Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:20:47 -0400
To: Steve Finley 
Subject: Re: Otabil and rhetorical style

Steve Finley wrote:
> 
> In response to my insistence that Otabil was indeed including more
> than just the "content" of his/her message in his/her florid, at
> times incomprehensibly dense style, you wrote:

My point in essence was simply that Mr. Otabil made a number of
substantive points, in response to which his opponents had very
little to say; they chose instead to excoriate him for his style.
That is or was a ploy intended to distract attention away from his
substantive points, and I sought in his defense to remind the list
that if black people are in the grip of an aesthetic that white
people find too "florid", then that's just it: a clash of aesthetics.
Let's get beyond that and address the substance please.  We don't
let the odd style of the King James version of the Bible get in the
way of our study of it; nor the odd style of Shakespeare interfere
with our appreciation of his wit and insight; nor the odd style
of say, Melville's Moby Dick diminish the high regard in which
the book is held as an American literary masterpiece.  So too, 
odd though it may appear, Mr. Otabil's rhetoric is the product of
an upbringing quite different (I would assume he is African--Ghanaian
I would suspect, from his name and writing style) from 
most on the list, and it is not fair to use his rhetoric as red
herring, as I believe was attempted.

I agree btw that where the benefits do not outweigh the cost
involved in deciphering a piece of prose, that a reader is free
simply to ignore it, and perhaps should.  That is not the case
here.  His opponents were quite effectively hoist on Mr. Otabil's
petard, there was no mistaking it, and in response, rather than
contradict his facts or refute his arguments, they sought to
ridicule his rhetoric.  It is to that that I objected.  Having
defended his rhetoric, I did not want to see it made the center
of the debate.  You in your MacLuhan-esque way, with your degrees
in rhetoric, etc., would seem to want to do just that.  I say,
if his rhetoric in any way strengthens his point, as high style,
even if odd, is wont to do, like a slam-dunk or a high five,
then deal with it!  Respond in kind, or use your own version
of high style.  But respond in substance.  That was my point.
In any case the debate is now over, so it is all moot.
It was fun, though, while it lasted.  

Until we cross swords again, in some other forum perhaps, let me 
wish you all the best in your present and future endeavors.  My
only advice to you, if I may be so bold, is not to assume that
any failures on your part is linked necessarily and inextricably
to the unmerited success of some black person or minority, 
whatever your grade point average may be.  Peace.  

Regards,

Contents | Previous |