Sirc’s analysis of box logic composition provided an interesting model for the collection and organization of information. His description of Joseph Cornell’s, Walter Benjamin’s and George Maciunas’s approach to composition seems somewhat similar to some of Boice’s advice about pre-writing.  Like Boice, Sirc’s perspective woud be useful and of interest to mature writers. However, for a beginning student of composition, one without a strong understanding of the standard expectations for their writing in a variety of venues, Sirc’s method might prove more overwhelming than practically constructive.  His interrogation of “notions of articulate coherence, conventional organization, and extensive development” represents the type of questioning important for mature writers. It offers little concrete advice for beginning writers. Problematizing a structure and process they have yet to understand seems unproductive.  It also might be damaging, since the traditional essay for which Sirc has such contempt would likely remain the standard for writing in other venues.

            Kastely’s interrogation of argument, on the other hand, problematized its subject in a much more useful way. Decrying the standard, static approach to argument and advocating that would-be authors consider at every stage of composition the possibility of contradictory, yet still valid, perspectives would allow even beginning writers to develop an appropriate yet personal method of composition.