annajontzcomm-blog

[annajontzcomm-blog]

*Foucault: Rhetoric as Power*

In this entry, I will examine the following critical questions: What is an example of a discursive formation and its elements? How does this discursive formation evoke a certain sense of power, and how is this power productive and/or unproductive?

To investigate these questions, I investigated the NHL (National Hockey League) as my rhetorical artifact. The NHL is a perfect example of a discursive formation because it recognizes all five of Michel Foucault’s primary units including; Discursive practices, rules, roles, power, and knowledge. The NHL has the power to eliminate teams in the playoff season to be productive in naming the overall best team of the season with the Stanley Cup.

The NHL is a professional men’s ice hockey league. The league is made up of 31 different franchises including 24 in the United States and 7 in Canada (Marsh). The league was established in 1917 and has had numerous changes throughout the years since, recently adding the 31st franchise, the Las Vegas Golden Knights, at the beginning of this season. Each NHL stadium has thousands of fans that attend each home event and rack up profits for each NHL team. The teams play in the regular season which begins in early October and enter the postseason around April in a battle to be the best team in the league and take home the Stanley Cup.

Foss and Gill criticize and evaluate Michel Foucault in there article MIchel Foucault’s Theory of Rhetoric as Epistemic and examine his five primary units that make up a discursive formation. While they chose to investigate how these elements are evident at Disney World, I chose to investigate these elements in the NHL.

A discursive practice is the first unit discussed in Foss and Gill’s article. According to the reading, a discursive practice is, “A focus on the concern that because it follows particular practices or has passed appropriate tests, is understood to be true in a culture” (Foss and Gill 387). One example of a discursive practice in the NHL is that people who attend games between two teams feel obligated to wear one of those teams’ apparel because that is the normalized practice in society. People who attend these games and don’t wear one or the other team’s apparel are often looked down upon or not “true fans” if they don’t have the proper clothing on. Although it shouldn’t matter what people wear to the games, it is an element of the hockey culture that has been created over the years.

The next unit discussed in Foss and Gill’s article is rules within a discursive formation. Rules are, “Principles or procedures that govern a discursive formation; a discursive formation assumes its particular character because of these rules” (Foss and Gill 388). The NHL has two different types of rules, the rules that apply to the fans and the basic rules of the game. A few examples of rules of the game include: 5 players and 1 goalie on the ice at one time per team, no illegal play or a penalty will be applied, the puck must get past the goalie and into the net in order to count as a goal, etc. These rules have been critiqued and changed over the years, and now lay the foundation of what the game is today. On the other hand, the rules that are given to fans that attend the games are a little different. Fans must stay behind the glass at all times, they must stay in the generalized areas and not trespass into restricted areas, and they must respect other fans around them in the stadium, etc. Most of these rules are common sense and don’t need to be explained and if they are broken, serious consequences can be given to the people who break them.

The roles of a discursive formation is Foucault’s third primary unit. Roles “serve as the organizing principle of discourse and thus of knowledge” (Foss and Gill 389). There are different roles that people play in the organization of the NHL. The highest role that is held in the NHL is the President, Gary Bettman who has been serving since 1993. Under him there are different roles that are held by a variety of people. The different roles consist of CEOs of each franchise, the staff of the franchise, the coaches of the team, and even the staff that work at the stadium on game nights. The different roles have different difficulty levels and you also must be qualified to hold these positions.

The next unit that make up Foucault’s discursive formation is power. Power is, “the overall system, process, or network of force spread through the entire discursive formation” (Foss and Gill 389). Power in the NHL is actually quite productive because it keeps each and every franchise disciplined and the decision making process can be made more efficiently with one overall person in charge of figuring out what is best for the team. Power is equally distributed to every franchise and even then, the people who work for the league, have a final say in what happens within the league.

The final unit is knowledge. Knowledge is, “Whatever is considered to be truth in a discursive formation” (Foss and Gill 390). A few examples of knowledge within the NHL are: Teams are affiliated with their “team colors” and jerseys, each season certain teams play in Winter Classic and Stadium Series games, and there are different positions that players obtain while on the ice including defense, forward, center, and goalie. This knowledge applies to each one of the teams and is pretty understood within the fan base of the NHL.

