Trackback Assignment

For my trackback assignment, I plan to extend a portion of my dialect assignment to more fully explore the concept of audience.  Specifically, I am interested in the intersection of audience and the creation of social norms and identities.   Since audience is such a fundamental part of the rhetorical process, many scholars have obviously touched on this concept.  Therefore, to narrow my topic, I’d like to look at how rhetorical scholars view the role of audience in the meaning-making process, as opposed to being merely passive recipients of the rhetor’s message.  In this regard, my trackback will be heavily weighted to more modern theorists.

The major scholars that I plan to review will start with Maurice Rene Charland and Walter Ong.  Then, I will move backward into Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca, while interspersing Kenneth Burke’s theoretical underpinnings.  Lloyd Bitzer will most likely also come into play at some point in this mid-section.  I will continue to work backward to Aristotle’s early notions of the role of audience. 

Rhetorical Turns

If language is ever shifting, and if we have more recently seen a massive shift in communication practices both in terms of presentation tools and global connections, how should rhetoric shift in terms of its instruction?

Rhetoric, as a discipline, has seen massive turns in its approach (and therefore, its relevance) to educational practices.  To continue to be relevant, rhetorical educational and pedagogical practices will have to keep pace with the changes in communication practices and society at large.  Two areas where rhetoric will be particularly challenged to adapt are in the arenas of technology and multiculturalism.

Our past visions of the future thought that most of our technological advances would be in the area of transportation (Where are the hover cars?  We were promised hover cars!)  If you watch old Sci-Fi movies, few anticipated the level of instant communication capacity that our current society would enjoy.   These communication capabilities present challenges as we prepare students to communicate effectively.  Specifically, social media allows us to rhetorically construct and curate identities for both intended and unintended audiences, for both our personal selves and our professional selves. 

Moreover, in an educational setting, we are instructing students on technology platforms that will likely be outmoded by the time they graduate or shortly thereafter.  Rhetorically, this means that teaching students technological reasoning (and rhetorical) principles is far more relevant and efficacious than teaching to specific technologies.  

Multiculturalism in the context of globalization is another adaptation the discipline of rhetoric must make.  While we acknowledge that much of our knowledge of rhetoric is based in Western thought, we also admit the limitations of this approach.  As a class, we have discussed the perils of universal audience and cross-cultural enthymemes.  At some point, rhetorical theory will need to address ways in which we can effectively communication cross-culturally in a global environment.  (In fairness, being new to the discipline, it is very likely that there are many multicultural theories of which I am presently unaware.)  These theories will need to become embedded into traditional curricular designs and not added as an “aside” or afterthought to standard rhetoric curricula. 

Rhetorical scholars are certainly capable of meeting the challenges that time inevitably presents and it will be fascinating to observe the various forms that these new approaches take.

Abundant Style

What is abundant style, and in what ways is it relevant today in education and/or the workplace? Provide an example.

Abundant style, or copia, is having the ability to express a similar concept in many ways.  By doing so, one can see the precision and nuance in language.  For example, if I say, “I see the flower” I have expressed a simple, straightforward concept.  However, with abundant style, I can more precisely target my meaning and thus, move my audience.  Such an example might look like, “In witnessing the wilting petals on the daisy, graying slightly, I am reminded of the elusive passing nature of life itself.”  In both examples, I have indicated that I have seen a flower but in the second example, I have provided a description of the experience of seeing that flower through the use of style.  This description is more likely to evoke some reaction in audience.

In today’s education, this is relevant because we must understand a broad array of topics so that we can draw from multiple perspectives in order to reach a broad array of audiences.  In this sense, this is the value of a liberal arts education, or at a minimum, the value of general core education requirements for a baccalaureate degree.  This need to have at least a baseline understanding of a broad range of topics is what separates an “educated” member of our society from and uneducated one and why people would choose to go to a university to get a BA/BS rather than a trade school, where such requirements would not be in place.  With this broadened perspective, we can both speak to larger groups and understand the messaging from a larger composite of persuasive speakers. 

Sexual Assault Prevention Dialectic

The topic for my contemporary dialectic will be bystander intervention in sexual assault prevention.  Basically, this is a relatively new approach being taken in the field and it attempts to shift the “rape culture.”  Instead of preventative efforts being aimed solely at helping people (mostly women, because most prevention measures are aimed toward female audiences) avoid becoming victims or even strategies that seek to dispel rape myths, bystander intervention strategies seek to engage a broader collective audience in preventing rape and sexual assault.  For example, this Make Your Move campaign has been heavily promoted and replicated nationwide with images such as this: 

The copy on the above ad reads: "I could tell she was asking for it . . . to stop. So I stepped in and told my buddy that was not way to treat a lady. And he backed off."

