Close Reading: Bridging the Gap
Between Rhetor and Audience

Theory

As discussed above, literary analysis was a major focus in the English department of GCSU. Almost every English class required three large papers, all with a common denominator of having students create large, overarching arguments based on small details, like the wording of a sentence, imagery and metaphors, or even basic punctuation. For instance, one of the papers I wrote while in undergrad analyzed the use of clothing as a literary device in John Brown's Slave Life in Georgia, which was only referenced in the narrative a handful of times. I analyzed these few instances through a biblical context, imagining clothing as a representation of sin, supported by Genesis 3:21 and Adam and Eve wearing clothing after biting the apple. I then used this context to analyze scenes mentioning the presence or absence of clothing, and ultimately created the argument that through clothing, Brown was depicting slaves as being sinless. If you would like to read my essay, you can find it here. 

Although, most of the curriculum in my FYC will focus on composition and rhetoric, I think some incorporation of close reading could be helpful. Much of my curriculum will focus on the rhetorical situation, in which students will be taught to think of their purpose and audience when writing anything, from an academic paper to an email. I believe close reading assignments like the one I described above could be instrumental when teaching students the importance of remembering one's audience. People often believe that simply writing words on the page will deliver the exact message they had intended to outside audiences. For instance, as Charles Bazerman states in his essay, "Writing Represents the World, Events, Ideas, and Feelings," in Linda Alder-Kassner and Elizabeth Wardle's book, Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Students, "I may think if I write about a mountain that the mountain is there for all to see, so the words I use are not that important," (38) 

Although I enjoyed writing in high school, this was the exact belief I had when writing. I did not understand the need to be specific, or how the thoughts I think when writing words on a page might not translate to outside audiences. Similar to the meme going around of the high school teacher asking about the significance of the blue curtains, I did not understand how small details could impact the overarching message of a text, or that words themselves are "thin and frail communicators" (38), as Bazerman describes them. It was not until I had to pay attention to said small details and create my own arguments surrounding them that I understood the importance of every word, metaphor, and detail used. After having several of these essays under my belt, I was better able to look back at my own writing and picture it through the lens of my audience. I started questioning how my audience would read X word, and if I needed to give more context regarding the situation I was writing about. Would the wording of my sentence make sense, or did I need to add more detail? 

As Bazerman explains it, "When I realize that all my readers are likely to know the mountain, particularly on a sunny early spring afternoon after an overnight snow storm ending in sleet so the crust breaks through unpredictably beneath the feet, through the words I write, I begin to take greater care in choosing my words," (38). 

Practice

The majority of my experience with close reading occurred while in undergrad, but I believe there is a variety of ways that close reading can be merged with composition and rhetoric courses, and there are many resources for this, such as Davidson Writer's blog and Barry Brummett's book, Techniques of Close Reading. For one, close reading assignments can merge rather seamlessly with rhetorical analysis papers. While working at the KSU Writing Center, I have seen many assignment guildelines ask students to pay attention to details in a speech or a text that supports the rhetor's credibility. I have also seen papers that ask students to analyze the rhetorical appeals that the rhetor's using, like "Why does the rhetor use this word? What does the rhetor mean by this word? How might this word impact the audiences' interpretation of the speech?" Although this is different from the literary analysis papers I wrote in undergrad, the focus on one word's influence over an audiences' interpretation of a speech could hopefully teach students how important small details are to an overarching message.  

I believe this could also be useful in narrative assignments. Often, when students come into the Writing Center with a narrative assignment for their FYC course, they will bring feedback that they received from their professor, and often this feedback relates to the amount of detail students incorporated in their narrative. Generally, the student and I will go through the paper, and I will ask questions about specific details that the paper might be missing, like context or sensory details. It typically results in the student and I having a conversation about their narrative, and hopefully by the end of the session, the student has a better understanding of what details they should include for the audience to better understand the piece. I believe this practice could be implemented in class, with peer-review, where students are asked to read another student's work, ask questions about small details, and divulge how they interpret the text. I believe an assignment like this could be beneficial in that students will get to experience close-reading another person's word and understand what it is like to be an audience, and receive specific notes in how their own writing could be more clear.