A Then and Now Perspective: Examining The Little, Brown Handbook(1983)
and Composition and Rhetoric(1859)
and Composition and Rhetoric(1859)
Both The Little, Brown Handbook and Composition and Rhetoric are designed chiefly for students, but the books are separated in time by 124 years. These two texts reveal the different emphases on writing instruction between the two periods, emphases which reflect the changing nature of our country as it began its march into the Age of Industrialization. What are the differences between these texts? What are the similarities? And what do these differences and similarities tell us about how writing was viewed, defined, and taught in 1859 as opposed to how it was viewed, defined, and taught in 1983? How does each of the books sell itself? In other words, why would a student want to buy The Little, Brown Handbook, or why would a teacher want to use Composition and Rhetoric with his or her students? What cultural forces is each text responding to? What is the source of these similarities and differences?
To begin, each of the textbooks is a second volume. In their prefaces, both Quackenbos(Composition and Rhetoric) and Fowler(The Little Brown Handbook), point to the favorable reviews of their first editions and the fact that they have responded to the many suggestions they received by making numerous revisions to their second volumes. Thus, each textbook values, or is responding to, what is happening in the classrooms in which their textbooks are being used. The fact that each of the textbooks is doing this illustrates the importance of practical application. In other words, the very fact that each of these textbooks undergoes modifications as a result of user feedback suggests a teaching methodology grounded in practical experience. Both authors, therefore, would seem willing to admit that at least some of what they say may not be entirely accurate or in the best interest of the students. The formation of a perfect textbook, it would seem, is the result not of pure theory but of a symbiotic relationship between theory and actual teaching practice.
Both prefaces offer thoughts on what the ultimate advantages are for using their textbooks. The preface to Composition and Rhetoric devotes several lines to convey what the advantages are. I will enumerate them here in abbreviated form:
In the first place, clearness and simplicity. […] Secondly, it embraces in small compass a variety of important
subjects, which have a common connection, and mutually illustrate each other. […] In the third place, it is eminently
practical. (Quackenbos 7)
Likewise, The Little, Brown Handbook takes several lines to tout its advantages. Here is a selection:
If you follow the guidelines discussed in this handbook, your writing will be clearer and more demanding of serious
attention than it might otherwise have been. However, adhering to established conventions is but a means to the real
achievement and reward of writing: communicating your message effectively. (Fowler X)
Although the wording is a bit different in each of these excerpts, at the heart of each is this value on effective communication. While The Little, Brown Handbook is more direct here, Composition and Rhetoric suggests the same goal with its emphasis on “clearness and simplicity”. Composition and Rhetoric, moreover, places a value on studying a “variety of important subjects, which have a common connection, and mutually illustrate each other”. The Little, Brown Handbook also contains a variety of subjects(although not identical to Composition and Rhetoric) and so, although it does not state so directly in its preface, it too places a value on studying a “variety of subjects”. Both textbooks do, in fact, cover many subjects as evidenced by their large sizes. Composition and Rhetoric runs 451 pages and The Little, Brown Handbook runs 604 pages. Let’s take a closer look at what each volume contains.
Composition and Rhetoric begins with a “History of the English Language” that runs 61 pages. Contained within these 61 pages are topics such as “Origin of Spoken Language”, “Formation of Language”, and “Analysis of the English Language”. The language is often philosophical and even religious. Consider the opening sentence: “Man is distinguished from the brute creation by the possession of reason. Brutes are governed by instinct; man, by his reasoning faculties” (Quackenbos 13). And later on: “It is a question that has been much and ably discussed, whether spoken language is a divine or human institution: whether God gave it to man, as He gave the mental faculties; or man invented it for himself, stimulated by the desire of communicating with his kind” (Quackenbos 17). This kind of philosophical meandering is not to be found in The Little, Brown Handbook. Certainly we do not find any mention of God. Composition and Rhetoric is firmly rooted in the classical tradition, where knowledge was not segmented as it is today and thinkers could freely go from one “subject” to the next with little difficulty. The Little, Brown Handbook is much more straightforward and matter-of-fact. There is little talk of subjects other than “English” and so we see a more constrained and limited view of what the purview of English should be.