Especially on college campuses, stakeholders have become increasingly concerned with efficacious prevention strategies and several high-profile efforts have been launched, which I believe mark a significant shift in societal response to the issue.   (See Not Alone: The First Report of the White House Task Force to Protect Students From Sexual Assault and this PSA by male celebrities.) 

I’m still contemplating how I will present this as a dialectic in terms of what argument I will construct.  I believe I will pursue a line of reasoning that considers who is the appropriate target/audience for sexual assault prevention messaging (potential victim vs. bystanders).  Within this line of reasoning, I would invoke Perelman and, in particular, address the universal vs. particular audience, as well as the notions of convincing vs. persuading. 

Artes Dictaminis -- Revised Letter of Intent for Graduate School Admission

EDITED:  My original blog post was a less edited version of the actual letter I submitted for admission.  In considering the assignment, I had originally envisioned it as a modern application of ars dictaminis -- how the same conventions are applied in modern letter writing.  In reviewing my peers' blog posts, I see how I misconstrued the instructions and intent so I've revised my post, which is actually more comfortable since it felt awkward to have such personal information on the blog originally.

December 14, 2012  (Revised October 16, 2014)

RE: STATEMENT OF INTENT

[Salutation]

Dear Dr. Carter and Graduate Review Committee, by divine grace resplendent in Ciceronian Charm, Casey, inferior to her devoted learning, expresses the always obedient honorable service.

[Securing of Goodwill]

Your nobility and reputation as scholarly thought leaders, so esteemed in the field, is unparalleled.   

[Narration]

Having long-admired your impressive and impactful mark on the field of Rhetoric and Technical Communication, I could only hope to avail myself of your wisdom and generous teaching so that I could explore and expand your influence throughout the realm.   

[Petitio]

I appeal to your generosity, wisdom, and kindness to allow me, through your grace, to seek admission to your most noble and fine program.

[Conclusio]

Praise to your graces,

Casey Holland Akins

Home

I’m both intrigued and conflicted in trying to formulate my ideas about my notions of “home” and all that loaded word entails.  For me, I’ve had 16 major moves in my life, living in 13 different states.  The one place I call “home” is my grandmother’s house in Tucson, Arizona because I lived there at two different points in my life (once as a child and again as a young adult) and it was the only place I ever returned to visit.  My mother and father live in that house now and it holds so many memories that I feel almost a temporal shift when I walk through the door; I am both a child and adult concurrently.

Questions were posed about how home is related to identity, the concept of homelessness, and even what is it like to be an American.  Personally, these questions are all intertwined.  While not many people have moved as often as I have, I am not unique among Americans in moving away from my family of origin.  Many of my peers have moved several times and don’t live near family.  Perhaps it is an assertion of independence, but perhaps a simpler explanation is more accurate, such as following economic opportunities. 

I do find one thing particularly fascinating about America and our notion of home:  our obsession with the physical space of the home.  (I don’t know that it is uniquely American, perhaps other cultures experience this as well so I could be making a cultural assumption based on my limited knowledge.)   We have several television channels dedicated 24/7 to home improvement shows, hundreds of retail shops (large and small) dedicated to selling home improvement items and decorations.  We are a nation fascinated with nesting and creating the perfect home.  Part of our American dream is even stated to be buying a home with a white picket fence (though no homes seem to have white picket fences anymore).  We spend our weekdays at work and our weekends working on our homes and yards.   In full disclosure, I am a self-proclaimed do-it-yourselfer and take great pride in the fact that I have remodeled each of the homes I’ve owned.  Again, I don’t know if this is a uniquely American trait or not.

Some people have said that after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, our obsession with our homes really increased; that we longed for the comfort, stability, and security that “home” provided that was lost when such unexpected violence erupted in one of our major cities.  We felt so vulnerable and sought a balm to soothe our troubled souls in the form of the comforts of home.   Perhaps this is true. 

So while we are more transient, further away from family, and value our independence, we, or at least I, still crave the traditions, comforts, and stability of home.  And, if that means I have to build it myself, I guess I will.

