Creating Genres

In reading Carolyn Miller’s “Genre as Social Action” I found that I could agree with a lot of the claims that she makes. For example, I feel that the duty of classifying of rhetorical situations into genres is a difficult if even possible task. The subjectivity that comes with rhetoric and each situation makes it seem impossible to come to a specific set of genres. Like the subject of rhetoric itself, there is nothing concrete about the rhetorical situation. After reading Miller’s text, I did raise a few questions. First, in order to come up with a set of genres, what steps need to be taken in order to narrow down the process? The number of possibilities to classify genres of rhetorical situations is endless and if we cannot come up with some way to narrow it down there is no way to create enough genres.

Also, Miller emphasizes the idea that genre is primarily based on action. She explains that genre classifications should be based on discourse classifications. This too brought me to another question. Discourse also can be very subjective. It seems as though anytime there is an attempt to classify in rhetoric, we are hindered from doing so because of the subjectivity of the material we are attempting to classify. 

Miller’s explanation of genre seems to be more broad in comparison to some of the other ideas of theorists she draws from.  Her ideas are based less on a taxonomy that is structural. It seems however, that a more structured breakdown is more necessary in having some uniformity in classifying genres. If it is a more broad and general classification that someone wants, then Miller’s ideas would fit perfectly. Isn’t the whole point of a classification though to be specific? Miller has raised a lot of valid issues when it comes to genres and classification. It seems as though theorists and rhetoricians have a lot of obstacles still to overcome before the task of creating genres that can be recognized universally is accomplished.