rhetoric-by-marissa-blog

[rhetoric-by-marissa-blog]

*What is Rhetoric to Me?*

In COMM-320, Rhetorical Traditions, we covered a plethora of different theories and perspectives on what rhetoric is, and how it can be utilized. From ancient Greece to modern day, rhetoric is something that has always been prevalent and has always had different interpretations. Similarly to how the definition of rhetoric has developed over time, my personal definition has as well.

Originally, my definition of rhetoric was very vague, but not completely untrue. I was not very confident in the definition, but said that it could be “the way that something is expressed in writing” or the “style/way something is expressed/communicated”. This broader definition fits more with my current one, but in the past I had a more English-class definition, talking about authors having their own rhetorical styles. While this is also not incorrect, my new definition is more tailored to rhetoric as a whole.

One of the first readings that really had an impact on my definition of rhetoric was the Palczewski section about narratives. This showed me that rhetoric is inherent everywhere, and affects both groups as well as individuals. When Palczewski talks about public and personal memory, she highlights that individuals and groups both rely on narratives to recall events, create a sense of self, and also create a unified group (Palczewski, Catherine). This was very eye-opening for me, as I realized that my own memories and identity are communicated through stories, or narratives. Something as basic as a memory having rhetoric within is something I never previously considered, that really aided the idea that rhetoric is everywhere. This changed my definition to not just be about writing or speaking, but more of a broad spectrum phenomenon.

Another reading that shaped my perspective of rhetoric was the Squires reading “Counterpublics and the State”. This was important to my definition of rhetoric because it showed the influence of hegemonic power structures on marginalized groups, and the effects it has on their rhetoric. It summarizes the struggle of the Black press and their developments, and the attempt of the state to silence specific, marginalized voices (Squires, Catherine). This, combined with other readings on women’s rhetoric and the rhetoric surrounding the LGBTQ+ community, really demonstrated that rhetoric is something empowering, but it also is not the same for each group. Rhetoric is something that is affected by societal factors, not just personal factors.

My new definition of rhetoric is much more inclusive, and has also become more broad, due to this new knowledge of all extensions of rhetoric. My new definition is: “Rhetoric is the way that information or subtext is communicated, both verbally and nonverbally. Rhetoric is dictated by both internal factors, as well as societal and environmental factors.” This new definition is more inclusive and understanding of the factors contributing to rhetoric, and also makes the effort to encompass rhetoric in its broader form, rather than chalking it up to written or spoken works specifically.

Palczewski, Catherine Helen, et al. “Narrative.” Rhetoric in Civic Life, 2nd ed., Strata, 2012, pp. 117–136.

Squires, Catherine. “The Black Press and the State.” Counterpublics and the State, edited by Robert Asen and Daniel C Brouwer, State University of New York Press, 2001, pp. 111–136.

[rhetoric-by-marissa-blog]

*Aristotle: Ethos and Logos and Pathos*

In this entry, I will answer the critical questions: how are ethos, pathos, and logos used in this rhetorical artifact to convey a certain message? Is this message effective for the target audience?

Barack Obama’s speech addressing the shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, is a great example of these techniques being used effectively. He incorporates all three of these seamlessly, creating a very effective speech that both comforts as well as inspires change.

Obama gave this speech less than six hours after the shooting occurred, referenced many other mass shootings, and critiqued society’s responses. While he made an effort to comfort the families and loved ones who were affected by the shooting, his main goal was to spark a change in how America approaches gun control.

Herrick defines the three techniques, logos as the logic of sound arguments, pathos as the psychology of emotion, and ethos as the sociology of good character (Herrick, James A). In Obama’s speech, the most prevalent was logos, however each one is featured. For ethos, first of all, Obama is the sitting president when he gives this speech, which gives him inherent credibility. He also says, ”I’ve been to Roseburg, Oregon. There are really good people there” (Grossman, Les). This builds his credibility because he is claiming to know the type of people in the affected city, and is trying to relate to them. He also states, “But as I said just a few months ago, and I said a few months before that, and I said each time we see one of these mass shootings, our thoughts and prayers are not enough” (Grossman, Les). This implies that he has had a lot of experience already dealing with similar issues, and is a good source to listen to.

