Commonplace Conversation

It is common to connect with others who share similar values and beliefs to your own. It is common to interact with and form relationships with individuals located close to you geographically – neighborhoods, schools, work places. It is more common to form relationships with other individuals who have the same religious belief, or share the same language or ethnic background. These characteristics are good examples of basic commonplaces.
According to Jaques Ellul, in Persuasion and Influence in American Life, individual identification stems from shared cultural beliefs known as commonplaces. Commonplaces, “represent the core thoughts and ways of thinking that characterize a particular society” (168). Although the notion of commonplace is constantly a play, “it is rarely quoted” (169). Seattle University student, Jamie questions the potential negative effects of not verbalizing audience commonplaces.
I believe there are positive effects in not consistently expressing the commonplaces that bond audiences together. It can be assumed that every American wants complete recognition of their natural rights. It would be right to assume that the majority of our country and a belief in something greater. This is not to say everyone has a belief in God, or higher divinity, but that someone believes in the higher power of the law, or in the potential of people. Some manifest their spirituality in nature or through the innocence of children. Our nation prides itself on the opportunities it allows and the freedom it provides. These are not values I believe need to be states over and over again.
However, as the subject narrows, when examining “commonplace” beliefs such as, “everyone has a right to life” the need for explanation and discussion grow. What does a right to life mean? And who’s right to life are we discussing? Protesters of Pro-Choice believe the unborn baby has a right to life. Yet, many would argue that the quality of life of the future baby and mother could be diminished if the birth occurs due to external factors. Many have argued the death penalty violates the constitutions argument against “cruel and unusual punishment.” Everyone has a right to life, even if another life was wrongfully taken. However, the individual life that was immorally cut short had a right to live as well that was taken away. When developing a campaign add or an educational advertisement it is important to discuss the potential commonplace beliefs of your intended audience. In my mind this discussion would come up naturally in basic audience analysis.
I think Jaime has formed an interesting question about whether or not we should engage more in conversation about our beliefs to avoid devastating generalizations. To go even further with this question I think we should consider how we inadvertently hold conversations about our values as a society, as well as individuals. I would argue I am consistently talking about my core values with close friends and family, and even in a classroom setting. We are constantly being triggered to make judgment calls on various topics and readings. Headlines and policy issues are consistently challenging us as persons and as a community to analyze the direction we want to grow in.

I Know That Song...

Are you preaching to the choir if your persuasive message already aligns with the audience’s beliefs? If we are to accept Woodward and Denton’s definition of persuasion as “a conscious attempt by one individual or group to change the attitudes, beliefs, or the behavior of another individual or group of individuals through the transmission of some message” then it would seem that Jasmine’s example of Bill O’Reilly and his intended audience is not a form of persuasion, but simply a sharing of opinions.
For Bill O’Reilly, there is no pressing need to persuade his audience, as they are either avid fans, or staunch critics simply keeping the enemy close. O’Reilly’s air time is filled with drama, exaggerated emotions and sensationalized reporting. I do not believe that O’Reilly is committed to convincing others to see eye to eye with him, but more to rile audiences. Although, one could argue his use of evidence and general premises are persuasive means. Perhaps then, there is a scale of persuasion.
It would seem silly to consistently “persuade” individuals and groups of people that already agree with you. However, a politician cannot discontinue dialogue with certain publics, simply because they already agree with him/her. A politician will merely redirect their message priorities; they will utilize different persuasion strategies to communicate with the undecided voters. In the case of politics, it is necessary to continually reiterate your foundational message to thwart confusion or doubt regarding the stability or integrity of the message.
Another aspect of “preaching to the choir” we must consider is how much we enjoy it, and how difficult it is to start singing another tune. More often than not we surround ourselves with people who possess similar values and worldviews to our own. Naturally through our involvements, thoughts and actions we are compelled toward certain types of individuals we share commonalities with. This magnetism helps form our sense of community and belonging in the world. During the election, my social circle sounded like a tape recorder. We were constantly repeating our reasons for why Obama was a great candidate. We were all saying the same things and loved being validated in our beliefs. However, there were a select few who did not share our excitement over the potential president. If ever those select few began to speak in opposition to Obama they were immediately shot down. Not only were they outnumbered, but they were attempting to persuade those who could not or would not be deterred.
Just as seemingly pointless it is to “persuade” those who already agree with you, there is no value in challenging yourself to persuade an audience that is not open to being influenced or hearing a different set of opinions than their own. A balance must be found. Woodward and Denton allude to this balance in Jasmine’s quote, “an audience is more likely to accept the speaker’s evidence and conclusions if the persuader seems to see the world in the same terms as the audience.” The audience and the speaker do not have to agree on all accounts, but a common ground must exist, even if that common ground is a simple willingness to listen to the other.

