APPENDIX I: INFORMATION ABOUT, AND IMAGES OF, Howard H Dean’s Book => EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION, Prentice-Hall, 1953.

A) Below Is A Photo Of The Front Cover Of Howard H Dean’s Book 'EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION:
…Please look closely at the Persons & Books illustrated in the Dark Band.

---

---

A) Below Is A Photo Of What IS Just Inside The Front Cover Of Howard H Dean’s Book 'EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION:
Please look closely at the RED ALL CAPITALS listings, down the Left-most Column, and especially notice => PUNCTUATION and SPELLING !!
….Now … Remember these as you read Italic ZMM Book Excerpt, below the photo.

…HENRY GURR COMMENT: One can well imagine the frustration of Robert Pirsig at the end of day in Montana Hall: As he was staring at Howard Dean’s book => He no doubt would be depressed by especially this above photo view of => How-To-Look-Up The “Parts & Pieces” of what is => Supposed Help the Student To Create Good Writing:
…And Pirsig most especially would be depressed by this chart’s => RED ALL CAPITALS listings, down the Left-most Column, and especially notice => PUNCTUATION and SPELLING !!:

'''To Be Sure You Get The Point, Please Consider The Below ZMM Excerpt => :

;;; “He returned to his notes but it wasn’t long before thought about them was interrupted by a recall of her strange remark. What the hell was she talking about? Quality? Of course he was teaching Quality. Who wasn’t? He continued with the notes.

… Another thing that depressed him was prescriptive rhetoric, which supposedly had been done away with but was still around. This was the old slap-on-the-fingers- if-your-modifiers-were-caught-dangling stuff. Correct spelling, correct punctuation, correct grammar. Hundreds of rules for itsy-bitsy people. No one could remember all that stuff and concentrate on what he was trying to write about. It was all table manners, not derived from any sense of kindness or decency or humanity, but originally from an egotistic desire to look like gentlemen and ladies. Gentlemen and ladies had good table manners and spoke and wrote grammatically. It was what identified one with the upper classes. In Montana, however, it didn’t have this effect at all. It identified one, instead, as a stuck-up Eastern ass. There was a minimum prescriptive-rhetoric requirement in the department, but like the other teachers he scrupulously avoided any defense of prescriptive rhetoric other than as a "requirement of the college."

End ZMM excerpt.

---

---

B) HENRY GURR COMMENT: Below Please Study Pages 132 thru 137, From Howard Dean’s book ''EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION.'”
… AND Especially Notice At The TOP Of These Pages Heavy => “FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES” …” DEDUCTIVE THOUTHT AND EXPRESSION”.
…Now … just imagine a student trying to remember all this, as he or she attempts => , The most difficult, and creatively uncertain, part of any writing is => Getting the ideas down on paper or typed into a word processor,
……Now … below these Six Pages, 132 thru 137, as you continue reading => Keep in your mind, what Robert Pirsig says about Aristotle’s view of Writing => “'Rhetoric can be subdivided into particular proofs and topics on the one hand and common proofs on the other.”
…AND, as you read below these Six Pages, 132 thru 137, notice what Robert Pirsig says about Aristotle’s view of Writing => AND begin to see that this, by analogy, is largely => Just what Howard Dean is doing in his book EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION !!

---

---

---

---

Excerpt From ZMM, Telling What Robert Pirsig Found Out While He Was At The University Of Chicago: Bolds by HSG. '''
…Now. Please Study the ZMM Narrator’s Passage Below, Until You See By Analogy, What Pirsig Writes, Is Pretty Much What => Howard Dean Is Presenting To Students In His Book ''EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION.'”

… “I have since read Aristotle again, looking for the massive evil that appears in the fragments from Phædrus, but have not found it there. What I find in Aristotle is mainly a quite dull collection of generalizations, many of which seem impossible to justify in the light of modern knowledge, whose organization appears extremely poor, and which seems primitive in the way old Greek pottery in the museums seems primitive. I’m sure if I knew a lot more about it I would see a lot more and not find it primitive at all. But without knowing all that I can’t see that it lives up either to the raves of the Great Books group or the rages of Phædrus. I certainly don’t see Aristotle’s works as a major source of either positive or negative values. But the raves of the Great Books group are well known and published. Phædrus’ rages aren’t, and it becomes part of my obligation to dwell on these.

…Rhetoric is an art, Aristotle began, because it can be reduced to a rational system of order.

