Ede, Lisa and Lunsford, Andrea “Audience Addressed/Audience Invoked:

Ede, Lisa and Lunsford, Andrea “Audience Addressed/Audience Invoked: The Role of Audience in Composition Theory and Pedagogy.
“the fluid, dynamic character of rhetorical situations; and (2) the integrated, indterdependent nature of reading and writing” (78).
“The ‘addressed’ audience refers to those actual or real-life people who read a discourse, while the ‘invoked’ audience refers to the audience called up or imagined by the writer” (78).
In audience theory that focuses on the writer: “The ‘writer’ model is limited because it defines writing as either self expression or ‘fideltity to fact’ (p. 255) –epistemologically naïve assumptions which result in troubling pedagogical inconsistencies. And the ‘written product’ model, which is characterized by an emphasis on ‘certain intrinsic features[such as a] lack of comma splices and fragments’ (p.258), is challenged by the continued inability of teachers of writing (not to mention those in other professions) to agree upon the precise intrinsic features which characterize ‘good’ writing” (79).
“Neither the writer model nor the written product model pays serious attention to invention, the term used to describe those methods designed to aid in retrieving information, forming concepts, analyzing complex events, and solving certain kinds of problems’ (79).
Invention should be a major part of any writing model, shouldn’t it? It is the imagination which leads to invention and invention which leads to cutting edge ideas put into words clearly enough and passionately enough to incite others.
“Mitchell and Taylor argue that a major limitation of the ‘writer’ model is its emphasis on the self, the person writing, as the only potential judge of effective discourse” (80).
“emphasizing the creative role of readers who, they observe, ‘actively contribute to the meaning of what they read and will respond according to a complex set of expectations, preconceptions, and provocations’ (p. 251), but wrong in failing to recognize the equally essential role writers play throughout the composing process not only as creators but also as readers of their own writing” (81).
A game of weaving intellectual abilities in creating, observing, using language to communicate.
“Anthony Petrosky cautions us that ‘reading, responding, and composing are aspects of understanding, and theories that attempt to account for them outside of their interaction with each other run the serious risk of building reductive models of human understanding’5” (82).
Herbert Simons “He goes on to note that: “Between these two extremes are such groups as the following: (1) the pedestrian audience, persons who happen to pass a soap box orator. . . ; (2) the passive, occasional audience, persons who come to hear a noted lecturer in a large auditorium . . . ; (3) the active, occasional audience, persons who meet only on specific occasions but actively interact when they do meet’ (pp. 97-98)” (84).
So, a question for students might be, what KIND of audience will you have?
“Another weakness of research based on the concept of audience as invoked is that it distorts the processes of writing and reading by overemphasizing the power of the writer and undervaluing that of the reader” (88).
“It is the writer who, as writer and reader of his or her own text, one guided by a sense of purpose and by the particularities of a specific rhetorical situation, establishes the range of potential roles an audience may play. (Readers may, of course, accept or reject the role or roles the writer wishes them to adopt in responding to a text.)” (89).
“The addressed audience, the actual or intended readers of a discourse, exists outside of the text” (90).
Is it just me or are these articles becoming more boring?