I began my private blog as a way to finish up a chapter for Seth and JongHwa’s forthcoming  collection, Activism and Rhetoric: Theory and Contexts for Political Engagement.  In short, I liked writing and thinking in a blog space a lot more than I did in a Word context.  From there I began writing class notes and ideas for my course, “Rhetoric, Democracy, Advocacy” (which I am currently teaching), and seemingly random notes about issues I’m interested in and want to research.  The more I wrote, the more I wanted to write (a pretty consistent theme in my academic career).

Like everything else at a teaching university, my desire to write more and more often had to confront very real time constraints.  So, I scheduled myself a three-hour bloc once a week to write.

One of the first things I did was re-read all of the conference papers I’ve written over the past few years to see which ones (if any) I could work on and turn into an article.  As I read, it started to see the shape of a bigger project.  I shouldn’t have been surprised, actually, since I made a conscious decision a while back that I would only propose conference papers that chipped away at a bigger project.  After a few days of toying around with organization and, more importantly, the title I had the outlines of a book proposal together: Gettin’ Dirty: Rhetoric, Democracy, and Sustainable Dissent.  Yup.  So, that’s what I’m working on!

So…why this breaking out of my private blog into Cooking with Dionysus?  I refuse to admit this to myself, but I am sure it has something to with watching Julie and Julia the other night.  I’ve gone back and forth on bringing my works-in-progress to CwD (or any other blog for that matter) for a range of reasons…that I’d be happy to talk about.  What convinced me to move Gettin’ Dirty (the draft proposal at least) onto CwD?  Two things: 1) I need to give myself smaller deadlines and a consistent space to write in order to put this book together in a relatively short period of time (self-imposed urgency); and, 2) to open up the possibility of not feeling like I’m working in isolation.  Even if no one bothers to comment to what I post, it feels less isolating.  To me.  No general principles about the nature of blogging and it’s impact on writer identity here.  Just a fact that it seems easier to write.

As my first little nugget, I thought I’d post my very, very drafty table of contents.  This is what I am working with:

Gettin’ Dirty:
Rhetoric, Democracy, and Sustainable Dissent
by Kevin Mahoney

Table of Contents

1. Introduction: “Rhetoric of Advocacy: Curricular Labor and Democratic Futures” (from CCCC 2009 conference paper) [Potentially retitled as “Curricular Labor and Democratic Futures.”]
2. Radical Teaching and Social Movements: Historical Legacies (from chapter 3 of my dissertation)
3. “Space: Mapping Democratic Openings in Empire” (From CCCC 2004 conference paper)
4. “Advancing Composition: Public Rhetorics and the Struggle for Democratic Futures” (From CCCC 2007 conference paper)
5. “Viral Advocacy” (from CCCC 2010 conference paper)
6. “Literacies for the Long Haul: Traditions of Radical Literacy Education for Access, Autonomy, and Democracy” (from CCCC 2005 conference paper)
7. “The Day After: Grieving and Sustainable Dissent” (new)

So, there ya have it…my little entry into public, academic writing.  Oh, if you’re wondering about the picture at the top of this post, I found it online.  I love it.  I want to ask permission to use that as the cover.

I’ve got some ideas already about where to submit my proposal…but if you’ve got any ideas, I’m all ears.

******original post******

2010.  Wow.

I can’t think of a decade that went by faster than this past one.  I’ve spent 7 1/2 years of the ’00′s in Pennsylvania.  That means that I have lived here longer than DC (3years), Oxford, OH (4 years), and almost as long as I lived in Syracuse (8 years).  Pretty wild.  And…what’s really got me thinking…of my 7 1/2 years at Kutztown University, I’ve been the coordinator of composition for all but two of those years.  That’s right…I’m one of those people who took on the reigns of writing program administration well before I was tenured.  I’ve been a tenured coordinator of composition for only a year and half.   Believe me, I was told all during grad school that taking on WPA duties before tenure was a bad idea.  Practitioners in our field also recommend strongly against it.  But, at the time it didn’t feel like there was too much choice if I was going to be able to help build our composition program–one of the key reasons I came to KU.