The Little, Brown Handbook devotes 74 pages to the research paper. Composition and Rhetoric, on the other hand, devotes no pages whatsoever, but it devotes 161 pages to rhetoric, including such topics as “The Sublime in Writing”, “Wit”, and “Harmony”. This is a key difference between these two textbooks, and it highlights the turn from philosophy to science that is accelerating at the second half of the 19th century. In 1859, there is still an emphasis on classical rhetoric and its beauty and its ability to persuade. Again, there is also that easy entry into matters philosophical that Composition and Rhetoric places a great emphasis on. Eight pages, for example, are devoted to the sublime. The section “The Sublime” opens with:
The term Sublimity, for which grandeur is by some used as an equivalent, is applied to great and noble objects which
produce a sort of internal elevation and expansion. The emotion, though pleasing, is of a serious character, and, when
awakened in the highest degree, may be designated even as severe, solemn, awful; being thus readily distinguishable
from the livelier feelings produced by the beautiful. (Quackenbos 194)
There is a marked sense here that, in order to be an effective writer, you must have a good sense of the sublime and of other topics that are, perhaps, not readily seen as directly bearing on writing. But, that does seem to be the point – namely, that in 1859, topics such as the sublime were seen as being directly related to writing. In contrast, here is the opening to the research section in The Little, Brown Handbook:
A research paper is a composition based on investigation and interpretation of other people’s work rather than
solely on your own experience or observation. Many of the steps in planning and writing a research paper – such as
limiting a subject, developing a thesis, and organizing material – are the same as those you follow in writing other
kinds of essays… (Fowler 444)
There is a decidedly different feel to this; the tone is straightforward, matter-of-fact, and proscriptive. The student, for example, will use specific writing skills she has learned in previous chapters to aid her in the writing of the research paper. Gone is the eclectic and discursive meandering of 1859, where ideas such as God and the sublime feel at home and quite germane and necessary to get a proper footing. Interestingly enough, moreover, Composition and Rhetoric has no section on plagiarism(a key concern of the research paper), whereas The Little, Brown Handbook has 7 pages devoted to the issue.
Our country’s increasing move toward capitalism and efficiency is reflected in these two volumes. The Little, Brown Handbook is a reflection of a country that has streamlined everything it does. Everything must be quick and efficient. The Industrial Age was just getting underway when Composition and Rhetoric was published. In 1983, on the other hand, the United States was one of the world leaders in all things industrial and efficient — State the task and then get right into how to do it. This stance is reflected in the opening section of the research section in The Little, Brown Handbook quoted above. It is also reflected in the fact that The Little, Brown Handbook , unfortunately, has no section on poetry. Composition and Rhetoric devotes 24 pages to the subject. And this is not a surprise. Poetry, unfortunately, is not enjoyed and read today as it was in 1859. Perhaps it is a reflection of our country’s emphasis on productivity and numbers. In other words, what have you produced today that can be sold? Poetry, unfortunately, has little resale value in the free market, and so it would seem that its value in general has suffered. There is also a heightened sense today of having to specialize in things and to understand one or very few things very well. The philosophical bent in Composition and Rhetoric reflects a time when ideas and the origins of ideas could lead the thinker in the most unlikely of places, at least according to today’s standards. Poetry is very much about stopping and thinking about what lines and words mean, and about following thoughts to these unlikely places, so there is a good deal of reflection and meandering involved. Today, it seems, there is less time for reflection overall and the emphasis is more on learning specific skills so that specific assignments can be mastered.
The seed of this emphasis on the teaching of writing and the mastering of various skills, ironically enough, is present in Composition and Rhetoric. I leave you with some telling remarks in the preface to Composition and Rhetoric, remarks which reveal this seed and say much about our country’s move toward a less reflective, more structured, capitalistic mode:
The author is aware that an objection to the use of a text-book on Composition exists in the minds of some, who prefer
that their pupils should prepare written exercises from given subjects without aid or instruction of any kind. Of such
he would respectfully ask a careful consideration of the question whether something may be gained by pursuing a
regular, consistent plan. As, in the various departments of industry, much more can be accomplished, in a limited
time and with a given amount of labor, by those who work according to a definite enlightened system… (Quackenbos
8)
WORKS CITED
Fowler, H. R. The Little, Brown Handbook. 2nd ed. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1983. Print.