Identity Crisis

1.Ernest Bormann argues in his article, “Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision: The Rhetorical Criticism of Social Reality” that the dramatization of speech unfolds “into public speeches and into the mass media, and in turn, spread out across larger publics, serve to sustain the members’ sense of community, to impel them strongly to action…and to provide them with a social reality filled with heroes, villains, emotions, and attitudes” (3). What is it about the archetypal hero and villain that appeals to us so much, that we begin to mold our life into such conventional models? Why does a romanticized reality appeal to us? The alteration of reality was previously brought up by, columnist Horsey, for the Seattle PI; how does Bormann’s article relate to Horsey’s burning question, “Why do people ignore reality?”

2.Greg Dickinson writes a stirring case concerning the relationship between identity, location and consumption. Recalling his time spent in Pasadena, Dickinson is overcome with sensations of “comfort, community, and home” (7). While I am moved by the author’s sentiments, I am caught up by his firm belief that “contemporary identities are performances that utilize the resources of memory; these performances occur in and are structured by landscapes of consumption” (2). To genuinely believe that, who we are is controlled most by what we buy and surround ourselves with, seems in my mind very disheartening. Am I alone in thinking that we as communities of people are capable of creating individual, as well as group identities without the emphasis of a consumer culture? How does the memory and identity of an individual in a less capitalistic /consumerist society differ from an American’s? Is there a way to impede the “breakdown of traditional hierarchies and modes of living [that] uproots the individual from the past and from the structures of community” that Dickinson warns us about (5)?

3.Kevin DeLuca introduces a very interesting notion of the body, as a form of rhetoric. The image of a body as an argument, as exemplified in the pro-Choice, pro-Life debate was a fascinating point of interest to me. DeLuca quotes from another author not that “the pro-Life argument was more persuasive than the pro-Choice argument due to superior verbal commentary. Rather, it was a battle of images” (4). Similarly, Deluca discusses measures taken by Earth First to draw attention to their cause by using the bodies of volunteers as road blockers. DeLuca maintains, “images of bodies at risk are encapsulated arguments challenging the anthropocentric position granting humans dominion over all living creatures” (6). I wonder, if such a narrowly defined message is genuinely understood by the masses? When using simple images, such as a body, either that of an adult or a baby, will an audience understand the meaning of such a complex message, as the anthropocentric position of humans in relation to nature, without being told specifically? What could be the potential differences in meaning and understanding of an images function between people?

Loving Reality

1.Author, Sonya Foss introduces her book, The Nature of Rhetorical Criticism with a general definition and explanation of rhetoric. Foss argues that our use of rhetoric aids in the creation of a common world. “Rhetoric is not simply a communicable form. It is the process by which our reality or our world comes into being; reality or knowledge of what is in the world is the result of communicating about it” (6). I agree with Foss’s understanding of how a more collective comprehension of the world could eventually exist, if all humans were talking about the same type of people, events, establishments etc. within a similar context and awareness. Yet, how does the process of reality through rhetoric change cross-culturally? In regards to the example of love, in a number of languages, including Spanish, French and German there are many different words to describe the various forms of love; plutonic love, love between lovers or family members, etc. Yet, in the English vernacular to describe love of any sort we have only one word to use “love.” With such culturally different ways to describe an emotion, can Foss’s “common world” ever really exist?

