Tuesday, October 14, 2008
In this article, Dickinson argues that insecurities present within postmodern urban culture provoke longings for the past. This past is made up of a conglomeration of images denoting home, good relationships, safety from harm, and simpler ways. In this symbolic "safe space," Dickinson argues, we are more likely to uncritically consume goods and services. Dickinson's notion of "memory places" and nostalgia is significant in relation to my argument surrounding cooking and design magazines, such as Real Simple.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
1. Gerard Hauser states in the first chapter of his text, Introduction to Rhetorical Theory: “Rhetoric is a form of social action because it involves at least one person attempting to engage at least one other person. The specific mode of engagement is through symbols” (10). While this statement is seemingly innocuous, I want to disagree in part and argue for an expansion of his definition. I believe rhetoric is a form of social action that may involve at least another person, but may also exist in one’s “self-talk,” also called “self-persuasion.” In fact, I believe that most persuasion today is “self-persuasion or the subtle reinforcement of social norms in one’s daily life. I understand that some call the same phenomenon “thinking,” rather than “communication,” but if we take Hauser’s stated premises that rhetoric is human action and symbolic action then the teenage girl looking in the mirror and saying to herself “I am fat” at 5’8” and 92 pounds is rhetorical action in contrast to “thinking.” An implication of calling the above teenage girl’s symbolic construction of her body “thinking” is reducing her capacity to change her sense of self through the symbolic meanings available to her in that lived moment. What do you think about communication? Do you think the stories reinforcing our sense of self are communicative or psychological?
2. Wayne Booth summarizes some key perspectives on rhetorical theory within Western thought over the centuries. The definitions that seem to make the most sense are those that describe rhetoric as “cookery” (Plato) and an “art of deception” (Locke). It seems that rhetoric today remains the same: manipulative, deceptive, and essentially propaganda devised to fool the masses. All we have to do is look at our current presidential campaigns and conclude that the truth about our leaders is not only no longer desirable, but possible. Many American people seem to gravitate to the candidates that reinforce what they already believe to be true (or want to be true) rather than who might be the best person for the job. Do you agree, why or why not?
3. Woodward and