Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
JAC is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to JAC.
http://www.jstor.org
Gutter Talk:
(An)Other Idiom of Rhetoric
Joshua C. Hilst
Iwill speak, therefore,of a letter
Derrida
?Jacques
Wi,h
the space
Figure 1
jac
31.1-2(2011)
154
jac
we assume
about comics,"
Understanding
this example
Comics.
McCloud
(in Figures
2 and 3)
says:
Figure2
see
^\
THAT SPACE
X
&?ZWe&V
the \
PANELS? THAT'S
\
/
WHAT COMICS
AFICIONADOS HAVE/
NAMED
S /
**^Gwrre&r
_
AND
DESPITE^X.
y
its N
/
/ T/Tte, THE GUTTEffPLAYS
[ HOSTTO MUCH. OF THEAMG/C
THAT ARE
V ANDMXS7&ry
J
AT THE VEKyy%55*>P7"
V
Figure3
155
JoshuaC. Hilst
(67).
Haynes.
about paralogy.
Although
Postmodern
renewing
Condition)
old language
Lyotard, paralogy
is
Whereas
conversation
156
jac
In Negation,
various
space
gutter?that
theorists whose
of the comic?I
said about
which
this rhetorical
Three
Traveling
Companions
Todd Taylor addresses the paralogical aspects of ethos in his essay, "If
He Catches You, You're Through: Coyotes and Visual Ethos." Taylor
argues for a far more visual than textual ethos, based on cues picked up
by seeing and not seeing, or better yet, seeing and ignoring. Centering his
conversation on the Looney Tunes characters, Wile E. Coyote and the
Roadrunner, he presents each. Anyone fami 1iarwith them 1ikely knows the
of the Coyote, as opposed to the
We sympathize with the Coyote
characterization. We come to such conclusions,
disheveled
more
"determines
what we
'see'
Joshua C. Hilst
157
dominates
our vision"
observed:
inherent indiscourse,
linguistically
not
see.
Taylor refers to the visual aspects of rhetoric thatwe miss, but that
nevertheless
inform us, as paralogical.
In similar fashion, viewers com
plete the story of comics panels as they read, filling inwhatever action is
is correct: we read
interpreted as being there.4 So, then, Scott McCloud
across
the panels,
bay. In an effort to read from panel to panel, certain paths, or jumps from
panel to panel, must be taken. However, what the gutter does not show us
158
jac
sentences without
conjunctions.
The
purpose is to further
Lyotard's projectof overturningnegation (also an
important theme of Vitanza's
connotes the abyss ofNot-Being
thus
book). Lyotard writes, "Parataxis
which opens between phrases, itstresses
the surprise that something begins when what is said is said" (66). Vitanza
works toward a denegative function that brings inwhat he terms, "the
excluded third,"working out ofMichel Serres' formulation that a dialogue
a third term and then excludes
it.This third term,
always presupposes
which Lyotard's paralogy also acknowledges
through the abyss of Not
of noise"
Being, is a term of excess, or what Serres cal Is that "prosopopeia
(67). The classical
form of dialectic
and Serres?to
to
is designed precisely?according
exclude a third term of excess because
Lyotard, Vitanza,
of its role in fostering doubt about certainty and finality. Vitanza under
stands the excluded third as pivotal in themove to delay a final point of rest.
In his influential "Three Countertheses,"
Vitanza claims that paralogy
bears witness "to the unintelligible or to disputes or differences of opinion
thatare systematically
disallowed by thedominantlanguagegame" (146).
Moreover,
159
Joshua C. Hilst
itcan only do so by canceling out that same space, the abyss. Panels, like
the ones shown in Figure 1, can actually show the viewer no action, and
itwould be strange, indeed,
yet we may still perceive a narrative. While
to suggest thatwhat takes place in the panels (logos) is unimportant, we
cannot fail to acknowledge
the excess (para/logos) that the panels cover,
and the operation of closure that predicates "successful"
readings. The
operation of closure bears a decided similarity to the dialogue that closes
out the third term, the prosopopeia
of noise. The excluded term makes
as
the viewer pieces together the various panels of the story.
itself felt
Paratactically, the gutter continually opens up and allows the viewer to see
a blank space, but one that is determinative of what is seen. The term
"closure"
to Taylor's
triangulation
thirds), so that Imay place the idiom of the gutter among Taylor's and
Vitanza's
para-terms. Haynes seeks to unground rhetoric and composi
tion as the teaching of argument by promising "to probe the ground beneath
(671).
