Resumen de Reply to Gaonkar and Fuller
This response focuses on Gaonkar's two major claims, on the thinness of rhetorical theory and my sins of intention, and with Fuller's objections to rhetoric as strategy. The “thinness” of rhetorical theory, I argue, is its virtue and its pride, and that Gaonkar's alternative models for a “dense” language raise questions of their own. Gaonkar opposes the notion of a strategist, Fuller the notion of a strategy. Responses to criticism of the author's work on Charles Darwin are set out.
