In Richard Enos’ “Rediscovering the Lost Art of Researching the History of Rhetoric,” Enos urges rhetoricians to be historians. He says at the end of his article that “all that is necessary for ignorance to prevail in our discipline is for historians of rhetoric to forget their primary job of doing history.”
I think it is very easier for students to get stuck in the virtual world of doing research in a solitary state, and yes, computers are to blame for our recluse ways of doing research. It is too easy for us to sit at home by ourselves in front of our computer while searching Google Scholar for secondary source articles about our topics, but I think there is also so much value in our new technologies that we need to appreciate.
When I am getting through a class that requires research, I turn to the internet and nothing else, but this allows me to accomplish my goal and then move on to something else. I can devote less time to the means of doing research and concentrate on the end: the actual material that I’m learning from. I am able to access a search engine full of information stored in the mysterious universe of cyber space, but the point is that I have it in front of me, even on a computer screen to read through and process.
It is very important for historians of rhetoric to maintain the history of the rhetoric that has influenced us now, yes. Without it we would not have evolved into the students and institutions that we are, but does that mean we should stop the evolution that is happening with how we research?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There is no reason to stop the EVOLUTION of how we research, but we need to be more careful of WHAT we research.
ReplyDeleteI agree completely that with technological advances, its cake to go to the net and find sources for a paper or project whether it's for me to teach or for a class I am taking. I love it! However, it seems, according to our sources that too many are writing about others instead of finding their place to contribute to the canon.
This contribution is going to be very necessary as minds change, tech evolves, and our world becomes a different place. As rhetoricians, we need to find a place to contribute our own thoughts as opposed to merely commenting on the thoughts of others.
I think current computer and internet access is something of a double-edged sword for research. One the hand I think it does significantly improve research through the ease of access. However, as has been pointed out, the ease of access to commentary and other analysis seems to have made original research less appealing. Admittedly, the time-saving and accessibility factors of the internet allow for greater quality in actual research and in paper writing, by giving the student access to material that is not otherwise physically available and leaves more time for thought and actual composition, as opposed to hours spent hunting through library catalogs. I suppose I’m something of a romantic however when it comes to the possibilities of the internet. I was reading elsewhere online (^.^) that already in the US several university libraries are starting to scan historical source documents and make them available online (Eastern ones that have extensive archives anyway). Other universities around the world are doing the same thing. Right now there is an issue of access, as a lot of these scanned documents are not out there for the general public but rather are exclusive to the academy, but it is happening. There are expanding ways by which scholars can use the internet to conduct a degree of original, historical research starting at the sources and without the need of travel. Of course this has its limits; I don’t see the internet being able to replace the value of direct physical contact with artifacts and documents and certainly not places of historical significance. But I do see the internet at least expanding the “armchair” of research into something much closer to authentic and direct involvement with the material.
ReplyDelete