Draft Hypermediated Philosophy Portfolio

Here is a DRAFT of my hypermediated Teaching Philosophy Portfolio.  Based on the chapter provided by Dr. Rice, I re-envisioned my teaching philosophy to incorporate a hyperlinked portfolio approach.  There is still much writing to be done on the "theoretical underpinnings" sections so I just left my very rough notes.  While this is incomplete, I decided to post the draft to get feedback on the format and work so far.

(The hyperlinks in the document work on the PDF but don't appear to work on the PDF viewer for the blog.  Regardless, hopefully you can get the idea -- :-)  If you are very ambitious and interested, I believe you can download the document to get the links to work correctly.)


Hypermediated Teaching Philosophy.pdf

Week 4: Philosophy Statement

For my philosophy statement, I intend to reconceptualize and revise my teaching philosophy statement.  Within that statement, I’ve currently identified three areas that form the triad of my teaching goals:

1.     Relevance: “Relevant education is provided when students can articulate how to incorporate what they have learned into their professional careers and personal lives.  It often takes great effort to help students understand why certain acquired knowledge is relevant to them, but I fervently believe that it is worth the extra effort if it means that the knowledge will be used in their future rather than forgotten after the next exam.”

2.     Education vs. Indoctrination:  "My efforts are aimed at teaching students how to think rather than what to think.  It is impossible to anticipate the various moral, ethical, and even technical realities our students will face, even in the near future.  To be prepared to navigate these realities, I give students tasks with increasing complexity, helping them build their confidence at each step.”

3.     Expansion of Worldview: “I push students to critically examine long-held and cherished beliefs about race, ethnicity, gender, religion, and social class.  When I am able to guide students to recognize their own belief systems, rather than simply acting on them by instinct, they can begin to ask themselves critical questions about the merit of their ideas.  .  .  Students are inundated with new information presented in a seemingly objective manner.  Helping students break down the walls of the appearance of objectivity to evaluate the value structure that undergirds all communication is an expansive perspective.”

In reviewing this triad, I still hold the principles dear but to say that they remain unchanged after my own educational experiences in this doctoral program would be contrary to my own stated value system – I value education for its worldview -expansive potential. Therefore, I am moved to reevaluate and incorporate all that I am learning.

There is clearly a classical Sophistic influence in my teaching philosophy that I will continue to explore but I also see influences from more modern social constructionists and critical theorists, such as Burke, Perelman, and possibly even Foucault.   I’m looking forward to exploring this more as I delve more deeply into this assignment and of course, receive feedback.

Week 3 Classical Rhetoric and 9/11

What rhetoric do you remember being employed during and in the aftermath of 9/11? Perhaps make connections to rhetors we've been reading.   

At the heart of classical rhetoric is the notion of truth.  Is truth transcendent?  Is it rational and objective?  Is it knowable? Is it socially constructed?  Plato felt that there was an objective and absolute truth but that truth was unknowable.  The Sophists took more fluid approach to the notion of truth.  Plato feared the Sophists would/could use their artful rhetorical skills to manipulate audiences and convince them of untrue or unknowable ideas.

While we have more modern rhetorical theories from which to draw, classical rhetoric has much to offer in contemplating the rhetorical messages disseminated in the wake of 9/11, particularly as they relate to the notion of truth.  Certainly something “absolute” and “knowable” occurred as evidenced by the 2,996 lives lost, fallen World Trade Center towers, destroyed planes, damage to the Pentagon, and other indisputable effects of the events. 

However, the rhetoric that followed called into question every facet of how we interpret those “truths.”  For example, 9/11 “truthers,” led by Alex Jones from his InfoWars blog (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/trutherism/2011/09/where_did_911_conspiracies_come_from.html) believe that the US government orchestrated the attacks.  Using sophisticated rhetorical strategies that appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos, “truthers” have promulgated theories that question the collapse of WTC 7 (http://www.infowars.com/new-911-footage-reveals-wtc-7-explosions/  or http://www.ae911truth.org/). 

Using eye witness accounts, experts, and comparisons to similar-appearing building demolitions, the "truthers" assert that the building was in fact imploded by pre-planted explosives instead of collapsing as a result of the damage caused by the planes’ impacts.  While these theories have been debunked, they still hold sway with a relatively large portion of the American population (One poll indicates that one in three Americans think it was an “inside job” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/9-11-conspiracy-theories-wont-stop/.)

Is this the rhetoric that Plato feared?  An absolute truth that exists, but may not be fully knowable, and is certainly difficult to communicate, which therefore provides fertile ground for speakers’ to use their rhetorical skill to manipulate the audience to believing their particular version of “truth?”  

