Williams' "Packaging Theory"

The problem with Williams' essay is that he can't seem to make up his mind. He points out the positive and negative of every possible contingency of theory. He seems to think that there are many unseemly aspects to composition, and yet they also, in his opinion, appear to be necessary evils, such as the fact "that developments in literary studies are never independent and autonomous from market forces," which he treats negatively because "theory anthologies [are] institutionally circulated and governed bodies of knowledge" (284). The reason that Williams must admit that this is not such a terrible thing is that the only way to circulate literary knowledge, other than at seminars, etc. through public speaking, is through publication and distribution. People like to disparage popular art and writing, but the truth of the matter is that if a body of work is not seen by anyone, it cannot become part of curriculum, let alone literary theory. Publication is what gives credence to ideas (285).

Williams also gives a good deal of time to idealizing what could be the perfect way to teach composition. His own idea of work that can be done in the classroom seems to be fairly far-reaching. There is, in my opinion, a limit to how much can be properly absorbed in one semester. That is the unfortunate consequence of having only two semesters of composition required for college students, there doesn't seem to be enough time to get in all of the ideas and skills that will be necessary for students to move on in their respective majors.

I think that Williams' encouragement of teaching both major and minor authors is appropriate, however. It allows popular and unpopular ideas some stage time, which is how unpopular ideas can find merit and usefulness (286). The idea of blending compositional theories seems a little moot, however. I have not been in too many writing classes, composition or otherwise, where compositional theories have been mutually exclusive. Just by nature of being ways to analyze texts, they have much in common. Teaching one approach does not "tacitly seal off a 'theory' or an approach from other approaches" (289), not if the educator understands all of the concepts well enough to blend them together, especially if an educator can follow a philological approach that allows students to focus both on mechanics and voice (292).

I like Williams' notion that all writing is subjective, and none of it can be professed to be absolute fact. Composition is more opinion supported by facts for the basis of making an argument rather than gospel truth. Williams also points out the potential for composition to be best used in "professional forces and institutional structures" (292), in order to allow the greater percentage of students who take composition to be able to succeed in their selected professions. Now the only thing to do is figure out how exactly all of these goals can be managed.