That just left Phædrus aghast. Stopped. He’d been prepared to decode messages of great subtlety, systems of great complexity in order to understand the deeper inner meaning of Aristotle, claimed by many to be the greatest philosopher of all time. 'And then to get hit, right off, straight in the face, with an asshole statement like that! It really shook him. ''
'''
He read on:

Rhetoric can be subdivided into particular proofs and topics on the one hand and common proofs on the other. The particular proofs can be subdivided into methods of proof and kinds of proof. The methods of proofs are the artificial proofs and the inartificial proofs. Of the artificial proofs there are ethical proofs, emotional proofs and logical proofs. Of the ethical proofs there are practical wisdom, virtue and good will. The particular methods employing artificial proofs of the ethical kind involving good will require a knowledge of the emotions, and for those who have forgotten what these are, Aristotle provides a list. They are anger, slight (subdivisible into contempt, spite and insolence), mildness, love or friendship, fear, confidence, shame, shamelessness, favor, benevolence, pity, virtuous indignation, envy, emulation and contempt.

Remember the description of the motorcycle given way back in South Dakota? The one which carefully enumerated all the motorcycle parts and functions? Recognize the similarity? Here, Phædrus was convinced, was the originator of that style of discourse. For page after page Aristotle went on like this. Like some third-rate technical instructor, naming everything, showing the relationships among the things named, cleverly inventing an occasional new relationship among the things named, and then waiting for the bell so he can get on to repeat the lecture for the next class.

Between the lines Phædrus read no doubts, no sense of awe, only the eternal smugness of the professional academician. Did Aristotle really think his students would be better rhetoricians for having learned all these endless names and relationships? And if not, did he really think he was teaching rhetoric? Phædrus thought that he really did. There was nothing in his style to indicate that Aristotle was ever one to doubt Aristotle. Phædrus saw Aristotle as tremendously satisfied with this neat little stunt of naming and classifying everything. His world began and ended with this stunt. The reason why, if he were not more than two thousand years dead, he would have gladly rubbed him out is that 'he saw him as a prototype for the many millions of self-satisfied and truly ignorant teachers throughout history who have smugly and callously killed the creative spirit of their students with this dumb ritual of analysis, this blind, rote, eternal naming of things. Walk into any of a hundred thousand classrooms today and hear the teachers divide and subdivide and interrelate and establish "principles" and study "methods" and what you will hear is the ghost of Aristotle speaking down through the centuries—the desiccating lifeless voice of dualistic reason.” ''
'''
End ZMM excerpt.

HENRY GURR COMMENT: While At The University Of Chicago, Is Robert Pirsig “Haunted” by Howard Dean And His Textbook EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION?

See also: Binding the Dichotomy: A Reconciliation of Opposites By Jeremiah Lewis

---

---

C) HENRY GURR COMMENT: The Below Pages 402 & 403, Show Example Of Politics Of The 1950's, Are These Extremely Relevant? OR Just A Possible Distraction From The Purpose Of Howard Dean’s “Communication Course” Or “Good Quality Writing” As Envisioned By Robert Pirsig?

For an interesting parallel to the above see Dr. Robert Dunbar's views and problems when expressing them:“THREATS TO ACADEMIC FREEDOM AT MONTANA STATE COLLEGE,” A 1977 Monograph By History Professor Robert G. Dunbar

---

---

D) EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION PREFACE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS:

---

---

---

---

---

E) EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION COPY RIGHT & DEDICATION PAGES:

---

---

F) EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION TITLE PAGE:

---

---

For A History Of And A Further Perspective On The Textbook And Course That So Troubled Robert Pirsig While Teaching At MSC, See =>
APPENDIX II: The Communication Course: A Ten-Year Perspective by Howard H. Dean

---

---

Composed and Edited by Dennis Gary. July 2014, Plus numerous suggestions by Henry Gurr.
… Scans are from Howard Dean’s book ,Effective Communication, Copyrighted 1953.

---

---

We Are Saddened To Report That Robert Dennis Gary Passed Away In Jan 9, 2020, Likely From Covid19. You May Read About His Life => A Robert Dennis Gary Memorial Tribute Page & Autobiography : ALSO PLEASE SEND EMAIL To HenryG__USCA.edu With Your Memories Of Dennis. Click Here.

---

---

Edit&EplanationsAddedByHGurr231108.
FileC&pFmServer =DennisGaryAPPENDIXI ScansFmBk EffectiveCommunicationByHowardH.DeanFmServerRev05

---

---

Contact Me = Prof Henry Gurr.		My Text Pages. Powered By PmWiki 2.2.0 beta 34, GroupsUsed.
Legal & Copyright.		My Photo Gallery Click For All Nine Albums. Powered by Gallery.