The NHL has the evokes the power  to eliminate teams in the playoff season to determine the overall best team in the league once a year. NHL.com further explains the Stanley Cup Playoffs format, and qualification system. “The top three teams in each division will make up the first 12 teams in the playoffs. The remaining four spots will be filled by the next two highest-placed finishers in each conference, based on regular-season record and regardless of division” (NHL.com). After the 16 teams have been decided, matchups will take place in order to determine who plays who. In order to win the Stanley Cup, a team must win all four rounds, first team to win four games, moves on. “Home-ice advantage through the first two rounds goes to the team that placed higher in the regular-season standings. In the Conference Finals and Stanley Cup Final, home-ice advantage goes to the team that had the better regular-season record -- regardless of the teams' final standing in their respective divisions” (NHL.com). This structure and power that is given to the NHL is productive because it is the most accurate way to prove which team is the best overall. Another reason the Playoffs are productive, is because it keeps people watching throughout the season. All fans want their team to win the Stanley Cup and be titled the best team in the league. Since the playoffs are at the end of the hockey season, fans stick around all year waiting for this tournament. As a Blackhawks fan, the Stanley Cup Playoffs have been good to our team in the last few years (2010, 2013, 2015). Another reason why the Playoffs are productive is because almost 1 million more people tune in to watch the games, bringing in more profits for the organization.

In summary, the NHL is a discursive formation that Foucault can apply his elements to effectively. The league is a way for millions of people to engage and become interactive with their favorite teams. Whether it be watching the games in person or over the television, people feel a sense of connection with the league. Although the NHL does evoke the power to name the best overall team in the league once a year, they do it in a productive and efficient way that keep people coming back year after year.  

Foss, S. K., and Gill, A. “Michel Foucault’s Theory of Rhetoric as Epistemic.” The Western Journal of Speech Communication, vol. 51, 1987, pp. 384-401.

Marsh, James H. “National Hockey League (NHL).” The Canadian Encyclopedia, www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/national-hockey-league/.

NHL.com. “Stanley Cup Playoffs format, qualification system.” NHL.com, 24 Mar. 2014,www.nhl.com/news/stanley-cup-playoffs-format-qualification-system/c-711015.

[annajontzcomm-blog]

*The Feminine Style*

In this entry, I will examine the critical question(s): What gender norm is constructed or undone in this artifact, how is it performed, and/or how does it promote a dominant ideology over a marginalized group or push back against the ideology of gender norms?

To investigate these questions, I chose to examine a short clip of Riley Maida, a four year old who is infuriated by the gender norms that companies are using. Maida paces the aisle of a toy store and states to her father, “It wouldn’t be fair for all the girls to buy princesses and all the boys to buy superheroes!”. Gender norms are guided onto to children at such a young age. Riley is here to deconstruct the ideas of these toy store related gender norms and let people know that something needs to change.

This short clip that I used as my rhetorical artifact was originally filmed and posted on YouTube by Riley Maida’s father. This young girl took a trip to the toy store and was immediately not pleased with what she saw. What Riley saw almost instantly, was the gender norms that marketers had strategically placed in certain sections of the toy store labeled “Boy” and “Girl” aisles. They put the princess toys with the “Girls” aisle and the action figures and superheroes with the “Boys” aisle. She goes on to say that companies are wrong for assuming that girls can only play with girl toys and boys can only play with boy toys. She supports the idea that regardless of a child’s sex, they should be able to play with whatever toy they want to play. I hope to see more children like Riley in the future.

In this video, the gender norm that can be easily seen in places that sell toys, is shown. Boys get the dump trucks, action figures, and superheroes along with anything blue and the girls get the barbies, princesses, and anything pink and covered in glitter. In this video, you can even see some of the toys being featured were all pink and so called “girly”. Is it okay for people to assume that these gender norms are normal and just the way society “works”? Absolutely not and Riley Maida says why not. It is okay for children to want to play with boy and girl toys. There should be no gender norms because it gives the kids restrictions on what they think they can and cannot play with and Maida uses her personal voice to deconstruct the ideas of gender norms in a way that a lot of young children are not capable of doing. In Judith Butler’s Undoing Gender, she writes, “This is the juncture from which critique emerges, where critique is understood as an interrogation of the terms by which life is constrained in order to open up the possibility of different modes of living; in other words, not to celebrate difference as such but to establish more inclusive conditions for sheltering and maintained life that resist models of assimilation” (Butler). Butler’s ideas match the message that young Riley is trying to promote. Kids don’t have to celebrate that they are different for playing with what society has created as “opposite gender” toys, but instead an environment can be created in order to give children the comfort and support to play with whatever toy they want and not feel as if they are wrong or “different” for doing so.

