>>The central thrust of his argument occurs in the second paragraph where he suggests most current US compositional classes major on content without study of formal structure. This ’theory’, he asserts, is wrong: “Content is a lure and a delusion, and it should be banished from the classroom. Form is the way.”<<
I'm not sure about that. I think his point is that without an understanding of form, "content" -- thought -- is not likely to evolve. His reference to 'big ideas' is facetious; this is evidenced later in the piece when he describes 'big ideas' as "usually some recycled set of pros and cons about abortion, assisted suicide, affirmative action, welfare reform, the death penalty, free speech and so forth." Not to formulate ideas. But he also says that the reason his classes 'don't involve content,' is because "once ideas or themes are allowed in, the focus is shifted from the forms that make the organization of content possible to this or that piece of content." He is suggesting that once pre-digested glop is introduced, the kids stop thinking about anything at all. He is also suggesting that thinking involves making connections. True, he might have said this better, and his failure argues against him, but what he seems to be trying to point out is that the majority of American students cannot formulate clear content, because the majority of American students are trained to write -- that is, to think -- unrigorously. I'm afraid he's right.
You are probably mostly right, when you say that language is learned in the doing. And in that case, the fault my lie in the content: a lot of it is mush. A more demanding curriculum would probably force attention to the formal structures in which its content is 'embedded.'
His polemic should be taken with a grain of salt. It sounds as though his Freshman course is essentially remediary. He is attempting, by means of an assault of abstraction, to teach his students what they should, indeed, have learned in the course of the thoughtful use of language. But the thoughtful use of language may be a thing in short supply in the US classroom.
