![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A few days ago, I finished reading the last article in the course packet for my graduate class on composition theory at St. Joseph's. Yes, technically this is not a book, because it doesn't have an ISBN and it wasn't published beyond the, oh, 15 copies needed for my class. However, I've been working on it all semester, and it contains almost 20 scholarly articles, which I have read carefully and analyzed. And I do count literary journals as books for the purposes of this blog, even though they don't generally have ISBNs. So you know what, my course pack counts as a book, even if I can't put it on goodreads. So there!
For what it's worth, my favorite composition theorists are Perl, Hairston, Fulkerson, Kinneavy, and Elbow, and Mike Rose just because he's so fun to read. I like Emig and Flower & Hayes because they take such a scientific approach, but I don't ultimately love their theories. I like Bizzell's overall idea--that all the different theories have something valuable to offer--but I didn't love her application of that. Overall, Sondra Perl is my hero, and I'm doing my final research on her. She just makes so much sense! Look for more books by Perl to appear in this space.
For what it's worth, my favorite composition theorists are Perl, Hairston, Fulkerson, Kinneavy, and Elbow, and Mike Rose just because he's so fun to read. I like Emig and Flower & Hayes because they take such a scientific approach, but I don't ultimately love their theories. I like Bizzell's overall idea--that all the different theories have something valuable to offer--but I didn't love her application of that. Overall, Sondra Perl is my hero, and I'm doing my final research on her. She just makes so much sense! Look for more books by Perl to appear in this space.
