Ryan van Dyke

@ThaddeusRussell Is Renegade University still up and running? I was recently in the middle of Coffeen's Deleuze course, and it randomly stopped working with the message "This video does not exist." Those videos are too good to disappear.

@DCoffeen Did you ever teach any Kierkegaard? (I’m currently thinking of weaving him into my comp syllabus).

I forgot that I’d created a blog for my Berkeley Intro to Rhetoric course lo these many years ago. I have to say, I love this syllabus, even if I’d add a few things now (most notably, Clarice Lispector’s Agua Viva which I taught in other classes).

@DCoffeen I’ve heard you mention Gadamer a few times, but have never seen a deep dive. How does he influence the way you interpret a text? What do you get from him?

@DCoffeen What are the main books that taught you about irony? Do you have any recommendations?

@DCoffeen The program I’m in really pushes “reflective” meta-writing which seems anti-argument based and doesn’t focus on a text. It really encourages bull shit papers. What texts did you teach for early comp? Was it the same ones you taught for your rhetoric courses?

@Ryanvandyke1 But argument should always be the structure of any comp writing, whatever the writer's skill. What else could they be writing? It doesn't have to be original per se but it has to be an argument.

@DCoffeen if you were teaching comp today, would your style and philosophy remain the same? Or is there anything you might adjust given how many students use AI to write essays these days?

@DCoffeen So I’d imagine the students would mainly be focused on the movement between their claims, the argument map. It’s tough bc originality is not the goal for early comp, learning to write/think is; so what does a teacher do if AI does that for them?

@Ryanvandyke1 Well, I’m older, slower, calmer. But AI wouldn’t be an issue for me. Look at any ChatGPT writing about a text: there’s no argument. Every paragraph begins with ‘also’—which, in my classes, was verboten. In fact, I’d encourage AI so their papers would at least read better.

@DCoffeen I think that’s making more sense to me, but then how do you teach thesis statements? Do you teach it as just a starting point for the movement of the argument? Or is there too much focus on teaching thesis statements in comp classes?

@Ryanvandyke1 It’s not that everything ties back. It’s that everything moves the argument, forging the argument in the very writing/reading. Evidence isn’t proof of the argument; it’s touchpoints for the argumentative tour through the text.

@DCoffeen To avoid students listing, I’ve been thinking about incorporating your argument map into the comp class I teach. You’ve written that it’s not hierarchical, but then how do you explain that everything ties back to the thesis? Or do you not?

@DCoffeen Hmmmm I say both.

@Ryanvandyke1 Alas, I do not. But now I kinda want to write it. Or you should. Or we both should.

@DCoffeen Do you by chance know of any author who defines ethos, pathos, and logos in an atypical way? Perhaps in a kind of poetical dictionary style?

@getnickwright suns-nets tonight on national tv instead of nuggets-thunder is a perfect example of what you were talking about the other night on cowherd’s podcast.

@DCoffeen What’s odd is there’s always talk about not teaching old white guys, but that really only matters WHEN you focus on the rhetorical situation. To me that’s more like philosophy bc there’s an ultimate truth behind it. The author doesn’t matter when you look at how a text operates.

@DCoffeen Comp/rhet is one discipline so that makes sense. That explains why they’d rather I teach the rhetorical situation instead of the Dissoi Logoi; historical context over how a text moves.

@DCoffeen I have teachers at sac state who say that Berkeley teaches rhetoric “like a philosophy” and seem to mean it as an insult. Do you know what they might mean by that? It’s confusing bc your lectures clearly specify the difference between rhet. and philosophy.

@DCoffeen Interesting. The essay I wrote looked at something similar, but used Deleuze to show how he cannot escape the cliche when creating his world: “It is a mistake to think that the painter works on a white surface.”

@Ryanvandyke1 It was in a lecture on the performative — the way Harold literally writes/draws his world into existence.

@DCoffeen Can you recommend the best book by Deleuze (or Deleuze and Guattari) for someone new to his ideas and writing style? What should one start with?

@DCoffeen Was this for a rhetoric class I’m assuming? Do you remember what you argued?

@Ryanvandyke1 I used to give a lecture on Harold & the Purple Crayon!

@DCoffeen One of the first essays I wrote in college was reading “Harold and the Purple Crayon” through the lens of Deleuze’s “Painting before the Painting” which my professor printed out for us….I never realized it was from that book. Fucking awesome, thank you!

@Ryanvandyke1 I think his book on Francis Bacon, The Logic of Sensation. It doesn’t get into a lot of the well known concepts of D&G but it’s his most approachable & is a joy.

@Raanancomedy @JoeListComedy Is a Holdovers podcast in the works? The best Payne movie since Sideways, it might even be better….