Can a Writing be both Sublime and Construct Genre?

Many linguistic and rhetorical theorists have attempted to answer this question over time. We will now attempt to answer it for ourselves by using concepts of two respected authors that have touched on the topic of genre in writing as a lens: Amy Devitt, and the ancient philosopher only known as "Longinus". Although the subject matter that they touch on in both of their writings is varied, certain parallels can be made between the two pieces that state that writing can both construct genre and be sublime. However, there are several conflicting concepts in each of their philosophies that point to the answer that says no, a writing cannot both construct the genre and be sublime. I may not have a definite answer, but just as in writing, there is never a definite answer. In this blog post I will explore both sides of the argument; but, for the most part, it does seem like a piece of writing does have the ability to construct genre and be sublime. 

One of the biggest parallels in both genre construction and sublime writing is the idea that that they both require participation from not only the author of the writing, but the audience as well. The general conventions of particular genre begin before the audience reads the first word of a text. These predetermined conventions of general types of genres begin the process of genre construction. They put the audience in a certain frame of mind about the what they can expect from the text and the kinds of messages that they will read about. The author of a text, realizing these conceptual boundaries, attempts to manipulate these ideas using creativity in order to form a more specific kind of genre, one that better suits the message they are attempting to convey. Genre, then, is constructed in a similar way that sublime writing is formed. According to Longinus, two sources of sublime writing are it’s power to conceive great thoughts, and the ability of the text to inspire strong emotion in those that read them. This “greatness of thought” is referring to the ability to break free of genre conventions, look for true meaning of the author through the words and the context in which they came from, and the context that the audience is in while reading the sublime text. This kind of mental capacity is needed in Devitt’s genre construction as well; to determine the real “genre” of a text, both the author and the audience must be able to actively consider the genre that the text is supposed to be, determine what conventions that the text is following or breaking, and come up with the entirely new genre that they constructed together unknowingly. 

 
Besides the abilities of the author and audience themselves, the actual characteristics of the body within the text can help construct it’s genre and help determine if the writing is sublime or not. To write in a particular genre, the author has to know the various predetermined conventions of that genre, such as detail, tone, approach, layout and organization. The writer, in order to better construct their own genre, can manipulate, but not break, these conventions. Other sources of sublime writing, besides the thought power and inspired emotion, are certain kinds of figures of thought and speech, noble dictation, and dignified and elevated word arrangement. These three sources of sublime writing can be applied to the theory of genre construction. The way that an author actually writes the text plays a huge role in how the audience will interpret it. If the author has not paid attention to the amount of detail in the text to fit a certain genre, matched the predetermined tone of that genre, approached the genre’s problem in an unfamiliar manner, or has chosen a layout and organization that does not make any sense, the audience will be confused to how to construct that text’s real genre, and therefore, the text will declassify itself as a sublime one. The author must also avoid structuring his writing in either a turgid or pueril manner that make their body or writing seem overpacked with material to the point that it takes away from the message, or too underdeveloped. 

 
However, despite these similarities, a major flaw in my theory of being able to do both genre construction and sublime writing exists. Longinus claims that in order for a text to be truly sublime, a writing is able to transcend societies that are using the same language. But according to Devitt, genre construction relies heavily on both semiotic situations and social contexts. For example, social contexts of English speaking Americans could perhaps be vastly different than those in English speaking European countries. So, in this sense, it seems impossible to be able to both construct a text’s genre and have it be classified as a sublime writing.

 
Like I said from the beginning, I do not have a definite answer. Topics in writing and rhetoric, in my opinion, will always be tentative. Perhaps one day, we can expand further on the ideas of Longinus to be able to better fit Devitt’s ideas on genre construction.