160
jac
that
Both
are
logics of
panel, but between and among panels. Without the gutter, no panels exist.
Iwould even suggest that the panels are not primary, creating the gutter
between them, but rather the artist begins with the blank page: all gutter.
Haynes writes that her "design is notmeant to actively un-build spaces
much as to step back and view the unground (der Abgrund?abyss)
beneath the structures, and to sketch a rhetoric of the unbuilt" (688).
this idea of the unbuilt, a rhetoric that, as Haynes
so
In
content
to merely
161
Joshua C. Hilst
ourselves
Haynes,
as boat people?people
without a proper place or topos. For
people without a place understand rhetoric as otherwise: "Rheto
abstract
trajectories. Displacing
argument
is rhetoric's
supreme
task;
way, Haynes looks for other ways, other trajectories, thatmight serve to
disinvent logos. To locate other trajectories, and in the process disinvent
from which
provide
single
explanation,
and as
the atopos,
the abgrund
that
we should look
disinventslogos.To illustrate
and rhetorically,
both literally
at some examples.5
/HCiCWr-'THK
ON? fNTHE
Figure4
COAWYW/N6
2 CVCW'r
1 #A$ \JOST
flows
TO
0&8<7 MYXlf. TN?
don th??d/h?fo reu
ytxy
KXJTHAT.
I.WA$,
SO TH?fi?
tecne w rxesT/mcH
&cw
- -1
fCfi
WAP/1
T/fXS
7MA7/#
GUMS
1(0 '#
HOW
WAS7 Z> *?U
.-WHAT?..
7mV A6W? W/
rOUTWUNTIL
N?\&?
7**r>>:
V At**'. e>.v
7M?
WMAT?...C#,&#e.
U$?&W8M?$. XX/MOW
r/nm
imew.
162
jac
comic, Batman:
Frank Miller's
serves as a
prime example of what can happen in the gutter. In this case, the
movements
between
rather,
obvious. A character
seems obvious),
screens (again,
butpicked up nonetheless).Spliced in
probablynot activelyregistered,
between cuts, we view
panic of a man
theman moves
backwards. Miller
relations between
completely
Figure5
163
Joshua C. Hilst
plastic surgery, pulls off his bandages for the first time. Itseems, in looking
at the panels, hardly necessary to even divide these up?that whole images
might be more useful to us than these diptychs. However, when we
that the character
consider
in question
then
thediptychsfinallydisappears.
We walk throughthegutters,
throughthem?
j uxtaposingpanelwith panel,
and yet what we do not see is just as important as what we do see (the line
down the center of the diptychs, the doctors in later panels). Our blindness
allows a line to travel outside the panels into the space of the gutter.
it seems Miller plays with thewhole notion of outside and inside.
is part of the gutter, and what is part of the panels is now thrown into
question. Our traveling companions, no doubt, would perceive thismove
as an ungrounding of the panels thatmakes the gutter visible. All of the
What
excess of the gutter returns to spi 11into the topos of the panel. Having seen
this operation first hand, Iwould now like tomove into a consideration of
the rhetorical operation of the gutter, hence bearing witness
to this idiom.
of Comics,
164
jac
Figure6
ingthatitoughtnotbe fetishized,
arguingthatsomecomicshave onlya 1ine
to separate them, never actually a given empty space. Where
itmight be
an uninterrupted
and intelligibletotality"(114). The systemofcomics,he
165
Joshua C. Hilst
listed heretofore
(its paralogy,
excess,
composition
Regarding
"the will to systematize"
studies, Vitanza
and the will
writes
140).