There are multiple ways that Riley breaks down and performs the deconstruction of the marketing strategies of the toy store companies. First, we must point out that if a four year old can see the gender norms being placed heavily on children, i’m sure it is plain to see for anyone. She begins by saying to her father who is secretly recording, “The companies who make these try to trick the girls into buying the girl stuff instead of the stuff that boys want to buy”. Right off the bat, the young girl is able to deconstruct these strategies that are used to promote these gender norms. She later adds, “Some girls like superheroes, some girls like princesses, some boys like superheroes, some boys like princesses”. Riley makes it clear that the gender norms that are shown clearly in toy stores are giving kids the wrong impressions and that they may not be able to buy things that society believes don’t apply to their interests as a boy or a girl, when in reality these toys can be appealing to both sexes. Riley’s father asks her, “If boys want to buy pink they can buy pink right?” and she simply replies,  “Yes” then adds, “so then why do all the girls have to buy princesses?”. Good question Riley and the answer is, they don’t. Children as young as 3-4 are able to see what society has developed as gender norms and what they should do in order to fit into these categories of simply a boy or a girl.

This rhetorical artifact pushes back on the ideology of gender norms by showing that not all children want to fit into these two harsh categories. An article titled “Gender Roles and Society” written by Amy Blackstone dives deeper into what makes gender roles. “Gender roles are based on the different expectations that individuals, groups, and societies have of individuals based on their sex and based on each society's values and beliefs about gender” (Blackstone). In this artifact specifically, the gender roles that are shown are that little girls are supposed to like pink and play with princesses and babies while little boys are supposed to like blue and play with superheroes and trucks. What society forgets to take into account is the fact that these gender norms might not apply to everyone, so if you don’t find yourself identifying with one or the other, or you find certain aspects of both as things that you would identify yourself with, what do you do?

“Gender roles are sometimes created on the basis of stereotypes about gender. Gender stereotypes are oversimplified understandings of males and females and the differences between them” (Blackstone). Riley Maida shows in her short rant in the middle of a toy store article that the oversimplified understandings of males and females that society makes can sometimes be wrong. It is OKAY to not fit in with the gender norms that society so harshly implies.

Although Riley might only have been four when she was brave enough to take a stand and voice her opinions on the phony toy company strategies to promote these gender norms, she is a great role model for other kids her age who may be afraid to play with toys outside of their own gender norm. She has in the video that she herself plays with superheroes and in a follow up interview she talks about her closet full of action figures. Riley does a fantastic job of deconstructing these gender norms and showing that there are flaws within them. Girls and boys are allowed to play with whatever toys they want, not just the toys that are locating in their assigned aisles. Maida pushes back on the ideology of these gender norms and she does it all with a firm expression. Riley may only be four, but if we have more kids like her, the following generations will have no problem braking these gender norms that society has created.

Blackstone, Amy M. “Gender Roles and Society.” Gender and Sexuality Commons, University of

Maine, digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=soc_facpub

dbarry1917. YouTube, YouTube, 6 May 2011, www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CU040Hqbas.

“Identity and Politics – the Psychic Life of Power : Theories of Subjection. Undoing Gender.”Judith Butler: Live Theory, doi:10.5040/9781472545688.ch-006.

[annajontzcomm-blog]

*Burke: Rhetoric as Division*

In this entry, I will examine the critical questions: How is Burke’s notion of the unification device evident in this artifact? How are each of the components at play? How is this productive and/or unproductive? (Ethical/unethical)?

To investigate these questions, I examined a short clip on Adolf Hitler speaking about the Jewish people as my rhetorical artifact. Hitler frames the Jewish people as a scapegoat and the cause of all of Germany’s issues that are going on during WWII. All four of the unification device components including: Inborn dignity, projection device, symbolic rebirth, and commercial use, can be seen throughout this video.