For logos, which is most prominent in his speech, and he uses this technique mainly to convince Americans that a change to gun laws is necessary. He uses loose, easily understandable statistics, such as “There is a gun for roughly every man, woman, and child in America”, and “...states with the most gun laws tend to have the fewest gun deaths” (Grossman, Les). By stating these jarring and easily memorable statistics, it is easier to reach the audience. He also uses examples of other policies we have, making the audience put the pieces together that this is logical: “When Americans are killed in mine disasters, we work to make mines safer. When Americans are killed in floods and hurricanes, we make communities safer. When roads are unsafe, we fix them to reduce auto fatalities. We have seatbelt laws because we know it saves lives” (Grossman, Les). By doing this, the audience looks at their values and the facts, and is convinced to come to a reasonable conclusion that more gun control would save lives.

For pathos, Obama focuses on family ideals and the idea of community. He refers to those affected as “another community stunned with grief”, and tries to also relate to those who aren’t directly affected, saying “That means there are more American families -- moms, dads, children -- whose lives have been changed forever. That means there’s another community stunned with grief, and communities across the country forced to relieve their own anguish, and parents across the country who are scared because they know it might have been their families or their children.” (Grossman, Les). By doing this, he is giving condolences to those who were impacted by this event, but also inciting a sense of fear in those who weren’t.

By using these different appeals, Barack Obama is able to effectively reach multiple audiences, which is especially useful since he is addressing such a large nation. He makes sure to also mention law-abiding gun owners, covering that demographic as well. Because each individual is affected by different techniques more than others, using the combination of pathos, ethos, and logos, ensures the highest chance that he will reach large amounts of society with his speech.

In the article, “Contextual Influences on Message Persuasion: The Effect of Empty Space”, studies are done to see how audiences are affected by the use of blank or empty space. It also states that “People can also draw inferences from the amount of space that surrounds a verbal message” (KWAN, CANICE M. C.). In most of Obama’s speeches, it is very noticeable that he takes a lot of pauses. In this case, it seems that he wants the audience to really be thinking and soaking in what he has to say. Because he is trying to change opinion here and rally for a political change, he frequently pauses to let audience members analyze and reconsider their own ideals. This helps his message to be more effective, as well as seeming more sincere.

In summary, Obama’s speech about the shooting in Oregon was very effective, due to his use of ethos, logos, and pathos. He uses these to effectively appeal to his audience, citizens of the United States, and also uses gaps of silence to let the thoughts and words sink in. This speech perfectly embodies an effective persuasion, that makes the audience feel like it was their own idea to have these beliefs.

Grossman, Les. “President Obama Oregon FULL Speech. 'Some How This Has Become Routine’”. Online Video Clip. Youtube, 1 October 2015. Web. 26 October 2017.

Herrick, James A. “The History and Theory of Rhetoric.” The History and Theory of Rhetoric, 5th ed., Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, 2013, pp. 69–87.

KWAN, CANICE M. C., et al. "Contextual Influences on Message Persuasion: The Effect of Empty Space." Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 44, no. 2, Aug. 2017, pp. 448-464. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1093/jcr/ucx051.

[rhetoric-by-marissa-blog]

*The Feminine Style*

Today, I will examine the 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 or gender norms?

The show “RuPaul’s Drag Race” aids in undoing the idea of strict gender and sexuality norms, while also performing gender in a nontraditional way. It pushes back against traditional gender norms by celebrating fluidity and also promoting the breaking of gender roles.

I looked at an episode of RuPaul’s Drag Race, called “Shady Politics”. RuPaul’s Drag Race is a reality competition where drag queens compete to be “America’s Next Drag Superstar”. In this episode, the queens have to shoot presidential campaign ads while “throwing shade” (basically giving attitude and witty insults) at their opponents, and also have to transform into drag inspired by black and white movies (“Shady Politics”).

In Judith Butler’s book, “Undoing Gender”, she talks about gender as a kind of “doing”, something that people act out and perform in their everyday lives (Butler, Judith). People embracing their gender fluidity, or not conforming to gender norms, is productive in “undoing” gender. RuPaul’s Drag Race is a great example of undoing gender, because it goes completely against all traditional gender norms. While women are typically associated with the color pink, makeup, and feminine clothing, this show incorporates that with male contestants. The grand prize is cash and cosmetics, rooms and venues are decorated in pink, and the queens wear makeup, feminine clothing, and even change their physique (whether surgically or with padding) to appear more female (“Shady Politics”). Aside from the imagery and the show itself, the contestants openly display emotion regularly, something men are traditionally shamed for doing. They encourage sharing and talking about feelings, and one contestant in this episode openly cries and admits a fear of public speaking (“Shady Politics”). This goes directly against the masculine gender norm. In another relation to Butler, RuPaul often says, “We’re all born naked and the rest is drag”. This relates to her concept that gender is a performance for society and those around us. This show completely disregards and reshapes what people see as “traditional” in the gender binary.