Quackenbos, G. P. Composition and Rhetoric. 2nd ed. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1859. Print.
To begin, each of the textbooks is a second volume. In their prefaces, both Quackenbos(Composition and Rhetoric) and Fowler(The Little Brown Handbook), point to the favorable reviews of their first editions and the fact that they have responded to the many suggestions they received by making numerous revisions to their second volumes. Thus, each textbook values, or is responding to, what is happening in the classrooms in which their textbooks are being used. The fact that each of the textbooks is doing this illustrates the importance of practical application. In other words, the very fact that each of these textbooks undergoes modifications as a result of user feedback suggests a teaching methodology grounded in practical experience. Both authors, therefore, would seem willing to admit that at least some of what they say may not be entirely accurate or in the best interest of the students. The formation of a perfect textbook, it would seem, is the result not of pure theory but of a symbiotic relationship between theory and actual teaching practice.
Both prefaces offer thoughts on what the ultimate advantages are for using their textbooks. The preface to Composition and Rhetoric devotes several lines to convey what the advantages are. I will enumerate them here in abbreviated form:
In the first place, clearness and simplicity. […] Secondly, it embraces in small compass a variety of important
subjects, which have a common connection, and mutually illustrate each other. […] In the third place, it is eminently
practical. (Quackenbos 7)
Likewise, The Little, Brown Handbook takes several lines to tout its advantages. Here is a selection:
If you follow the guidelines discussed in this handbook, your writing will be clearer and more demanding of serious
attention than it might otherwise have been. However, adhering to established conventions is but a means to the real
achievement and reward of writing: communicating your message effectively. (Fowler X)
Although the wording is a bit different in each of these excerpts, at the heart of each is this value on effective communication. While The Little, Brown Handbook is more direct here, Composition and Rhetoric suggests the same goal with its emphasis on “clearness and simplicity”. Composition and Rhetoric, moreover, places a value on studying a “variety of important subjects, which have a common connection, and mutually illustrate each other”. The Little, Brown Handbook also contains a variety of subjects(although not identical to Composition and Rhetoric) and so, although it does not state so directly in its preface, it too places a value on studying a “variety of subjects”. Both textbooks do, in fact, cover many subjects as evidenced by their large sizes. Composition and Rhetoric runs 451 pages and The Little, Brown Handbook runs 604 pages. Let’s take a closer look at what each volume contains.
Composition and Rhetoric begins with a “History of the English Language” that runs 61 pages. Contained within these 61 pages are topics such as “Origin of Spoken Language”, “Formation of Language”, and “Analysis of the English Language”. The language is often philosophical and even religious. Consider the opening sentence: “Man is distinguished from the brute creation by the possession of reason. Brutes are governed by instinct; man, by his reasoning faculties” (Quackenbos 13). And later on: “It is a question that has been much and ably discussed, whether spoken language is a divine or human institution: whether God gave it to man, as He gave the mental faculties; or man invented it for himself, stimulated by the desire of communicating with his kind” (Quackenbos 17). This kind of philosophical meandering is not to be found in The Little, Brown Handbook. Certainly we do not find any mention of God. Composition and Rhetoric is firmly rooted in the classical tradition, where knowledge was not segmented as it is today and thinkers could freely go from one “subject” to the next with little difficulty. The Little, Brown Handbook is much more straightforward and matter-of-fact. There is little talk of subjects other than “English” and so we see a more constrained and limited view of what the purview of English should be.