Adolf Hitler was born and raised in Austria where he grew up living a comfortable lifestyle. According to an article written by BBC titled, “Adolf Hitler: Man or Monster”, Hitler hated the multi-composition of the Austrian empire, which influenced his decision to move to Munich in 1913. He wanted to show his keen loyalty to Germany, so he enlisted in the military in 1914 when what’s now known as World War II began. After being wounded twice in two battles, Adolf was forced to recovery. During the time of recovery, Germany surrendered and yanked themselves from the world wide battle. He later decided to go into politics after he saw the one Jews and socialists had betrayed the German army. This is the area where Hitler began to gain the support of Germans who created the German Workers Party, (later became the Nazi Party). Hitler was charged with treason, in which he spent nine months of his sentence in Landsberg am Lech. During his time at Landsberg am Lech, he wrote the Mein Kampf (1925), which happens to be the work that Kenneth Burke breaks down and criticizes so deeply in his piece, “The Rhetoric of Hitler’s Battle”.

Kenneth Burke wrote “The Rhetoric of Hitler’s Battle” in 1939, before the US had entered WWII. He was really the first one to examine Mein Kampf and criticize the things that Hitler was saying about the Jewish people. Adolf Hitler was a great rhetorician and he used his orator skills to influence the German people in their time of need when they were desperately looking for an answer to the crisis they were facing. The Jewish people at the time, had a lower reputation and were an easy target to place the blame on. Hitler gave the German people “medicine” or in other words, a cure to their problems; eliminate the Jews.  In the reading he writes about a unification device including four components that Hitler had met. He states after breaking down the four components of the unification device, “never once, throughout the book, does Hitler deviate from the above formula” and “The “Aryan” race is “constructive”; the Jew is “destructive”; and the “Aryan”, to continue his construction, must destroy the the Jewish destruction. The Aryan, as the vessel of love, must hate the Jewish hate” (Burke 194). Much like the reading, my rhetorical artifact focused on showing the ways Hitler had met and exceeded all four components of Burke’s unification device.

There are examples of each component at play in my rhetorical artifact. The first component, Inborn dignity is “In both religious and humanistic patterns of thought, a “natural born” dignity of man is stressed (Burke 193). In my rhetorical artifact, it is evident to see that Hitler stresses the dignity and superiority of the Aryan race to the people by saying, “The (Aryan) people is bounded to its soil, bounded to its fatherhood.Bounded to the possibilities of life that the state, the nation offers” (Hitler’s Speaks About Jews). Hitler focuses on his ability to promote the superior Aryan race because of the dignity and greatness that they have created for themselves, while stating that the Jews are the inferior in this situation.

The second component, Projection device is “the “curative” process that comes with the ability to hand over one’s ills to a scapegoat, thereby getting purification by dissociation (Burke 193). In my video of Hitler’s speech, he states “the struggle between the people and the hatred amongst them is being nurtured by very specific interested parties. It is a small, rootless, international clique that is turning people against each other, that does not want them to have peace” (Hitler Speaks About Jews). Adolf is blaming the Jewish people for the reason that Germany does not have peace within the country anymore. He promotes the idea that in order for this issue to change, the elimination of the scapegoat is what needs to take place.

The third component, Symbolic Rebirth is “the projective device of the scapegoat, coupled with the Hitlerite doctrine of inborn racial superiority, provides its followers with a “positive” view of life” (Burke 194). You can see that Hitler wants to unite the Aryan race to help end the inferior races from damaging their superiority and control of Germany. He says, “it is the people who are at home both nowhere and everywhere who do not have anywhere a soil on which they have grown up, but who live in Berlin today, Brussels tomorrow, Paris the day after that. And then again in Prague or Vienna or London and who feel at home everywhere, The Jews” (Hitler Speaks About Jews). The Jews to Hitler are inconsistent international foreigners who have been trespassing on the land of Germans for far too long. Hitler wants to unite the German people to purge the scapegoat and gain their power and control on life back. One thing that is engaging to the people, is that Hitler explains that this “rebirth” only happens once in a lifetime and it is a now or never type of situation to get their control of Germany back.