to be composition's
"author(ity)"
the reading, one that produces a satisfying and coherent narrative. While
Groensteen
Iser's suggestion of a "wandering view
takes up Wolfgang
wherein
of
words
sequences
(or in comics, images) leads to the
point,"
of expectation
these modifications
modification
as the viewer
proceeds,
he nevertheless
and hermeneutic
describes,
"The
that must
be
in it,as Miller
inmind Lyotard's
totalized meaning Groensteen
The goal,
Groensteen,
as he looks to the panels: "[Demonstrating
thatmeaning
is inherent to the
166
jac
to narration"
turning around
metonymic
and
is not
emphasis added). Here Groensteen
to
but
the
rather articulating the
gutter,
looking
(107;
linkage between
it"
the syntagmatic
(Groensteen 43). Here he demonstrates
linkages be
tween panels through the operation of closure. As a syntagm, these panels
are metonymically
linked. The viewer moves from one panel to the next,
linking the actions
perceived
in each across
and Morris
which
kindof similarity.
eyes are
is based
167
Joshua C. Hilst
on the equation
somewhat
operating within
is typically a category of metaphor and refers
to a metaphor "misused" to rhetorical effect, a kind of abuse
specifically
of the comparison function. The Silva Rhetoricae
site lists the following
"He was foolish enough to order the new music CD sight
example:
unseen," and then explains, "No parallel idiom to 'sight unseen' exists for
things auditory, so the idiom iswrenched from its proper context to this
unusual one." Catachresis,
then, ismetaphor, but a metaphor so different
inwhich much
explains further in the Institutes of Oratory, "Metaphor,
of the ornament of speech consists, applies words to things towhich they
do not properly belong. Hence, the propriety of which we are speaking,
relates, not to a word absolutely, but to the sense inwhich it is used, and
is to be estimated, not by the ear, but by themind" (8.2.6). Metaphor, as
we have seen in its traditional conception, is paradigmatic,
equating one
for
another through similarity.
thing
The operation of this rhetoric, then, through the gutter, consists in
creating a new relationship that may not be accounted for in strictly
metaphoric terms. It ismetonymic in its linkages, but that does not account
for what
In other words, while there is a metaphoric
is happening.
operation in the separation of panels, the meanings emerge through the
notes, we will conjoin two panels
operation of catachresis. As McCloud
no matter how dissimilar.
here:
non
22).
asks
168
jac
the viewer to take these two panels and establish a relationship. This is an
the relationship, equate the two panels. The
operation of metaphor?find
unpredictability.
taxonomy misses the point that the rela
Unfortunately, McCloud's
between
tionship
panels always requires the viewer to learn to construct
the relationship, which is not a natural relation. The relation between two
panels is constructed, asking that the viewer determine what is happening
in this new language. These relationships, Iwould argue, are less natural,
and more developed over time until they appear thatway. In other words,
all gutters are non sequitur. Nietzsche
reminds us that all language is
on
in
his
"Notes
Rhetoric," he maintains: "The tropes,
tropic. Specifically,
non-literal significations, are considered to be themost artistic means of
all words are tropes in
respect to their meanings,
et
and
the
al. 23). In other words,
from
themselves,
beginning" (Gilman
there is no basic, non-literal language.
rhetoric. But, with
That
describe
perfectly
169
Joshua C. Hilst
is the instance of
The first instance of placing two ideas in juxtaposition
catachresis. Eventually, we may find that certain of these catachreses
work better, and they become more normalized. But the relationship
between comics panels isno more natural or literal than is literal language.
Gutters always present us with two images and require us to construct the
only forgotten that the gutter is a non
relationship between them.We've
over
occurs
an
time. So what we have, then, is a
sequitur,
operation that
special case of metaphor. Two panels are both linked and equated in an
fashion. Both contributions fromMcCloud
unpredictable, unassimilable
but they do not account for the
excess of paralogy, for thatwhich is excessive to the system. As Davis
interaction,"
claims, once communication can be defined as "successful
we can once again rule out all of the "'marks and noises' that can't be
and Groensteen
immediately appropriated"
Conclusions:
(129). Paralogy,
Reveling
however,
is our goal.
in the Noise
There are two distinct and important conclusions to draw from th is idea of
metonymic catachresis. The first regards the notion of so-called visual
rhetorics, inwhich there is a tendency to see the composition of images in
a unified way. I am thinking here especially of Gunther Kress, who tends
to focus on the semiotics of a given image, especially
in his Reading
and Multimodal
Discourse.
