Hugh Blair & charles Bazerman

Can Hugh Blairs's work be applied to our current day studies in composition? While there was much discussion in the class and handout on Hugh Blair of his artificial system. Yet the article also state under Lecture XII as follows"A florid style implie excess of ornament..They forget that, unless founded on good sense and solid thought, the most florid style id but a childish imposition on the public" (2nd page of handout titled "Summary of lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres"). This would suggest that Hugh Blair valued what we now think of as critical thinking, reasoning and a well grounded argument. He also is cited in the same handout on page 1 under Lecture X Style-Perspicuity and Precision that "This (perpicuity) must be our first object, to make our meaning clearly and fully understood, and understood without the least difficulty". This would seem to indicate that Hugh Blair also valued simplicity, chronological, line ordered presentation with the argument written in language that is commonly known. Neither statement is stressing beauty or style, as much as a reliance on reason and simple language. Charles Bazerman's article suggests that in the writing of scientific texts the author is influential versus the rhetoric per see, as "they interpret and attempt to realize his [the scientist] ambitions in their writing"(509). This further suggests that the writers thoughts become central. The subject gives the scientist eminence, as their thought becomes the subject. Hugh Blair says"...it is to the intercourse and transmission of thought, by means of speech, that we are chiefly indebted for the improvement of thought itself" ()page one, Lecture I Introduction of Summary of Lectures on Rhetoric and Belle Lettres). Both articles are foscued on thought and reason, as the role of the author and audience are considered, in a argument based on logic.