The fourth and final component, Commercial use is “a noneconomic interpretation of economic ills” (Burke 194). Hitler used this component to blame the economic hardship of Germany on the Jewish people by addressing “jew finance” instead of just “finance”. According to Adolf Hitler, the Jews are international people who have to take relocate everywhere because they destroy other countries economy with their businesses. “They are the ones who can be addressed as international elements because they conduct their businesses everywhere, but the people cannot follow them” (Hitler Speaks About Jews). In this instance, Hitler told his followers that if they were to eliminate the Jewish people, that the economy would return to normal and that their financial and economical would vanish.  

As awful and horrifying as this sounds, Hitler’s ability to sway the decision of thousands of Germans to unite and exterminate the Jews was quite productive. His orator skills and his presence on the stage were exactly why he was so productive in going about this project. Hitler said what needed to be said when it needed to be said and for that reason, the German people were on board with the decision to remove the Jewish people from Germany. While his actions were productive and he won over the people of his country, this doesn’t mean that his acts were ethical. To be ethical is to know and recognize the difference between what is right and what is wrong. It is obvious that killing a mass amount of people is unethical, which is what makes the actions that Hitler created simply unethical. Some say Hitler was not in the right state of mind and if he hadn’t been morally depraved, he would not have committed the same actions that he chose to make. According to Nicholas Sturgeon in Ethics: Essential Readings in Moral Theory, “My answer is that he would not, and this answer relies on a (not very controversial) moral view: that in any world at all like the actual one, only a morally depraved person could have initiated a world war, ordered the “final solution”, and done a number of other things that Hitler did (Sturgeon 174). I agree with Sturgeon in terms of morally depraved and unethical people being the only ones that could perform acts as brutal as these, which leads back to Burke’s point for writing his analysis of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. There were much more things going on in Hitler’s head that led him to create the genocide that he created, people just wanted to ignore it in hopes to better their own lives as Germans.

Burke took his analysis to a new level and created an essential way for readers like myself to break down other artifacts such as my short clip using the unification device. Hitler was a complex man who Burke decided to break down in order to give people the opportunity to view rhetoric in a negative way. One often times sees the ways that rhetoric can be positive but it takes a true rhetorician to show not only the positive sides of rhetoric, but the negative as well. Adolf Hitler will go down as a great rhetorician who used their skills for the worst.

Burke, Kenneth. “The Rhetoric of Hitler's "Battle".” Readings in Rhetorical Criticism, 3rd ed., Strata, State College, PA, 2005.

George. Ethics: Essential Readings in Moral Theory. Routledge, 2012.

“IWonder - Adolf Hitler: Man and Monster.” BBC, BBC, www.bbc.co.uk/timelines/zsmm6sg.

St1ckycheese. YouTube, YouTube, 11 Sept. 2011, www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0V_xf3OQgM. Accessed 27 Sept. 2017.

[annajontzcomm-blog]

*Rhetoric as Narrative*

In this entry, I will examine the critical questions: What narrative(s) does this artifact tell about me or the U.S. culture or a certain group of people? What truths does it promote and what truths does it limit or ignore (who does it include and exclude)? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this narrative (think about effect and ethics)?

To investigate and dissect these questions, I examined the TV show That’s So Raven, that aired on Disney Channel from 2003 to 2007 as my rhetorical artifact. The show shared a narrative with pre teens and teens that it is okay to be different and to not look and act like everyone else, which is ultimately an influential narrative as it teaches children to live confident and independent lives.

That's So Raven was a TV show that starred Raven Baxter (Raven-Symone), an African American teenage girl who grew up and attended school in San Francisco, California. Raven was a psychic who used her powers to preview and prevent numerous adolescent and pre-adolescent situations. In 2005 and 2007, the show was nominated for Emmy Awards for Outstanding Children’s Programming. This show was one of the first times that kids and teens were introduced to situations regarding racial, body image, and much more.

