Response to Berlin

I had some trouble getting behind this one. It seems to me that Berlin is offering suggestions for teaching advanced composition, not basic. Also, he is not focused on writing but on theories of philosophy that take up 90% of his essay before we see his thesis. I don't feel that discussing what rhetoric should do, or whose theory of rhetoric is correct, is a beneficial tool in most classrooms. Rather, we should be looking at ways in which we can improve student writing. He says, "The study of rhetoric thus focuses on developing skill in arrangement and style" (770). Right, but how do we go about improving those things in students who may be  averse to the whole writing process? Students who need to be able to articulate what they want to say before learning what someone else has said about what they are trying to accomplish? Instead of approaching writing as the study of someone else's definition of truth, as Berlin spends multiple pages laying out for us, we should be teaching students to recognize and articulate their own truths in writing before bombarding them with philosophical theory.

Berlin seems to be more concerned with views of composing rather than composing itself. He even addresses the criticism that he feels will be held against him for not relating his topic to the teaching of freshman composition, but only offers us more theory. To me he sounds arrogant, and his use of the term "effective persons" had me questioning his motives (177). Perhaps I am just too fond of Lindemann's practicality and simplicity to back someone discussing theories that should be reserved, in my opinion, for already established writers in terms of  teaching composition.