2.As emphasized in Persuasion and Influence in American Life, “The greatest potential for awareness and memorability of ideas, according to John Rossiter and Larry Percy, lies in the use of dynamic pictures (video), static concrete pictures (print)…Advertisers “brand their products by placing them in contexts where images link the product with symbols that carry a message…certain images trigger more or less reliable attitudes” (384-385). The use of visual images as a form of persuasion has escalated dramatically in the past two decades with the increased use of television, internet, and mobile phones. Significant amounts of money are made off television and internet advertisements every year. In relation to influencing advertisements, and the use of emotionally triggering advertisements what ethical guidelines exist? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYjbWHbbjjg&feature=related What are the moral codes around using young children, or impoverished families, or beautiful women to sell a product or idea?

3. Although, I was intrigued Herbert Wilchens contributions to neo-Aristotelianism , I felt that his overall analysis of rhetorical criticism seemed rather deficient. In regards to the listed topics identified by Wilchens, there was no explanation as to how the elements should be utilized. As a critic, how would you deal with the essential topics identified by Wilchens? Once characteristics of the topics are identified what do they signify? Are the original elements Wilchens identified still prevalent to the study of speech today? Are there any other topics that should be added, now in the 21st century?

Together we Create a Story

Life is what you make of it...
Psychologist Jerome Bruner was quoted in Gerard Hauser’s text, Introduction to Rhetorical Theory, arguing “the point that these culturally influenced cognitive linguistic processes that shape the telling of our life story also condition the way we perceptually experience, remember, organize, and ascribe purpose to the events of life,” (188). Bruner’s claim generated a question from my class peer Kenny McCray about the potential self-impediment of experience(s) due to our past encounters and understandings.
It is important to consider Hauser’s point of “rightness,” when considering the latent challenges that may be posed by our understandings; “standards of rightness apply to my life story as much as my account of last Saturday’s football game” (188). It is important to know what has value within your life. It is important to understand the core values that make-up the foundation of your life and how they were developed. Who were the people in your life that helped you grow into those values? What experiences did you have that either confirmed or opposed your beliefs, making them stronger, or opening the opportunity of change? In this sense it is imperative that one pays attention to stories and events that seem important to us, to remember, reflect and discern upon their impact within our lives.
However, as Kenny suggested there is a chance that by focusing too much on the life experiences and stories of our own lives, that we miss the opening to learn from another story. I traveled to along the coast of Italy, into Bosnia and Croatia for two weeks during my freshman year of college to study the evolution and significance of the Catholic Church and the Catholic faith. I traveled to Medjugorje, Bosnia where for over twenty-years now has been the site where six witnesses have testified the Blessed Virgin Mary appears to them to bestow messages of compassion, love, and hope.
As an individual who has struggled with faith, and organized religion I entered Bosnia skeptically, expecting to gain very little from the experience. Yet, as I stood on an ancient cobbled street in the pouring rain, against a hillside of uneven rocks and mud, amongst two-hundred people, waiting in anticipation for Vicka Ivanković, one of the six individuals to receive apparitions, I was overwhelmed. Vicka Ivanković delivered the message she had received from the Blessed Mother in Bosnian. Her message was translated into 6 different languages, English, German, Spanish, French, Chinese, Croatian, and Vietnamese. Vicka spoke about her experience of hiding as young child in the early 1980’s from political oppression because of the “Catholic messages” she had been receiving. She described the hope and sense of warmth that she received from her belief and faith in the church and the Blessed Mother. Although, I myself did not connect to Vicka’s message about the church, I gained an incredible perspective on the significance and need for there to be something in the world that people can look to for support and explanation. Even though I do not find explanation in the mystery of God and the Catholic faith, there are those who do.
Considering my own story in the hills of Bosnia, I believe that with an open mind Hauser’s “rightness” can be found in any story, and our personal “blinders” can be mostly removed. It is not always an easy challenge to be open to the story of others, yet life is what you make of it, and it is always more interesting when you are not the only character in it.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