In Ryan Morton’s article, “Queering Trans Rhetoric”, he talks about heteronormativity in rhetoric and how people writing about those who are transgender or transsexual adjust their rhetoric. He asks the question of when do words/rhetoric become reality. By assigning these labels to people, is it simultaneously reinforcing the gender binary? He goes on to explain that even the word “transgender” is based on biological sex (Morton, 11). The show RuPaul’s Drag Race does a great job at not conforming to any certain words. The host refers to the contestants as “ladies”, with the catchphrase, “Gentlemen, start your engines. And may the best woman, win!” (“Shady Politics”). While most contestants present as traditionally male when they aren’t in drag, the show has featured transgender contestants as well as cisgender contestants, though it usually does not clarify. By doing this, they are encouraging fluidity and the loss of labels, which also goes back to the idea of “undoing gender”. By losing labels as well as symbols associated with traditional gender roles, this show is a complete mixture of different gender ideas that causes the viewer to just stop questioning and trying to mentally label.

To summarize, the show “RuPaul’s Drag Race” is extremely productive to the idea of undoing gender. It challenges ideas of masculinity and gender roles to the utmost extent, and encourages the celebration of people as humans, rather than how they present themselves and perform their gender.

Butler, Judith. (2004). Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge. 1-4.

Morton, Ryan. "Queering Trans Rhetoric." Conference Papers -- National Communication Association, Jan. 2008, p. 1. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=44852272&site=ehost-live.

“Shady Politics.” RuPaul's Drag Race, season 8, episode 7, World of Wonder Productions, Apr. 2016.

[rhetoric-by-marissa-blog]

*Isocrates, Politics, and Rhetoric*

In this post, I will look to explain the critical questions: What is an example of an artifact that fits Isocrates’ criteria of good rhetoric (kairos, appropriateness, originality)? (Give specific examples/quotes from the rhetorical artifact.) Is this example of “good rhetoric” ethical/productive for democracy?

Barack Obama’s speech, given in Hiroshima on the 71st anniversary of the atomic bombing, fits Isocrates’ criteria of good rhetoric, and is also ethical and productive for democracy.

Obama’s visit and speech at Hiroshima is a great example of effective rhetoric under Isocrates’ standards. Obama visited the peace park (memorial where the atomic bomb hit) on the 71st anniversary, where they typically hold a ceremony every year. His speech addressed the victims, created a sense of unity within all countries, and tried to sell the idea of ending the use of nuclear weapons.

Isocrates’ three criteria of good rhetoric must be understood before any type of artifact can be analyzed. His criteria, in order of importance, are kairos, appropriateness, and originality. Kairos basically refers to the timing of an argument/piece of rhetoric. No one would want a politician to wait a month after a disaster to address the issue. The second criteria is appropriateness, basically the appropriateness of the style and the content itself. It would be inappropriate for a politician to speak informally when giving an address, or to talk about a completely different subject than they are supposed to. Lastly, a rhetor could get extra points for originality. If they did anything to stand out in a positive way, or did something that a rhetor in their position would not be predicted to do.

Obama meets the most important criteria, kairos, by choosing to come on the 71st anniversary of the bombing, when a ceremony is being held, and after a wreath-laying ceremony with the Japanese prime minister (“Hiroshima Peace Museum Puts Obama's Paper Cranes on Display”). He also addresses this anniversary multiple times in his speech, one instance stating, “That is why we come to Hiroshima. So that we might think of people we love. The first smile from our children in the morning. The gentle touch from a spouse over the kitchen table. The comforting embrace of a parent. We can think of those things and know that those same precious moments took place here, 71 years ago” (AmericanRhetoricOrig). By timing this well, and doing it in a meaningful place and a meaningful time for those affected by the bombings, his entire speech will be infinitely more effective. 

