Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Review
Author(s): John Logie
Review by: John Logie
Source: Rhetoric Society Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Winter, 2001), pp. 102-105
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3886405
Accessed: 18-04-2016 13:14 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Taylor & Francis, Ltd., Rhetoric Society of America are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Rhetoric Society Quarterly
This content downloaded from 123.63.6.201 on Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:14:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
102
RHETORIC
SOCIETY
QUARTERLY
ment with the first rhetorical canon, invention. But these books demonstrate
that the pathways to such engagements vary considerably according to investigators' theoretical and disciplinary investments. In Standing in the Shadow
discipline-Howard directs the The Writing Program at Syracuse University, while Coombe is an associate professor of law at the University of Toronto
-their books share a common critical ancestor. These texts, like most recent
North American studies of authorship, build on the work of Martha
Woodmansee and Peter Jaszi, who prompted a sustained interdisciplinary
investigation into the topic as organizers of a 1991 meeting of the Society for
Critical Exchange entitled "Intellectual Property and the Construction of Authorship." This truly interdisciplinary meeting reflected the assembled scholars' responses to the late 1960s Continental critique of authorship, epitomized by Roland Barthes' "The Death of the Author" and Michel Foucault's
Woodmansee persuasively posited the emergence of The Author as a byproduct of the rise of mass-market publishing in the eighteenth century. Among
the presenters at this meeting were Karen Burke-LeFevre, building on the
arguments she developed in her 1987 book, Invention as a Social Act; Andrea Lunsford, drawing on her joint efforts with Lisa Ede on the topic of
collaborative writing; and Rosemary Coombe, presenting an early version of
This content downloaded from 123.63.6.201 on Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:14:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
REVIEWS
103
what is now the second chapter of The Cultural Life. Both Coombe's book
and Howard's book build on the conclusion suggested by this meeting; that
proprietary authorship, regardless of discipline, is best understood as a contingent, contested, and recent social construct.
In Coombe's text, recasting The Author as an expressly Foucauldian "au-
these investigations, Coombe enriches her readings of the legal issues at stake
with pertinent references to work in both anthropology (especially Geertz)
and postmodern theory (key referents include Jean Baudrillard, Judith Butler, and Jean-Francois Lyotard). Predictably, this makes for dense prose, and
the sheer breadth of Coombe's scholarship can also be overwhelming. In one
welling up from within marginalized cultures. Coombe's arguments are typically more associative than progressive, and readers who prefer conclusions
to connections may become frustrated. Her arguments are also weighed down
erty" events of the last four centuries. Coombe benefits from her ability, as a
resident of Toronto, to both participate in and distance herself from the culture of the United States. Throughout her chapters, Coombe demonstrates a
particular sensitivity to the ways in which cultural signs and identities, particularly those of indigenous peoples, are appropriated and transformed by
dominant cultures, and conversely, the ways in which dominant cultures are
transformed by their use of these signs. In this light, the cover of Coombe's
text seems especially apt. The cover features (with permission) an Andy
Warhol image in which the pop artist rings "primitivist" changes on the familiar Arm & Hammer logo. Warhol's image ably announces and comments
on Coombe's core themes, and contributes to the text's standing as one of the
most elegantly packaged academic texts in recent memory.
This content downloaded from 123.63.6.201 on Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:14:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
104
RHETORIC
SOCIETY
QUARTERLY
While Coombe works to read expansive networks of signs, and understand their resonances, Howard's purpose is, especially by contrast, bracingly
specific. Howard is, as she states in her introduction, arguing for substantial
revision of university plagiarism policies so that evidence of a writer's intent
to deceive readers, rather than proof of inadequately acknowledged appropriations, would be needed to sustain a charge of academic misconduct.
Howard expands current understandings of textual appropriation by offering the term "patchwriting," which she initially defines as "copying from
a source text and then deleting some words, altering grammatical structures,
or plugging in one synonym for another (xvii). Coombe nuances this definition in a series of subsequent explications, wherein patchwriting is described
variously as: "a form of imitatio, of mimesis"; "a process of evaluating a
source text. . . "; "a form of verbal sculpture, molding new shapes from pre-
existing materials"; and "a form of pentimento, in which one writer reshapes
the work of another while leaving traces of the earlier writer's thoughts and
intentions" (xviii). While most of these activities would clearly be restricted
under typical university plagiarism policies, Howard provocatively concludes
that patchwriting is "something all academic writers do" (xviii) and her later
arguments make it clear that she means professors as well as students. After
illustrating the popularity of patchwriting as a composing strategy, Howard
asks, quite reasonably, why the Academy no longer tolerates imitation and
appropriation as modes of learning.
Howard describes Standing in the Shadow of Giants as a "history of
composition studies" (xxi), but this is a partisan history, always focused on
thorship; the challenges surrounding authorship in electronic media; and numerous examples of composers violating cultural norms for textual production.
Howard's prose throughout is notable for its conciseness and clarity. Her
arguments are supplemented by her extensive use of pertinent quotations from
philosophers, rhetoricians, and literary theorists, situating her work within a
2,500 year discussion about texts and the people who compose them. Stand-
This content downloaded from 123.63.6.201 on Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:14:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
REVIEWS
105
John Logie
Department of Rhetoric
University of Minnesota
This content downloaded from 123.63.6.201 on Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:14:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms