To articulate the relationship of visual elements of rhetoric to discursive elements
Critique of Birdsell & Groarke's treatment of "Visual Propositions"
B & G assert, "...even if highly abstracted and presenting only a fraction of the geographic information about a given location, a map purports to be an accurate ("true") representation of the arrangement of places in space" (p. 106). No, accuracy is irrelevant; rather we look for functional representations. For example, the London Tube Map is used daily by hundreds of thousands of people. The map is NOT "an accurate ("true") representation of the arrangement of places in space"; it is functional in representing an understandable guide to tube lines and stations but is completely inaccurate in representing location, distance, etc.
The Tube Map, while wildly distorting of almost every conceivable element of the London's existence, is exceptionally functional and meaningful. London Tube Map London Surface Map Shifted to match Tube Map
The link above shows how the Tube map distorts relative locations a surface map intended to function as a representation of relative location.
B & G go on to assert that, "Visual metaphors and symbols are used to convey propositions in political debate and discourse" (pp. 105-6). No, they may augment propositions but the foundation for rhetoric is essentially in discourse. Even they must comment on the Bush cartoons for them to make sense within the context of the article.
For further example, take a look at this cartoon:
You cannot know what this is about apart from being told what "Dale Farm" is; what a "traveller" is and the time frame and cultural location of this message. Even those to whom it was directed had to have information on those topics in order for the cartoon to have any meaning. Notice that once you are informed (discursively) about what Dale Farm is and what group of people "travellers" names, you can "get" the joke (you also bring already existing information about the class of people called "bankers" garnered from previous talk, readings, TV or internet viewing, etc; so all significant elements of the joke now are articulated.) At this point you can see the argument offered by the cartoon--but not because of its own visual merits!
OK, so B & G, finally get it right at the end in their discussion of context/s as controllers of and resources for understanding the potential implied assertions made by any visual element of any rhetorical effort.
Amanda Moyer: Dissociation as a rhetorical concept
To describe the rhetorical qualities of Gandhi's Grievances
Session #5 (2/25)
To determine the nature of "good reasons" within the framework of narrative paradigm
(Dr. Ian Stoner will speak to us briefly on the topic; he is lecturer in the Department of Philosophy, University of Minnesota)
Reading commentators: Michael Mann Gloria Whalen Revisit the "rudimentary search model" (session #4) to see where we can take the analysis.
Sessions #4 and 5 (2/18)
To articulate the nature of the narrative paradigm, generally.
To articulate the nature of and elements of narrative argument, specifically as moral argument
To differentiate narrative probability and narrative possibility as essential rhetorical functions
To analyze "The Machine Stops" using narrative concepts
Reading Commentators: Amanda Burk and Corbin Wright
Session #3 (2/11)
Overall goal: To explore the nature of knowledge that critics create about rhetoric/communication
To define "emic" and "etic" criticism
To compare Hart & Daughton's directives for analysis to our definitions of etic or emic criticism
To assess your own predilections in approaching criticism
Document to capture our definitions Agree or disagree: In chapter 3 H & D offer a generic set of topics that appear to by "hyper-etic" (objective), but their use leads to a "hyper-emic" (subjective) treatment of messages
Agree or disagree: In Chapt 4 A Topical Approach to Ideas (p. 61 ff) H & D offer an etic approach; in "A Judgmental Approach to Ideas"(p.67ff) they offer and emic approach. I suggest that H & D are not sufficiently aware of the nature of the approaches they advocate.
Session #2 (2/3)
To define or characterize rhetoric as a concept
To define or characterize criticism as act
To reflect on your prior work as a critic of rhetoric
Session Handouts
Session #9 Feminist Criticism (Diane Davis, UT, Austin)
Session #8
A history of feminism
"Residue" of Critical Description of Gandhi's Grievances; catalog of critical terms that may be used for analysis; terms selected on the basis of what "fits" with the qualities turned up in the description.
post all homework you complete on your wiki page
Week 1# Jan 28 for Feb 4 Goal; To assess the nature of your previous critical work To contextualize your previous work in new theory
1) Post on your wiki page your best paper from ComS 100B (or equivalent course if transferred)
2) Review your paper in light of our reading so far and
3) answer at least two of the following questions below the essay (Copy the questions, paste them in, then answer each in a short essay)
Was the text you examined, in fact, rhetoric? Justify your answer using what we've read so far.
What does your study teach someone about how the message studied worked as rhetoric? (If it didn't, freely admit that and explain what it did do.)
What seem to be the assumptionsyou were making about the critical process and critical product? (This asks you to do some analysis of your analysis--"going meta")
The best answers (score of 2) use
relevant examples from your essay to
illustrate assessments based on specific ideasfrom the readings, and
sources are cited in APA form
REMEMBER TO POST YOUR PAPER AND YOUR ANALYSIS OF IT ON YOUR WIKI PAGE.
Table of Contents
Course Resources
Syllabus
Course syllabusCourse calendar
Research resources
Readings
Pre-course readingsAssigned readings
Resource readings
Texts to analyze
Resource textbook:
Stoner, M. & Perkins, S. (2005). Making Sense of Messages: A Critical Apprenticeship in Rhetorical
Criticism.Boston: Allyn & Bacon
Assignments
RequiredOptional
Contract
Optional Assignment Sign-Up Calendar
Reading Comments Calendar
Session Objectives
Session#12Focus Group Release Form for your review
Session #11
Posters with answers to basic questions you treated:
Session #10
Critique of Birdsell & Groarke's treatment of "Visual Propositions"
B & G assert, "...even if highly abstracted and presenting only a fraction of the geographic information about a given location, a map purports to be an accurate ("true") representation of the arrangement of places in space" (p. 106). No, accuracy is irrelevant; rather we look for functional representations. For example, the London Tube Map is used daily by hundreds of thousands of people. The map is NOT "an accurate ("true") representation of the arrangement of places in space"; it is functional in representing an understandable guide to tube lines and stations but is completely inaccurate in representing location, distance, etc.
The Tube Map, while wildly distorting of almost every conceivable element of the London's existence, is exceptionally functional and meaningful.
London Tube Map
London Surface Map Shifted to match Tube Map
The link above shows how the Tube map distorts relative locations a surface map intended to function as a representation of relative location.
B & G go on to assert that, "Visual metaphors and symbols are used to convey propositions in political debate and discourse" (pp. 105-6). No, they may augment propositions but the foundation for rhetoric is essentially in discourse. Even they must comment on the Bush cartoons for them to make sense within the context of the article.
For further example, take a look at this cartoon:
You cannot know what this is about apart from being told what "Dale Farm" is; what a "traveller" is and the time frame and cultural location of this message. Even those to whom it was directed had to have information on those topics in order for the cartoon to have any meaning. Notice that once you are informed (discursively) about what Dale Farm is and what group of people "travellers" names, you can "get" the joke (you also bring already existing information about the class of people called "bankers" garnered from previous talk, readings, TV or internet viewing, etc; so all significant elements of the joke now are articulated.) At this point you can see the argument offered by the cartoon--but not because of its own visual merits!
OK, so B & G, finally get it right at the end in their discussion of context/s as controllers of and resources for understanding the potential implied assertions made by any visual element of any rhetorical effort.
Let's try another case or two....
Reading Comments Presenters:
Some pages from Graphic History text for discussion
Session #9
Reading Presenters:
Session #8
Reading Presenters:
Describing Barker's, Wanted....
Jig Saw: Tentative answers to questions that drive the course (i.e. final exam questions):
Class members present oral report on progress on term projects (2 mins each)
Session #7
Presenters on the New Rhetoric:
Dialectic defined
Session #6 (3/4)
Tasks
Review our progress on our objectives so far
Review calendar and projects upcoming
Objectives:
Session #5 (2/25)
- To determine the nature of "good reasons" within the framework of narrative paradigm
(Dr. Ian Stoner will speak to us briefly on the topic; he is lecturer in the Department of Philosophy, University of Minnesota)Reading commentators:
Michael Mann
Gloria Whalen
Revisit the "rudimentary search model" (session #4) to see where we can take the analysis.
Sessions #4 and 5 (2/18)
Begin narrative analysis (a rudimentary search model; use to describe the message)
Check out this dramatic version of The Machine Stops produced for an English TV series, Out of the Unknown:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ea1Lkm832s
Reading Commentators: Amanda Burk and Corbin Wright
Session #3 (2/11)
Overall goal: To explore the nature of knowledge that critics create about rhetoric/communication
Document to capture our definitions
Agree or disagree: In chapter 3 H & D offer a generic set of topics that appear to by "hyper-etic" (objective), but their use leads to a "hyper-emic" (subjective) treatment of messages
Agree or disagree: In Chapt 4 A Topical Approach to Ideas (p. 61 ff) H & D offer an etic approach; in "A Judgmental Approach to Ideas"(p.67ff) they offer and emic approach. I suggest that H & D are not sufficiently aware of the nature of the approaches they advocate.
Session #2 (2/3)
Session Handouts
Session #9Feminist Criticism (Diane Davis, UT, Austin)
Session #8
A history of feminism
Session #7
"Residue" of Critical Description of Gandhi's Grievances; catalog of critical terms that may be used for analysis; terms selected on the basis of what "fits" with the qualities turned up in the description.
Session #6
Perelman's Project (Prezi)
Session #5
Questions for assessing the logic of a narrative
Session #2
Homework
post all homework you complete on your wiki pageWeek 1# Jan 28 for Feb 4
Goal;
To assess the nature of your previous critical work
To contextualize your previous work in new theory
1) Post on your wiki page your best paper from ComS 100B (or equivalent course if transferred)
2) Review your paper in light of our reading so far and
3) answer at least two of the following questions below the essay (Copy the questions, paste them in, then answer each in a short essay)
The best answers (score of 2) use
- relevant examples from your essay to
- illustrate assessments based on specific ideas from the readings, and
- sources are cited in APA form
REMEMBER TO POST YOUR PAPER AND YOUR ANALYSIS OF IT ON YOUR WIKI PAGE.