Images: The Grammar
of Visual Design
And while he looks at theway that images, and even pages, can be brought
into relation (see especially Grammar 25), the emphasis tends to be on
and how to produce it.Kress'
penchant for looking at the
can
of
composition
images overlooks the noise that such juxtaposition
produce in the interstitial spaces. Ifmy arguments are persuasive, thenwe
coherence
must acknowledge
that it is not only the composition of a distinct image,
but the arrangements of elements within them that give rise to any suasi ve
capacity that images possess. While Kress would no doubt agree with
such a claim, the unseen, excessive, atopical gutter presents an entirely
different issue for visual composition. Visual
rhetorics often focus on
composition atthe levelofcoherence(followingtrajectoriesin
design and visual perception), but less so at the paralogical
information
level.
170
jac
focusedon therhetorics
ofjuxtapositionand the impliedguttersinbetween
screens when
one navigates a
two-part essay, "An
webpage. Williams'
on
in
in
theways inwhich
Integrated Pedagogy
part,
Hyptertext," focuses,
"juxtaposing
competing representations" allow students to rethink the
relations between various aspects of an argument and enables exploring
alternative forms of argument. In Rice's Rhetoric of Cool: Composition
and New Media,
he claims that "Juxtapositions among ideas as well as
word
and
Burrough'sA^va^x:/?^^
link to another
suggests that having one page on a website
a
connection
the
the
between
two, and
suggests
goal must be for
of theWeb"
always
rhetoricians to consider this relationship. Whereas a great deal ofwork has
been done investigating whether or not visuals can present an argument,
what is just as important (because paralogical)
are the ways
inwhich
are associated.7 Whether or not association
and juxtaposition
constitute a "proper" argument is less significant than the association
itself. This is thework thatmost exemplifies the function of the gutter:
visuals
Haynes
whole
into pieces
reinvent
171
Joshua C. Hilst
inventing new
something new. The gutter slashes between panels,
rhetorics and new ways of seeing. I take this same blade as a point of
departure by which to describe a slasher rhetoric. Slasher rhetorics
match disparate phenomena, different ideas, pairing them together to
invent new topoi, new idioms. This same slash of the gutter resides in the
most
crucial
composition,
The slash, which was
so jarring to theMLA
editor inHaynes's
article, is
a call to us not to select one at the expense of the other, but serves rather
as an invitation to inhabit both, and to construe and reinvent continual lythe
relation between them.91 hope that through this exposition of the gutter,
we
through the
Utah
Notes
1.Readers familiarwith visual perception theorieswill understand closure
somewhat differently.Closure, especially inGestalt theories, refers to a type of
172
jac
See Ware.
2. This reading will no doubt reflect similar conceptions that have been
developed inother fields. For instance, inLouise Rosenblatt's theory of trans
actional reading, she claims that interpretations ignore "elements in the text or
[project] on itexperiences forwhich there isno defensible basis inthe text" (137).
I take no issue with Rosenblatt's
While
gutter is a gap inasmuch as it is an actual, physical gap in the storyof the comic.
3.1 do refer toKent's definition of paralogy, despite also referringto one of
Kent's critics on the subject of paralogy, Diane Davis. While Davis is critical of
Kent's normative claims regarding paralogy, she does not criticize Kent on the
basis of his descriptive claims. That is, she rightly critiques Kent's placing
paralogy in the service of hermeneutics and ultimately allowing itsreappropria
tion. However, I thinkKent's general description ofwhat paralogy is seems to
accord well enough with Lyotard's tomerit inclusion here.