To meet appropriateness, Obama does many different things to show his respect to Japan as well as other countries. He goes through the history of how humans have always turned against each other with violence, not condoning this. His speech overall is very formal, but in a way that focuses on unity of not just Japan and the US, but the entire world. He establishes his respect for Japan and the victims there by making sure to pronounce and use specific words. When he says Hiroshima, he uses the Japanese pronunciation, and he also uses the word “hibakusha” multiple times, which means a victim of the atomic bombings. He acknowledges the hibakusha and their forgiveness, seeming inspired by it. He also makes sure to mention Nagasaki multiple times, and does not sugarcoat or ignore the brutality of what occurred during WW2 (AmericanRhetoricOrig). 

As for originality, Obama did not have much to compete with. He was the first sitting US president to ever visit Hiroshima, which is extremely significant. His speech is also exceptionally beautiful with how it is worded and delivered, despite how solemn it is. His repeated use of Japanese words also stood out as a message of respect. Obama also visited the peace museum before his speech, folded paper cranes (which is very significant to the story of Hiroshima and to Japanese people as a whole), two of which he gave to local schoolchildren. He also talked face to face with survivors of Hiroshima, really making the effort to reach out and show his genuine effort to understand and condone what happened in Hiroshima (“Hiroshima Peace Museum Puts Obama's Paper Cranes on Display”). Overall, he meets each of the criteria with ease, creating and delivering an extremely powerful and beautiful speech.

Obama’s speech is both ethical and productive for democracy. At one point, he even explicitly references the Declaration of Independence, instead altering the context to unite multiple countries, rather than just the US. He stated, ”My own nation’s story began with simple words: All men are created equal and endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (AmericanRhetoricOrig). By doing this, he is bringing an American idea of democracy and saying that it is universal. He also ropes in that ”...the radical and necessary notion that we are part of a single human family — that is the story that we all must tell” (AmericanRhetoricOrig). He is trying to motivate other countries, specifically Japan, to see each other as just fellow residents of the same Earth, not countries divided by differences. By showing extreme respect for Japanese people, victims of the bombings, and other countries in general, he is fostering very ethical beliefs and delivering them to the public. Moving towards peace and an end to the use of nuclear weapons is an extremely ethical cause, as it is not hurting anyone and is trying to prevent future pain and violence for others. His speech was beautiful, and had pure intentions that were expressed very clearly.

Scholar Melani Schröder published an essay titled “Addressee Orientation in Political Speeches”. In this essay, she outlines how rhetors can use framing and calculated targeting in order to better market their ideas to an ambiguous audience (Schröter, Melani). I will be focusing on her concept of presuming nearness and agreement, which basically means assuming the audience has similar beliefs to a certain extent. By focusing on ideas of community within his speech, uniting multiple countries, and agreeing on stances on this event, he is able to presume a broad target audience. By assuming that there are shared beliefs about violence, the event of Hiroshima itself being tragic, and other historical events of tragedy and violence being bad, he is able to unite an audience that he is not completely informed of before his speech (AmericanRhetoricOrig). Because he knew generally where and when his speech would be given, he was able to assume a small target demographic, but also knowing that this speech would be broadcasted worldwide, he was smart to broaden his potential audience even more.

Overall, Obama’s speech about Hiroshima was beautiful, respectful, and extremely effective, as it met Isocrates’ three criteria for good rhetoric. Because he used this in an ethical way, it showed other countries around the world a new perspective on peace, acceptance, and also the United States.

AmericanRhetoricOrig. “Barack Obama - Hiroshima Peace Memorial Speech.” YouTube, YouTube, 27 May 2016, www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI6EqUAnt2I.

“Hiroshima Peace Museum Puts Obama's Paper Cranes on Display.” The Japan Times, The Japan Times, 9 June 2016, www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/06/09/national/hiroshima-peace-museum-puts-obamas-paper-cranes-display/#.Wcm3GdOGOt8.

Schröter, Melani. "Addressee Orientation in Political Speeches: Tracing the Dialogical 'Other' in Argumentative Monologue." Journal of Language & Politics, vol. 13, no. 2, Apr. 2014, pp. 289-312. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1075/jlp.13.2.05sch.

“Text of President Obama's Speech in Hiroshima, Japan.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 May 2016, www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/world/asia/text-of-president-obamas-speech-in-hiroshima-japan.html?mcubz=3.