The Little, Brown Handbook devotes 74 pages to the research paper. Composition and Rhetoric, on the other hand, devotes no pages whatsoever, but it devotes 161 pages to rhetoric, including such topics as “The Sublime in Writing”, “Wit”, and “Harmony”. This is a key difference between these two textbooks, and it highlights the turn from philosophy to science that is accelerating at the second half of the 19th century. In 1859, there is still an emphasis on classical rhetoric and its beauty and its ability to persuade. Again, there is also that easy entry into matters philosophical that Composition and Rhetoric places a great emphasis on. Eight pages, for example, are devoted to the sublime. The section “The Sublime” opens with:
The term Sublimity, for which grandeur is by some used as an equivalent, is applied to great and noble objects which
produce a sort of internal elevation and expansion. The emotion, though pleasing, is of a serious character, and, when
awakened in the highest degree, may be designated even as severe, solemn, awful; being thus readily distinguishable
from the livelier feelings produced by the beautiful. (Quackenbos 194)
There is a marked sense here that, in order to be an effective writer, you must have a good sense of the sublime and of other topics that are, perhaps, not readily seen as directly bearing on writing. But, that does seem to be the point – namely, that in 1859, topics such as the sublime were seen as being directly related to writing. In contrast, here is the opening to the research section in The Little, Brown Handbook:
A research paper is a composition based on investigation and interpretation of other people’s work rather than
solely on your own experience or observation. Many of the steps in planning and writing a research paper – such as
limiting a subject, developing a thesis, and organizing material – are the same as those you follow in writing other
kinds of essays… (Fowler 444)
There is a decidedly different feel to this; the tone is straightforward, matter-of-fact, and proscriptive. The student, for example, will use specific writing skills she has learned in previous chapters to aid her in the writing of the research paper. Gone is the eclectic and discursive meandering of 1859, where ideas such as God and the sublime feel at home and quite germane and necessary to get a proper footing. Interestingly enough, moreover, Composition and Rhetoric has no section on plagiarism(a key concern of the research paper), whereas The Little, Brown Handbook has 7 pages devoted to the issue.
Our country’s increasing move toward capitalism and efficiency is reflected in these two volumes. The Little, Brown Handbook is a reflection of a country that has streamlined everything it does. Everything must be quick and efficient. The Industrial Age was just getting underway when Composition and Rhetoric was published. In 1983, on the other hand, the United States was one of the world leaders in all things industrial and efficient — State the task and then get right into how to do it. This stance is reflected in the opening section of the research section in The Little, Brown Handbook quoted above. It is also reflected in the fact that The Little, Brown Handbook , unfortunately, has no section on poetry. Composition and Rhetoric devotes 24 pages to the subject. And this is not a surprise. Poetry, unfortunately, is not enjoyed and read today as it was in 1859. Perhaps it is a reflection of our country’s emphasis on productivity and numbers. In other words, what have you produced today that can be sold? Poetry, unfortunately, has little resale value in the free market, and so it would seem that its value in general has suffered. There is also a heightened sense today of having to specialize in things and to understand one or very few things very well. The philosophical bent in Composition and Rhetoric reflects a time when ideas and the origins of ideas could lead the thinker in the most unlikely of places, at least according to today’s standards. Poetry is very much about stopping and thinking about what lines and words mean, and about following thoughts to these unlikely places, so there is a good deal of reflection and meandering involved. Today, it seems, there is less time for reflection overall and the emphasis is more on learning specific skills so that specific assignments can be mastered.
The seed of this emphasis on the teaching of writing and the mastering of various skills, ironically enough, is present in Composition and Rhetoric. I leave you with some telling remarks in the preface to Composition and Rhetoric, remarks which reveal this seed and say much about our country’s move toward a less reflective, more structured, capitalistic mode:
The author is aware that an objection to the use of a text-book on Composition exists in the minds of some, who prefer
that their pupils should prepare written exercises from given subjects without aid or instruction of any kind. Of such
he would respectfully ask a careful consideration of the question whether something may be gained by pursuing a
regular, consistent plan. As, in the various departments of industry, much more can be accomplished, in a limited
time and with a given amount of labor, by those who work according to a definite enlightened system… (Quackenbos
8)
WORKS CITED
Fowler, H. R. The Little, Brown Handbook. 2nd ed. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1983. Print.
Quackenbos, G. P. Composition and Rhetoric. 2nd ed. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1859. Print.