Palczewski, Ice, and Fritch (2012) explain that narratives are everywhere and are stories that inform people’s personal lives. Narratives are an important way to understand the world in which people reside (Palczewski, Ice, and Fritch 118). One of the narratives that is familiar in That’s So Raven is that it promotes truth to real life issues that pre teens and teens are dealing with constantly on a daily basis. One of the memories that is explained in the reading is the term personal memory. A personal memory is the manner in which individuals remember their pasts (Palczewski, Ice, and Fritch 119). I remember as a child in school, I was constantly feeling as if I had to have the hippest clothing and the newest trends in order to feel as if I was popular enough. I am a girl who has never had the supermodel skinny body and I never realized that it was okay to be different. As a teen who watched Disney Channel quite often, That’s So Raven was the first place that showed me that it was okay to be different to not have the perfect body or the trendiest items. This personal memory of mine is so important because it takes me back to my younger days where I can reminisce on how much that show was one of the influences that shaped me into the confident woman that I am today. A specific narrative that I didn’t remember from watching this show but my dad recently was telling me, was that I used to sit on the couch and watch this show and one time I looked at him and said, “Dad, it’s okay for me to not look like some of the girls on TV, I am the way I am for a reason”. According to Palczewski, Ice, and Fritch, “Individuals recollect events from their daily lives as stories as stories that they keep in their own personal memories or share with others (119). That was a story that my dad had always remembered and was willing to share with me, which is what fueled me to write about this strong subject. One truth that it does limit is that there is very well still racism that is alive in our country and parents of kids who watched this show may have seen what this show stood for and not allowed their child to have the exposure to these issues which may have resulted in racist children because this is all that these children know.

There are both advantages and disadvantages to this narrative. An advantage is that pre teens and teens are given early exposure to a delicate topic that most of them are experiencing first hand. According to DoSomething.org, over 70% of girls age 15 to 17 avoid normal daily activities, such as attending school, when they feel bad about their looks. That’s So Raven was one of those shows that targeted those insecurities of teens positively effectively. On the other hand, one disadvantage of the narrative is that it may not have been targeted to teenage boys as much as teenage girls. Most, if not all issues talked about during the show were affecting Raven Baxter. A teenage girl who was dealing with racism and body image during the most influential years of her life. The show could have touched more on a boys perspective as well and how they dealt with these types of issues.

I found an article that was recently written regarding one of the most important episodes of That’s So Raven that was ever created. It was episode 10 of season 3 and was called True Colors. The article gives a thorough recap of the episode and speaks further about the issue of racism that was addressed in this episode. This article supports the narrative that I chose to write about. In the episode, Raven and her best friend Chelsea both apply for a position at their favorite place to shop, Sassy’s. Chelsea got hired whereas Raven did not and Raven later discovered that it was because Chloe, the manager of Sassy’s didn’t hire black people. A conversation that was struck between the three best friends brought light to the fact that people are in deed still prejudice.

Eddie: Have you ever seen anybody black, latino, or asian working at Sassy’s?

Raven: Actually, no.

Chelsea: You know, I can’t even believe that people are still so prejudiced.

“In our book, prejudice is an idea about the characteristics of a group that is applied to all members of that group and is unlikely to change regardless of the evidence against it. Prejudice can lead to discrimination as it did in Sassy’s manager’s case” (Benevolentia 2017). Although I watched this episode 10 years ago, I still remember how important this episode was and I can recall my mom acting in disbelief that Disney Channel had just brought recognition to an issue like racism.

In summary, the narrative of Raven showing teens that it is okay to be different and to not look or act like everyone else is something no one should ever look past. Although the people of the United States have progressed since this episode aired, racism still is real, body shaming still is real and just as it was ten years ago, teens are still not all going to be perfect. Speaking from personal experience, That’s So Raven was an overall excellent show that helped with the progression of these issues.

Palczewski, C.H., Ice, R., Fritch, J. (2012). Narratives. In Rhetoric in Civic Life (pp. 117-146). State College, PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.

“That’s So Raven- True Colors.” Benevolentia, 24 Mar. 2017, benevolentia.wordpress.com/2017/03/24/thats-so-raven-true-colors/. Accessed 5 Sept. 2017.

Vampirebloodinc. “That's So Raven - "Put That In Your Magazine".” YouTube, YouTube, 29 July 2012, www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YzoArtLh-k. Accessed 5 Sept. 2017.

“11 Facts About Teens and Self Esteem.” DoSomething.org | Volunteer for Social Change, www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-teens-and-self-esteem. Accessed 5 Sept. 2017.