[rhetoric-by-marissa-blog]

*Rhetoric as Narrative*

In this entry, I will be exploring the questions: What narrative(s) does this artifact tell me about U.S. culture or a certain group of people? What truths does it promote and what truths does it limit or ignore? To answer these questions, I looked at Kesha’s new music video for her song, “Praying”. Kesha uses this video to encourage viewers who may be going through something, as well as to remind society how damaging rape culture is to people.

This song was written to show that she has grown and come to peace with her past abuser and producer, Dr. Luke. Kesha uses a lot of symbolism as well as a monologue at the beginning describing how she felt before she overcame the abuse that she had gone through. The music video overall shows her journey as she goes from a black and white world to one with color again, regaining herself, and going through many emotions along the way (KeshaVEVO). To anyone who is at all involved in pop culture, it is obvious that this song reminds us of her legal struggle with Dr. Luke. Kesha ended up losing her case, which left her still trapped in her contract with her abuser, Though some celebrities showed support, overall the ruling of the case could be seen as an example of rape culture failing a victim (Johnston, Maura). Because of this, the video seems to be sending a reminder of how damaging rape culture can be. By showing her low points, Kesha is showing what victims of abuse and sexual assault deal with, but it also shows them as survivors who can overcome what has happened to them. Overall, the narrative that stood out most was the inspiring one to other victims, showing them that it is possible to be okay, even if you struggle to get there.

In the lecture, we discussed the ethics and truth behind narratives. The story she is trying to portray here is what we would call empirical truth, but not in a negative way. Empirical truth is selection of details and facts to make the narrative communicate a certain message. In her personal entry on LennyLetter, she focuses on how she has healed and overcome things, and how she wants to inspire her fans to do the same and give them hope if they have been through something (Kesha). By focusing on this narrative of making the good out of something, she is omitting the result of the trial, and while she touches on how Dr. Luke made her feel, she does not address the devastation of going to trial and losing. Though I wouldn’t consider this to be unethical in any way, it is good to see that she is still focusing on portraying certain parts of her story to send this more positive message. She uses different artistic elements, specifically color, to show the juxtaposition between her during and after her abuse versus now that she has healed (keshaVEVO). Her opening monologue about her feelings of hopelessness and depression also pulls in the viewer and tries to relate to others who are struggling.

Kesha’s new song has made such a big splash because it goes so completely against the norm of how rape survivors are portrayed in the media. One shot of her music video shows TVs painted with words, a clear shot at the media and how they handled portrayal of her case (keshaVEVO). Kesha’s narrative in this video is so important because victims of assault are typically silenced and not made to feel validated. In an article by Rania Khalek, it is discussed how often rape culture is perpetuated in the US media. It gives many examples, including the claim that an 11-year old who was gang raped was dressing older than her age, wearing makeup, etc (Khalek, Rania). This is just one of many examples of rhetoric being intertwined with rape culture, something Kesha is trying to make a statement against. By showing herself dressed as an angel in multiple scenes of her video, she is symbolizing the innocence of victims, which goes against the idea of “What she was wearing matters” that is perpetuated by rape culture (keshaVEVO). While rape culture is a lot of mindsets and actions, it is also a lot of speech, and therefore, rhetoric. The article gives many examples of legislators’ comments about sexual assault, as comments like that are what make rape culture so dangerous and problematic. By rewriting this narrative of what a victim is, Kesha is creating power for any person who has been a victim of abuse or assault, and rewriting the narrative that is usually associated with rape.

Overall, Kesha’s video for her new song, “Praying”, is extremely progressive and tells an inspiring story to target others who are suffering or being abused. By releasing this with the symbolism that is so obviously featured, she is also combatting the rhetoric of rape culture. By rewriting the narrative that exists about rape victims, she is empowering them as well as herself.

Johnston, Maura. “Kesha, Dr. Luke: The Case Explained.” Rolling Stone, Rolling Stone, 22 Feb. 2016 Khalek, Rania. "For US Media, Rape Culture Is There, Not Here." Extra!, vol. 26, no. 6, June 2013, p. 5. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=87924641&site=ehost-live. Kesha. “Kesha Fights Back in Her New Single, ‘Praying.’” Lenny Letter, Hearst Communications, INC, 6 July 2017, www.lennyletter.com/culture/a904/kesha-is-back-with-a-new-single-praying/. keshaVEVO. “Kesha - Praying (Official Video).” YouTube, YouTube, 6 July 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-Dur3uXXCQ.