At the end of my second year, ten faculty in our department retired; one tenure-track faculty member got married and joined her husband on the West Coast; and, our then Chair decided to tell us during finals week that he had accepted a new job and would not be with us the following fall.  He even passed around pictures of his new house in Michigan.  I remember that moment as both daunting and exciting.  Daunting in that our faculty was gutted by almost a third and we had to scramble to elect and new chair and figure out how to staff all of our courses by the fall semester.  Exciting because many of those people who were retiring were the very faculty members who seemed committed to internal factionalism and personal conflict.  In one fell swoop, that dysfunctional departmental dynamic would be gone for the most part.  We had the opportunity to build a new, collaborative department.

Our coordinator of composition at the time decided to run for department chair.  She and I had talked about me taking over the coordinator position, but this would mean I would do so a year ahead of time.  I didn’t see any real alternatives, no matter how conflicted I was about my premature entry into the world of writing program administration. I can’t pretend that my first couple of years at the coordinator were easy.  It was a huge adjustment that was marked by my own, at times, ambivalent relationship to administrative work.  But, in looking back on these 5 1/2 years, I think I can say that I’ve been able to do some pretty good things here.

I think my biggest contribution has been to privilege growing the program.  This has meant: 1) prioritizing building a core faculty in composition and rhetoric; 2) cultivate intellectual spaces to support that core faculty and all faculty teaching composition; and 3) build an undergraduate (and eventually graduate) concentration in Composition, Rhetoric, and Literacy Studies (the name came later, actually). Since I took over in 2004, we’ve hired three new faculty in composition and rhetoric and we are in the middle of hiring our fourth.  We’ve also converted a temporary faculty member–who is completing her PhD in composition and rhetoric–to a tenure-track position.  So, by fall 2010 we will have increased the number of comp/rhet faculty from three to eight.  Not bad.

In terms of creating an intellectual space, I started a reading group in Composition, Rhetoric, and Literacy Studies that meets monthly to discuss current scholarship in the field.  Thanks to the great work of Amy Lynch-Biniek and the Composition Conference Committee, we’ve expanded our annual undergraduate composition conference to include students taking composition and rhetoric courses at all levels.  We’ve also brought in keynote speakers such at Keith Gilyard, Rosa Eberly, and Steve Parks–and this spring Susan Wells will be joining us.

We have also revised and added several new courses to the department’s offerings.  In my first year as coordinator, we added ENG 430 “Rhetorical Traditions/Contemporary Renditions.”  Last year, we added my course ENG 316 “Rhetoric, Democracy, Advocacy.”  And this past semester, we added ENG 260 “Issues in Composition and Rhetoric” (Lynch-Biniek) and ENG 274 “Women, Writing, and Rhetoric” (Cullum).  Linda Cullum also worked with Lisa Weckerle from Speech/Communications to update ENG/SPE 335 “Rhetoric of Literature.”  Thanks in large part to our Chair (and fellow compositionist) Janice Chernekoff, ENU 405 “Teaching of Writing” runs every semester and is a required course for all Secondary Education/English majors.  All of these new courses are part of our proposed concentration in Composition, Rhetoric, and Literacy Studies, which I expect to have cleared all the curricular hurdles by the end of spring 2010 semester.  It’s really been quite an amazing run so far.

Like anything else, I could also list the many things I wish I had done, done better, or didn’t do.  But, I’m pretty good at beating myself up about those things on a daily basis.  In the spirit of the New Year, I thought I’d cut myself a little slack, look back at some accomplishments, and remind myself that the work is worth it.  Now I can actually begin planning for the next step!

Hmmmmm….where can we go from here?

I can’t think of a decade that went by faster than this past one.  I’ve spent 7 1/2 years of the ’00′s in Pennsylvania.  That means that I have lived here longer than DC (3years), Oxford, OH (4 years), and almost as long as I lived in Syracuse (8 years).  Pretty wild.  And…what’s really got me thinking…of my 7 1/2 years at Kutztown University, I’ve been the coordinator of composition for all but two of those years.  That’s right…I’m one of those people who took on the reigns of writing program administration well before I was tenured.  I’ve been a tenured coordinator of composition for only a year and half.   Believe me, I was told all during grad school that taking on WPA duties before tenure was a bad idea.  Practitioners in our field also recommend strongly against it.  But, at the time it didn’t feel like there was too much choice if I was going to be able to help build our composition program–one of the key reasons I came to KU.