Whether one believes that 9/11 is the product of a US government conspiracy to justify an Iraq invasion or the result of a long-term Al Qaeda operation as part of their declared war on the US, both the event and the rhetorical messages describing it have had a potent aftermath.

Week 2

The reading this week was particularly intriguing as I was wholly unfamiliar with non-Western rhetorics.  Borcher’s treatment of the subject provides a nice overview and introduction. 

I’m particularly drawn toward Afrocentric rhetorical theories because I often discuss and explore the topics of white privilege and racial disparities in our justice system.  Of course, it makes sense that western theoretical approaches would be privileged in academic knowledge bases and I welcome the inclusion of non-Western approaches.

The Knowles-Borishade model opens up two interesting lines of thought for me.  First, the way they position audience is significant.  In contrast to a western approach where audience is simply the recipient of the rhetorical message, in the Afrocentric approach, the audience is an active, engaged actor in the rhetorical process as both the chorus and the responder.  This re-positioning of audience to a more centralized locale means the audience is part of the meaning-making and not a receiver or just situated at one end of a recursive cycle.  In many ways, this model recalibrates the entire process in my mind.  I realize that it specifically is intended and used to describe oration with African-style roots or orators from the black community but just as Western rhetorical models have been used to explain non-Western rhetoric, I wonder if this model can be used to explain non-Afrocentric rhetoric?  Or, is it intended to be limited to that particular rhetorical tradition?  At what point do we cross the boundaries into cultural appropriation?

Second, by including the spiritual elements and discussing the concepts of rhythm and movement between chorus and caller, the model captures one of those ineffable qualities of “good” rhetoric – rhetoric that moves you, that gets you caught up in it, makes you swoon and sway, tremble and want to act on what you just heard.   With my admittedly limited knowledge of Western rhetorical models, it is hard to capture precisely the points of order in the rhetorical context that cause those moods and swells but the Knowles-Borishade model, by using Asante’s Afrocentric approach, is able to do just that.

In other words, by widening our cultural lens, we can expand our theoretical possibilities in interesting ways, which is clearly the point!

My Mobius Strip: What is normal?

What is normal?  I've pondered this question a lot throughout my life.  When I was a kid, I'd have a thought or a feeling and wonder, "is it normal to think that, to do that?"  When I was older, I found myself brave enough to actually ask a close friend or two, here or there, "is that normal?"  The question was usually met with slight annoyance and a disappointing answer: "I don't know."  Because, honestly, how does one 'know' normal? 

More often, I've noticed that it is easier to identify when something is not normal than when something is normal.  When something falls outside the boundaries of our expectations, it tweaks a nerve and calls attention to itself.  It immediately becomes identifiable as not normal.  Interestingly, something doesn't have to fall very far outside a boundary to catch our attention.  I think this is because the window of acceptable behavior is surprisingly narrow. 

You don't have to be really weird to be noticed, even labeled, as weird (or possibly some more severe or shaming label).  You can just be a little "off." 

So, how do these boundaries get defined?  Who makes the window of acceptable behavior?  What happens to people who live right at the edges?  Mostly "normal" but having some characteristic, belief, behavior, or idea that marks them as not fully within the boundaries of what is typical, conventional, normal.    I'm fascinated with this line -- this edge.  I'm even more fascinated with how it moves through time and changes.  How does it change?  Who decides normal?

As an aside,  I've titled this blog "At the Edges" also for personal reasons.  First, with a name like Casey, I've grown up with lots of nicknames -- Casey and the Sunshine Band, Casey Kasem.  Casey at Bat was probably the one I heard the most -- and so now Casey at the Edges is a bit of a take-off on that.  I'm still "at" something, a new thing.  Second, as a mother of five kids, who works, and goes to school, and is generally fairly stressy, I sometimes leak out inappropriate comments to my children.  One time I said to my kids, "Guys, you need to settle down.  Mommy is a woman on the edge."  My daughter, then about 8, not missing a beat said, "Of glory!  You are a Woman on the Edge of Glory!"  I loved that she could turn my stress and make it something positive and so, in a way, the title of this blog speaks to that as well -- being at the edge, the precipice of something yet unknown but hopefully, positive.  My journey as a student is not new, as I've been recently reminded. I'm what you would term a life-long learner.  My journey as a student is part of my journey as a professor, which is part of my journey as a parent, which is part of my journey as a woman, which is part of my journey as a human -- all strung into a mobius strip of adventure -- all edges, no end.