It’s been a while since I’ve posted here. I was away visiting my in-laws in T or C, NM over holiday. And then I spent several days catching up. I’m still not caught up, but I’m writing here anyway.

So, in the past, I’ve dealt here with questions that come up here and there, you know, around, in departments, in hallways, at conferences, raised by colleagues and such. For example, "do you really need a PhD to teach writing?" or "Do students really need to learn about new media?" and similar variations on this theme.

Here is another quasi-hypothetical question: is rhetoric (and writing) part of the liberal arts (in English)?

There are a couple of answers.

1. Since rhetoric is part of the original trivium of liberal arts, it would seem obvious that the question is yes. However, perhaps you could say that rhetoric is a liberal art but NOT part of "English" (and yes this disciplinary identity question just drags on and on, perhaps waiting for people to die, I don’t know).

2. On the other hand, at least some professional/technical writing programs are really focused on preparing students for a very specific sector of jobs. We don’t have a program like that, but they do exist. I taught a summer course in a technical writing program that is part of an engineering school (rather than arts and sciences). Perhaps faculty in such a program would not think of their subject matter as a liberal art. I’m not sure. Honestly it’s hard to imagine writing as anything other than a liberal art. Indeed  it stikes me as the prototypical liberal art.

Nevertheless, this tension between professionalization and liberal arts does exist. It is, in a sense, an extension of the tension in first-year composition between seeing such courses as skills-driven or as developing critical thinking.

3. The third response considers the motivation of such a question. Taking up the old guard view of writing as a skill, as something other than an "intellectual" matter (i.e., as something that may be delegated in the way composition often is), English liberal arts becomes strictly literary study. Writing instruction then becomes a precursor to liberal arts (as a basic skill), a natural side effect of literary study (as in reading literature and writing literary interpretation naturally leads to learning to write in some general sense), and/or a professionalizing activity (as in preparing for a specific job) that stands outside the realm of "liberal arts."

The liberal in liberal arts has two meanings. The first, dating to the medieval era, suggests those arts that were appropriate for "free men" (as opposed to serfs). The second, more appropriate to the Enlightenment, is related to liberation, to freeing the mind, and creating/securing a free society. Though clear differences exist, there is a strong sense that liberal arts are those which make us and help us stay "free." I’ll leave the critique of freedom for another day.

The historical situation of literary study over the last century or so as a centerpiece of liberal arts (at least in Anglo-American universities) is well-documented. Essentially the study of literature provides insight into human nature… allows us to better understand ourselves, others, and the world around us (as most any English department website might tell you).

I have no particular problem with literary study as a liberal art. I am curious to see how the study of literature will evolve as we move further from the print culture that created it.

However, it seems to me that the heart of liberal arts is intellectual openness, the opportunity to encounter and consider different ideas. Within English Studies, to create a cordon sanitaire walling off rhetoric from the liberal arts seems counter to the central principle of liberal arts. That is, to have a "liberal arts" degree in English that excludes rhetorical study makes little intellectual sense.

More importantly, it reflects a general misunderstanding of the work that takes place under the name of rhetoric or professional writing. Sure, there may be some profesisonal-technical programs that might eschew the category of liberal arts, but I would bet they are few and far between. And yes, undoubtedly, many professional writing programs and/or courses develop out of a perception that students and administrators desire curriculum with a more direct connection to the workplace. However, those facts do not mean that rhetoric is suddenly no longer a liberal art! Yes, maybe a technical writing or editing course helps a student succeed as a technical writer or editor. But are we suddenly suggesting that a "liberal arts" English degree does not also help a student reach such success? Aren’t we always suggesting liberal arts degrees lead to successful careers?

My point is that (many) Professional Writing degrees, like degrees that focus on literary studies, are liberal arts degrees that help students achieve professional success.

And the bottom line is we shouldn’t have to be discussing such questions or battling over the intellectual territory they might represent. What we should be doing is asking "how can individual English departments establish curricular structures that allow their faculty to offer their knowledge and experience to the widest possible range of students and thus create conditions in which students have the opportunity to receive a rich, diverse, intellectually-challenging, and yes, even professionally-rewarding education?"

#plaa{position:absolute;clip:rect(496px,auto, auto,496px);}