Greening the Gap: Rhetoric, Literature, and the Environment

full name / name of organization: 
Northeast Modern Language Association (NeMLA)

Tensions between rhetoric and literary studies are long-standing. For example, poetry and other types of literary texts were subsumed by rhetoric for the greater part of two millennia. However, a shift in 20th-century values led to the canonization of literary texts; consequently, English departments today prioritize literature (however you might define it) over rhetoric. Why are rhetoric and composition considered "low arts"? Why do academics fight to teach literature classes available, but complain about teaching composition? What does an English department "do" anyway? These kinds of questions and concerns have led many contemporary English departments to hunker down in their respective camp. But is this divide necessary or useful?

In My First Summer in the Sierra, John Muir writes "When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." This panel draws inspiration from the inter- and extra- disciplinary model provided by the environmental movement, which relies heavily on the skills and assets of various types scholars. What are the inter- and extra- disciplinary strategies of the environmental movement: how do they apply to English departments? How might we use this model to "green the gap" between composition, rhetoric, and literary studies? Can they inform one another in the classroom and in scholarly practice? In what ways?