Deborah Tannen Analysis

Imagine a world where resolving academic disputes involved duelling the opposing person. According to Deborah Tannen, agonism is just that: an argument culture that attacks ideas and arguments, rather than studying them critically by both believing and doubting the opinions writers express. Framing the concept concretely and then appealing to pathos and ethos, Tannen argues that this notion of academic debate is destructive to healthy academic discourse.

Tannen frames the article using agonism, defining it with the words of Walter

Ong, the creator of the idea: “programmed contentiousness” and “ceremonial combat”.

Using a story to frame the issue, Tannen recounts the events at her book club, describing her experiences and feelings.

Eapen 2

Throughout the piece, Tannen appeals to pathos to help readers identify with her experiences and to draw them away from agonism. Describing the critics as a

“chorus” that made her feel “naive”, allows readers to understand the effect of the criticism and the loneliness she felt: “our suggestions were dull compared to the game of critique.” On the traditional method of writing academic papers, Tannen says, “The framework tempts ­ almost requires ­ us to oversimplify or even misrepresent others' positions; cite the weakest example to make a generally reasonable work appear less so; and ignore facts that support others' views, citing only evidence that supports our own positions.” This form of attack comes across as low and deplorable and is further strengthed by her portrayal of a member of the book club: “I was especially struck by the fact that one of the most talkative and influential critics was the member who had not read the book. Her unfamiliarity with the work had not hindered her”. Tannen quotes a study on academic agonism to demonstrate the bias towards agonism in education: “the professors didn't admire students who asked ‘a nice