I found myself repeating in my mind the infamous proverb, “a picture is worth a thousand words” while reading classmate Jordon’s Laine’s question concerning Sonja Foss’s article, Framing the Study of Visual Rhetoric. Foss claims that the focus of ‘function’ when interpreting visual objects, is the effect the creator of the visual image intended upon an audience. Thus, from a visual image a meaning or function is produced. Foss neither negates numerous functions stemming from one image, nor does she affirm the idea. It is within this grey-area that Jordan Laine questions; if an audience is not specifically told the function of an image, as we were with photograph of JFK’s son salute can more than one function exist?
I argue yes. “A picture is worth a thousand words” is a strong verbal manifestation of how many understandings can be perceived from a single image. The proverb speaks to the complexity of a story behind a solitary vision. As we have discussed in class, symbols, images, even words are mere representations of reality. They are arbitrary and ambiguous, depending on context culture and the symbol, in this case the image.
Modern art, one of the most controversial and misunderstood forms of talent make for a good example of how an image can produce multiple functions. A black canvas hanging in the Seattle Art Museum, may be interpreted by many to be a waste of canvas and space. Statements often uttered in modern art displays such as, “My child could do that,” or “what are they even trying to say?” are examples of individuals who find no function within the art. However, an art history student studying at the University of Washington may sit in front to the painting for over an hour examining how each brush stroke on the canvas runs at a different angle, creating a subtle difference of color within each stroke. Perhaps the student will walk away understanding the function of the piece to illustrate a personal conflict. The variance of the strokes depicts the indecision and battle of the artist. Perhaps it is a battle with modernity, or the current political culture.
I believe the argument that there can be more than one function of an image is easily made. I more pressing and exhaustive question to ask is “why” do individuals walk away with a different understanding of an image’s function? One reason being, our culture, an American understanding of Vietnam propaganda will be understood on a vastly different scale than an individual in South Africa. The image of a massive, angry ape on top of a building wearing a red cape, grasping a petite white woman will be understood in America as the threat of communism. Yet, in other areas of the world the image could be understood as America’s fear of gorillas. Or perhaps, that America is trying to warn the people of the nation of a vicious animal attack on the nation, or perhaps it appears as a movie advertisement. Where an individual is in life, physically, emotionally, mentally, and demographically will all impact an individual’s perception of function as well. My understanding, as a college student of an image of the American flag, will be incredibly different than a five year-olds understanding, or even different than a college student raised in the South.
It is because of these different perceptions that we must engage in open dialogue with one another, not necessarily to reach perfect agreements, but to allow for understanding and appreciation of our differences and similarities.

The Impact of Language

1. Author, Gerard Hauser summarizes the basic understanding of ‘experiential language use’ in his book Introduction to Rhetorical Theory. In his explanation, Hauser offers an example of America’s language development due in part to physical encounters, as well as from our cultural orientation. Hauser explains the American understanding of ‘up, down, front and back.’ He illustrates that the American perception of these directions is merely a matter of perspective. For in reality, there is no ‘bottom’ to a ball, and there is no real ‘back’ to a tree. “Our culture makes an orientational assumption…(226)” However, America’s assumption will vary greatly from a Nigerian, South African, or Vietnamese assumption – How will understanding the basic differences in language development and use, impact the modern movement toward globalization? How does being aware of the cultural variations in language development help you to become a more active ‘global citizen’?

2. Although, opinion polls are used often, especially during election years Hauser states opinion polls can only give us responses to structural questions; “We are unable to find out whether participants were genuinely interested in the material, how much background information they may or may not have had on the subject” (94). If the information we receive from the polls is not completely authentic and lacks totality, why is public opinion polling important? Is there a way to enable discussion and depth within publics theory despite the current limitations to engage in discourse? What are the risks/challenges that may exist if we have merely opinions, but no judgment or reasoning backing the opinions of the public?

3. Although, I was emotionally touched by Dickinson’s argument to utilize rhetoric and communication in an effort to create and maintain memories of cultural identity, I am interested in his notion that an individual may find their identity within images, memories and interactions of their surrounding. Dickinson states, “Old Pasadena provides the images of comfort, community, and home necessary for the needs of identity, utilizing memory to suggest authenticity, and the attempt to stabilize, finalize and, in a most literal sense, place identity” (7). While I agree that the above mentioned characteristics aid in an individual’s creation of identity, I will argue that no matter what location geographically, emotionally, or physically a person is in, their sense of identity is constantly shifting due to experiences, their background, the people they meet, the conversations they partake in and the meaning they initiate. Do you agree or disagree? Considering the city you grew up in, or are now living in, is there a distinct, well known history, and how if any has it impacted you?