Mckerrow's Discourse Of Power

The paper written by McKerrow was a great read and really gave me a different perspective. This essay that he wrote serves as a type of rational for critical rhetoric. To me, Mckerrow is able to provide one of the clearest views on a theory that has on emphasis on power. His idea of critical rhetoric “…seeks to unmask or demystify the discourse of power. The aim is to understand the integration of power/knowledge in society–what possibilities for change the integration invites or inhibits” (441). He presents to us in this essay eight different principles that he believes orient the critics towards the ideal act of criticism. These eight principles he discusses are the following; it is a practice, not a method, the discourse of power is material,

In his essay, he also discusses two forms of critiques. These two forms include; a critique of domination and a critique of freedom. His discussion on the critique of domination has an aim to make the conditions of domination easier to understand and process. It focuses on the way ideology can work to reproduce domination and how it is clearly related to power dynamics; it emphasizes on “…the discourse of power which creates and sustains the social practices which control the dominated” (442). On the other hand, you have the critique of freedom that focuses on the way power is spread throughout one’s culture. It works to find new ways that power can express and present itself. These two forms of critique have one main thing in common with each other, they are both an analysis on power discourse. There are two subdivisions within the analysis of discourse on power. First, it maintains the privilege of the elite. And second, it maintains social relations across a broad spectrum of human

I believe he is truly trying to discover the mobilizations of discourse and how the ruling class and social rules that are in place have a contribution to who does and does not get to speak, and the functions that power has over a broad spectrum. He is showing that criticism has the potential to be a force of domination or repression. I believe that his critique of freedom provides a lot of importance on the topic. I believe he is moving critical practice of rhetoric to a more normal sense of terminus. I believe his goal is that this repressive discourse of power could help lead to a change. He states, “Results are never satisfying as the new social relations which emerge from a reaction to a critique are themselves simply new forms of power and hence subject to renewed skepticism” (446). I think that he sees criticism as a never-ending thing, and it is always striving to evaluate domination and repression. An important aspect of his critical rhetoric view is the emphasis on Praxis, which I believe he views as a process where a lesson or idea is put into some sort of action or is practiced. I believe that in his essay he is purposely avoiding using a methodology and instead he is offering us to a type of orientation. That orientation is inviting us to put a lesson into a certain action. I believe his critique is very interesting in the way that it addresses the retention and