Comments on: CCR 691 – Welch Ch. 2 for Comment http://justinlewis.me/me/2009/10/18/ccr-691-welch-ch-2-for-comment/ Sun, 04 Sep 2011 12:23:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: eileen E Schell http://justinlewis.me/me/2009/10/18/ccr-691-welch-ch-2-for-comment/comment-page-1/#comment-115 eileen E Schell Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:41:03 +0000 http://justinlewis.me/?p=95#comment-115 Hi, Justin: Interesting mass of questions. It might be said that Welch is thinking through the possibilities of the subaltern counterpublic sphere. She keeps talking about spaces where working class consciousness and rhetorical action has taken shape in response to increasing moves toward exploitation and privatization. But she doesn't really use Fraser's terminology consistently throughout the book. On the question of socialism, Welch, at one point, identifies her own stance as being socialist. I think she does see socialism as a viable system for addressing many of the issues and struggles she raises in the book. But she stops short of arguing for socialism as a system and advocates, in varied ways, rhetorical strategies based in socialist movements and freedom, civll rights, and worker rights struggles. If found the book very interesting, but to be an interesting challenge in terms of organization, arrangement, and theory/methods across the chapters I'd like to talk about what we we think as we consider Welch's methods? How is her methodology rhetorical? How is this also a literacy narrative about Welch g realizing need for our field/students to go to "activist school" and counter/unlearn academic training and expertise modes? Hi, Justin: Interesting mass of questions. It might be said that Welch is thinking through the possibilities of the subaltern counterpublic sphere. She keeps talking about spaces where working class consciousness and rhetorical action has taken shape in response to increasing moves toward exploitation and privatization. But she doesn’t really use Fraser’s terminology consistently throughout the book.

On the question of socialism, Welch, at one point, identifies her own stance as being socialist. I think she does see socialism as a viable system for addressing many of the issues and struggles she raises in the book. But she stops short of arguing for socialism as a system and advocates, in varied ways, rhetorical strategies based in socialist movements and freedom, civll rights, and worker rights struggles.

If found the book very interesting, but to be an interesting challenge in terms of organization, arrangement, and theory/methods across the chapters I’d like to talk about what we we think as we consider Welch’s methods? How is her methodology rhetorical? How is this also a literacy narrative about Welch g realizing need for our field/students to go to “activist school” and counter/unlearn academic training and expertise modes?

]]>