Campbell responds to Biesecker’s article. First, she states that Biesecker is an individual responding to an individual, so she is doing exactly what she criticizes. Second, she states that Biesecker is attempting to silence women because she does not want women highlighted: “The only conclusion I can draw is that Biesecker means what her essay attempts to say. She wants to do away with the individuals and the rhetorical art they created. She wants to silence them. Women were partially or completely silenced for centuries; then the women who dared to break these barriers were silenced in turn by rhetorical historians and critics and theorists. Now that some women have helped to make some of the voices of these once silenced women heard again, Biesecker wishes to silence them once more” (158). Third, she criticizes Biesecker’s use of techne: “As to her claim, I note that she does not explain how she has eliminated these qualities; she does not indicate the presence of these qualities in Plato and Aristotle; and she appears to confuse (a) the presence or absence of the ethical/moral dimensions of techne with (b) the relationship between an agent and that agent's intentions…Derrida and Foucault may regard (a) and (b) as similar or identical; Plato and Aristotle certainly did not” (157).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Tags
All
|