4. This idea no doubt draws comparisons to schema theory,a psychological
concept drawn from thework of Jean Piaget, but exposited by more current
research in educational psychology (see Anderson), artificial intelligence re
search (see Arbib), and elsewhere. Schema theory looks at theways inwhich
knowledge equips learnerswith a means, as Anderson writes, "often not repro
ducible in sentences, which provides [a student]with a framework or context for
interpretingnew experiences" (416). In otherwords, past experience provides a
basis for understanding. Though Imay see a limited view of a cube, I recognize
itand still know ithas six sides. Memory and knowledge provide an expectation
that can fulfillwhat is seen. Anderson suggests that theways inwhich schema
how panels are assimilated, and more interested ingutters thatplay with closure
and seek to interruptclosed and unambiguous viewings?an excessive take on
the gutter.
5. One certainly ought not to base a theoryon a single example, and I do not.
JoshuaC. Hilst
173
While Miller
of vision produces gaps inwhat we perceive. These, of course, might also be kinds
of gutters. Ware suggests thatmost designs are a mix of both sensory and
arbitrary representation, and thegutter isundoubtedly no different. I am focused
here on the conventional side.Moreover, where Ware is interested inunderstand
ing visual perception in an effortto create visual designs thatproduce themost
efficient readings, Iwould prefer to show how the excess thatescapes us can also
be valuable. There ismost certainly value in the scientific research ofWare, as
Works Cited
Anderson, R.C.
Enterprise."
Ed. R.C. Anderson et al.
174
jac
Arbib, Michael A., JeffreyConklin, and Jane C. Hill. From Schema Theory to
Language. New York: Oxford UP, 1987.
Blair, J.Anthony. "The Possibility and Actuality of Visual Arguments," Argu
mentation and Advocacy 33 A (1996): 23-39.
Burbules, Nicolas C. "Rhetorics of theWeb: Hyperreading and Critical Literacy."
Page toScreen: Taking Literacy into theElectronic Era. Ed. liana Snyder.
New York: Routledge, 1998.102-22.
Burke, Kenneth. Permanence andChange: An Anatomy ofPurpose. Berkeley: U
ofCaliforniaP,1984.
Burroughs, William S. Nova Express. New York: Grove/Atlantic, 1992.
Davis, D. Diane. Breaking Up [At] Totality: A Rhetoric ofLaughter. Carbondale:
Southern IllinoisUP, 2000.
-.
Derrida,
of Philosophy.
Gilman, Sander L., Carole Blair, and David J.Parent, eds. Friedrich Nietzsche on
Rhetoric and Language. New York: Oxford UP, 1989.
Groensteen, Thierry. The System ofComics. Jackson: UP ofMississippi,
Haynes, Cynthia. "Rhetoric/Slash/Composition." Enculturation5.
/enculturation.gmu.edu/5_l/index51 .html. 14April 2008.
-.
2007.
\(2003). http:/
JAC23(2003):667-724.
JoshuaC. Hilst
175
Interaction.
Kress, Gunther, and Theo Van Leeuwen. Multimodal Discourse. London: Hodder,
2001.
-.
U of
U of
Minnesota P, 1984.
McCloud,
Miller, Frank, with Klaus Janson and Lynn Varley. Batman: The Dark Knight
Returns. New York: D.C. Comics, 1986.
Moore, Alan. Promethea. New York: Wildstorm Comics, 2001.
Quintilian. Institutes ofOratory.
Rice, JeffThe Rhetoric ofCool: Composition Studies and New Media. Carbondale:
Southern IllinoisUP, 2007.
Sire, Geoffrey. English Composition as a Happening. Logan: Utah State UP, 2002.
Taylor, Todd. "IfHe Catches You, You're Through: Coyotes and Visual Ethos."
The Language ofComics: Word and Image.Ed. Robin Varnum and Christina
T. Gibbons. Jackson: UP ofMississippi, 2001.40-59.
Vitanza, Victor. Negation, Subjectivity, and The History of Rhetoric. Albany:
State U ofNew York P, 1997.
176
-.
jac
1991.139-72.
Williams,
in