After reading Sánchez’s essay (see previous post), I read McComiskey’s response, in which he tries to complicate the dichotomy between Sánchez and Berlin that Sánchez has created. Sánchez critiques Berlin’s ideology as “nondiscursive and arhetorical,” a view in which “rhetoric functions either to perpetuate dominant ideologies or to liberate the oppressed from the shackles of ‘false consciousness'” (168-169). McComiskey contends, however, that while he agrees with Sánchez, “Berlin’s use of the concept and the consequences of its use are more slippery than Sánchez suggests,” stating that while Berlin at times represents ideology as false consiousness, with rhetoric to be used to demystify it, he is also very often in agreement with Sánchez on the idea of multiple ideologies (170).
McComiskey is not too fond of Sánchez’s “‘surface’ view of ideology in which there no neutral spaces” if taken too far, as he believes Baudrillard does, because it “can result in a kind of paranoia that produces cynicism at best and apathy at worst” (171). While I didn’t fully get Sánchez’s surface view of ideology, McComiskey’s assertion that “If all positions are always equal in the eyes of ideology, then writers (especially inexperienced writers) may find it difficult to argue for or against anything” (171).
McComiskey discusses further the problems with “ideology-as-false-consciousness” views, because, “with an eye toward critical discourse, such pedagogies do assume a theory of ideology that limits students’ potential to enact change in their worlds” (171), and then goes on to stress the importance of critique and then production, which he feels Sánchez fails to engage in (174).
So, what does all this mean for me? For one, I must remember that ideology does not mean just false consciousness, and then I want to find ways to engage students in production after critique that makes them engage in society and engage writing that creates. Additionally, the idea of “Textual Rhetoric” (proposed by Susan Miller) sounds interesting and might be something to look into.
McComiskey, Bruce. “Ideology and Critique in Composition Studies.” JAC 23.1 (2003): 167-175.