At the end of my second year, ten faculty in our department retired; one tenure-track faculty member got married and joined her husband on the West Coast; and, our then Chair decided to tell us during finals week that he had accepted a new job and would not be with us the following fall.  He even passed around pictures of his new house in Michigan.  I remember that moment as both daunting and exciting.  Daunting in that our faculty was gutted by almost a third and we had to scramble to elect and new chair and figure out how to staff all of our courses by the fall semester.  Exciting because many of those people who were retiring were the very faculty members who seemed committed to internal factionalism and personal conflict.  In one fell swoop, that dysfunctional departmental dynamic would be gone for the most part.  We had the opportunity to build a new, collaborative department.

Our coordinator of composition at the time decided to run for department chair.  She and I had talked about me taking over the coordinator position, but this would mean I would do so a year ahead of time.  I didn’t see any real alternatives, no matter how conflicted I was about my premature entry into the world of writing program administration. I can’t pretend that my first couple of years at the coordinator were easy.  It was a huge adjustment that was marked by my own, at times, ambivalent relationship to administrative work.  But, in looking back on these 5 1/2 years, I think I can say that I’ve been able to do some pretty good things here.

I think my biggest contribution has been to privilege growing the program.  This has meant: 1) prioritizing building a core faculty in composition and rhetoric; 2) cultivate intellectual spaces to support that core faculty and all faculty teaching composition; and 3) build an undergraduate (and eventually graduate) concentration in Composition, Rhetoric, and Literacy Studies (the name came later, actually). Since I took over in 2004, we’ve hired three new faculty in composition and rhetoric and we are in the middle of hiring our fourth.  We’ve also converted a temporary faculty member–who is completing her PhD in composition and rhetoric–to a tenure-track position.  So, by fall 2010 we will have increased the number of comp/rhet faculty from three to eight.  Not bad.

In terms of creating an intellectual space, I started a reading group in Composition, Rhetoric, and Literacy Studies that meets monthly to discuss current scholarship in the field.  Thanks to the great work of Amy Lynch-Biniek and the Composition Conference Committee, we’ve expanded our annual undergraduate composition conference to include students taking composition and rhetoric courses at all levels.  We’ve also brought in keynote speakers such at Keith Gilyard, Rosa Eberly, and Steve Parks–and this spring Susan Wells will be joining us.

We have also revised and added several new courses to the department’s offerings.  In my first year as coordinator, we added ENG 430 “Rhetorical Traditions/Contemporary Renditions.”  Last year, we added my course ENG 316 “Rhetoric, Democracy, Advocacy.”  And this past semester, we added ENG 260 “Issues in Composition and Rhetoric” (Lynch-Biniek) and ENG 274 “Women, Writing, and Rhetoric” (Cullum).  Linda Cullum also worked with Lisa Weckerle from Speech/Communications to update ENG/SPE 335 “Rhetoric of Literature.”  Thanks in large part to our Chair (and fellow compositionist) Janice Chernekoff, ENU 405 “Teaching of Writing” runs every semester and is a required course for all Secondary Education/English majors.  All of these new courses are part of our proposed concentration in Composition, Rhetoric, and Literacy Studies, which I expect to have cleared all the curricular hurdles by the end of spring 2010 semester.  It’s really been quite an amazing run so far.

Like anything else, I could also list the many things I wish I had done, done better, or didn’t do.  But, I’m pretty good at beating myself up about those things on a daily basis.  In the spirit of the New Year, I thought I’d cut myself a little slack, look back at some accomplishments, and remind myself that the work is worth it.  Now I can actually begin planning for the next step!

Hmmmmm….where can we go from here?

Course Description

ENG 316: Rhetoric, Democracy, Advocacy The connection between rhetoric and democracy is an old one dating back to the origins of both concepts in Western traditions. Simply put rhetoric—the skilled use of argument and persuasive discourse—and democracy were seen as ways to replace violence as the primary means of governing and resolving conflict. This course argues that the intimate connections between rhetoric and democracy are critical to retain and reclaim for the health of democratic society and culture. American democracy has been defined not only by its institutions and Constitutional frameworks, but also by vibrant traditions of citizenship advocacy that have relentlessly stretched the boundaries of democratic freedoms, identities, and protections. A healthy democracy requires citizen advocates who are skilled in the analysis of public discourse and the rhetoric of advocacy. This course will be a sustained study of the theory and practice of advocacy rhetoric, primarily in the American context. In addition, this course will raise practical questions about what citizenship advocacy means in a context of increasing globalization and new media. 3 s.h. 3 c.h.

Course Rationale

Despite the historic connection between the rise of democracy and the rise of rhetoric in Western traditions, rarely do we study rhetoric as a “citizen discipline.” That is, while it is common to find courses training students in the “expert rhetorics” of corporations (public relations) and political campaigns, there is a general lack of courses that focus on the role of citizen advocacy as integral to the health of democratic cultures. As one of the missions of higher education is to train critical citizens capable of meeting the challenges and responsibilities of an ever changing world, this course seeks to make such training an explicit part of the English department’s curriculum.

Books for the Class

• Emergent Publics: An Essay on Social Movements and Democracy (Semaphore Series)
• The Rhetoric of Agitation and Control
• Rhetoric for Radicals: A Handbook for 21st Century Activists
• Rhetorical Democracy: Discursive Practices of Civic Engagement
• Rules for Radicals
• Activist Rhetorics and American Higher Education, 1885-1937

So, there ya have it!  Come one, come all!

I got a little bit concerned looking at amazon.com because it looks like the book might be out of print.  However, on the Southern Illinois University Press site, it shows the book in-print.  Very cool!

So, any KU students who are last minute register-ers and might dig this class…REGISTER SOON!  I want to make sure this class runs.  It looks pretty good now, but I stress over this kind of stuff.

I. Course Description: ENG 316: Rhetoric, Democracy, Advocacy

The connection between rhetoric and democracy is an old one dating back to the origins of both concepts in Western traditions. Simply put rhetoric—the skilled use of argument and persuasive discourse—and democracy were seen as ways to replace violence as the primary means of governing and resolving conflict. This course argues that the intimate connections between rhetoric and democracy are critical to retain and reclaim for the health of democratic society and culture. American democracy has been defined not only by its institutions and Constitutional frameworks, but also by vibrant traditions of citizenship advocacy that have relentlessly stretched the boundaries of democratic freedoms, identities, and protections. A healthy democracy requires citizen advocates who are skilled in the analysis of public discourse and the rhetoric of advocacy. This course will be a sustained study of the theory and practice of advocacy rhetoric, primarily in the American context. In addition, this course will raise practical questions about what citizenship advocacy means in a context of increasing globalization and new media. 3 s.h. 3 c.h.

II. Course Rationale

Despite the historic connection between the rise of democracy and the rise of rhetoric in Western traditions, rarely do we study rhetoric as a “citizen discipline.” That is, while it is common to find courses training students in the “expert rhetorics” of corporations (public relations) and political campaigns, there is a general lack of courses that focus on the role of citizen advocacy as integral to the health of democratic cultures. As one of the missions of higher education is to train critical citizens capable of meeting the challenges and responsibilities of an ever changing world, this course seeks to make such training an explicit part of the English department’s curriculum.

I’ll post the book  list for the class in a little  bit.  If you have any questions about the class, drop me a line.

Welcome back everyone!  I have to say that  it was pretty incredible coming back this semester and having seven–SEVEN– comp/rhet faculty at our first meeting.  We’ve come a long way in terms of faculty hiring and program development in a very short time.  When I took over the Coordinator position, we had three comp/rhet faculty members.

There has also been a pretty rapid increase in student interest in upper-level composition courses.  ENG 430 Rhetorical Traditions/Contemporary Renditions, went live in the Spring 2007 semester and this coming Spring, my new course ENG 316 Rhetoric, Democracy, Advocacy will be offered for the first time.  Amy Lynch-Biniek authored a new course, ENG XXX Composition and Rhetoric Studies which is making its way through the curricular process and will be one of the key courses for our proposed concentration in Composition, Rhetoric, and Literacy Studies.  Linda Cullum will be submitting her new course, ENG XXX Women, Writing, Rhetoric to the curriculum committees this semester.  In addition, our ENU 405 Teaching of Writing, continues to fill every semester with graduate and undergraduate students. Needless to say, we are excited about the direction our program is headed!

This semester I hope to get all our comp/rhet faculty up and running on this blog too.  This way you can hear from all of us…of different approaches to teaching, latest scholarship, thoughts on writing and rhetoric, musings, and random contributions to this little space.

I am going to leave for now…but will return soon!  Thanks for taking the time to check in.