class.
Overall, while students and academic writers of all levels can
profit from Cioffi's very practical advice on producing argumentative
and research essays, writing instructors, in particular, can read
it and feel they are consulting with an approachable and thought
provoking colleague. Without being dogmatic or narrowly prescriptive--as
many rhetoric handbooks can be--Cioffi manages to be comprehensive,
walking the reader through the thinking process of planning and
structuring an essay while covering a wide variety of pedagogical
issues to think about.
- 1
- 2 - |
