tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4470800272309893246.post7394345022539860632..comments2023-08-23T08:13:02.884-05:00Comments on CCCC: Where is the Rub with "Diversity," Right Now?NCTEhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12254024796847309329noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4470800272309893246.post-72536284570751869522009-08-10T11:56:09.499-05:002009-08-10T11:56:09.499-05:00Dear Susan Jarratt,
Thank you for your insightful...Dear Susan Jarratt,<br /><br />Thank you for your insightful commentary, and for placing some of the earlier CCCC blog posts directly into dialogue. It seems that many of us approach "diversity" with caution, even if from a multitude of disparate cultural locations and experiences. At the same time, we collectively persist in examining what possibilities--if any--are enabled by the modern variant of the Latin expression "diversus," with whatever cultural baggage may come with it. <br /><br />I am inspired by your call to foreground living experiences free from strict (and hierarchical?) categories, what you link specifically to "poikilos: the beauty of the varied, the pied, the ornately crafted, the unexpectedly shaped and colored. This noun gives aesthetic expression to a practice: polypragmasune--doing many things, the antithesis of Plato’s utopia..." <br /><br />As I understand it, evoking "poikilos" and "polypragmasune" works to form a more expansive account of what Greek rhetorical practice might include. Somewhat similarly, my advancement of the late Gloria Anzaldúa's "new mestiza consciousness" works to incorporate various traditions of rhetorical practice that would include pictographic and other non-alphabetic (and non-Western) forms of knowing and communicating. For example, the Nahua idiomatic expression "in xóchitl, in cuicatl" refers simultaneously to artistic expression (such as poetry & song), critical thought, and living experience. Among a number of possibilities, this expression confronts us with the often overlooked fact that the narrow Aristotelian Rhetoric/Poetics split is not universal, nor without its own cultural roots or limitations. <br /><br />But the expressions "in xóchitl, in cuicatl" and "poikilos" return me to a question many of us continue asking--if the ancient Greek "rhētorik" is the unavoidable point of departure, to what degree can we make room for a more inclusive concept of rhetoric that incorporates both established and unconventional rationalities, both systematic and informal, and especially both the dominant and the subjugated, far beyond the colonial limits of Eurocentric horizons? Thank you again for your commentary. I hope we can continue the conversation.<br /><br />best,<br /><br />DamiánDamián Bacahttp://www.u.arizona.edu/~damian/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4470800272309893246.post-24099650197590955582009-07-31T08:26:54.871-05:002009-07-31T08:26:54.871-05:00Great comments and important questions.
Thank you...Great comments and important questions.<br /><br />Thank you!<br /><br />Yvonne Siu-RunyanYvonne Siu-Runyanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08045275133856113581noreply@blogger.com