Reflection Post

As everyone around scrambles to solidify their GPAs with strong performances on their final exams and the humid breeze sweeps across Norfolk, I am reminded that summer is upon us. I, as a student and amateur scholar, fondly reminisce on the last four months, reflecting on the knowledge gained and lessons learned in a class such as Rhetorical Criticism. Into the future I take with me the thought that in an environment overflowing with advertisements and marketing, propaganda and politics, propelled by the intention of control, all messages communicated by humans may be considered rhetoric. All messages between people contain a specific intent, whether conscious or not. By looking specifically at artifacts, or texts such as videos, books, scripts and the like, an individual can analyze the encoded message when armed with the proper techniques of critique. Utilizing such techniques can provide a person with a better understanding of themselves and of the people around them. It can also supply the person with a better understanding of the society they live in and the world around them as a whole. Elevating the human consciousness to create a more self-aware society that understands why things function the way they do and how they function can only improve upon the already established basis and further build towards the future in a more positive direction.

Though it may be difficult to first grasp techniques of rhetorical criticism on a path to a more enlightened environment, learning such criticism can be helpful to all members of society assisting them in contributing positively to the surrounding community, no matter local, national, or global.
In general, a knowledge of rhetorical criticism can be applied to many questions that a person might have in life and a answer, though not always satisfactory, can be concluded from research, study, and analysis. A closer look a gay rights in reference to comments made by politicians, a look at implied messages in the children's film Toy Story, or a study into the messages of N'sync as communicated through their hit singles, can all reveal certain rhetoric as relayed by the rhetor and effectively determine a conclusion as to the views behind the words or images.
One question that I personally have would be about the ideology and justification of war. To effectively come to a certain conclusion as to what that might be, I would have to look through the texts of time and research the views as communicated by those texts and find various themes, ideologies, metaphors, and other language techniques.
In retrospect of the class with all the knowledge of rhetorical criticism, one could most certainly pose any question and develop an answer for it through study of artifacts.

Final Essay Topic

The genre commonly referred to as conscious rap or political rap music holds a prominent role in Hip-Hop music. This sub genre has served over the years a a medium for critique on society. For the second essay that I will be writing, I have chosen to cover two musical artifacts from the genre of political rap. Lupe Fiasco's song "American Terrorist" and Nas's song "America" both lyrically commentate on modern American society, each artist offering their own takes on sociological issues plaguing this particular environment. Both songs seemingly focus on critiques in regards to inequality as related to minorities. I will be using the method of fantasy theme criticism to analyze the settings, characters, and actions as illustrated in the songs and compare and contrast the assumptions and opinions that each artist communicates in relation to these societal critiques.

Pentadic Criticism

According to the text, Pendatic Criticism is concerned with the content of what is being done and what are the motives behind a certain artifact as crafted by a rhetor. This method of criticism is greatly based in Burke's Theory of Dramatism which looks at life as a play where symbols and language are used to formulate thoughts in a neurological need for humans to make sense of the world. The artifact (as a play) is analyzed with special attention to these five aspects:

Agent - Who
Act - What
Scene - When/Where
Purpose - Why
Agency - How

In applying the pentadic method of criticism to the analysis of a university library. In a university library, the Agent would be those who funded the library and the university. The Act would be luring students to come participate in the seeking of knowledge through books, magazines and technologies. The Scene would be where a quiet, plain environment promotes the acquisition of knowledge and the pursuit of higher learning. The Scene is a clear area of tables and chairs, and books on shelves, along with various desks with computers for academic use. The Purpose is to maintain an educational organization focused on higher learning and hold a peaceful environment believed to be best for fueling the eager and curious mind. The Agency would be the individual department in charge of keeping and maintaining the library, most likely the academic department. Also, the Agency could be money itself and/or the actual materials which make up the university library.



The ratios in this artifact of the university library seem to point to the purpose to be the most dominant aspect. In way of applying the dramatist based theory, the purpose seems to take the forefront over all other aspects. Each of the other aspects supports the Purpose of a university library.

Ideological Criticism

In Chapter 7 of the book Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration and Practice the Fourth Edition, the author Sonja J. Foss prefaces her explanation of Ideological Criticism with a basic definition to outline the idea of ideology. Foss offers the reader an example to think of ideology as a language, so to speak. With this language one perceives the world in a particular fashion, funneling all external happenings through previously held ideas which allows a person to compare, categorize, and make sense about the matter. This language is developed through life experiences in a formulations of ideas that reflect "fundamental social economic, political, or cultural interests."

Neo-Aristotelian Criticism

World:

"Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration and Practice", the Fourth Edition book by Sonja K. Foss covers the topic of Neo-Aristotelian Criticism in Chapter Three. With Neo-Aristotelian Criticism being the first method of rhetorical criticism, it was unclear how this approach differed from that of literary criticism. It was necessary to differentiate between the two. Many of those intellects who specialized in communication hoped to progress the field, developing a unique identity so as to offer a specific approach to analyzing and criticizing culture.
Neo-Aristotelian Criticism looks to analyze certain aspects of the artifact in question that focus on the speaker. These aspects that a critic must look at include "the speaker's personality, the public character of the speaker or the public's perception of the speaker, the audience, the major ideas presented in the speech, the motives to which the speaker appealed, the nature of the speaker's proofs, the speaker's judgment of human nature in the audience, the arrangement of the speech, the speaker's method of speech preparation, the manner of delivery, and the effect of the discourse on the immediate audience and its long-term effects" (22). While looking at these elements the critic performing the rhetorical criticism must consider the speaker's means of communicated with the specified audience.
As reported by Foss, there are three basic steps in using the Neo-Aristotelian method to analyze an artifact which include reconstructing the context, applying the canon, and assessing the effects. In reconstructing the context it is important to survey the background of the speaker, analyze the occasion of the event which the artifact was presented, and by examining the audience who is being subjected to the rhetorical artifact. Next a critic would apply the canon of classical rhetoric. The characteristics of the canon are invention, organization, style, delivery, and memory. Lastly, in assessing the effects of the artifact, the critic interprets whether the intended goal of the rhetorical device was achieved and how effective it was in achieving that goal.

Introduction

Salutations:

I would like to welcome everyone as we undertake a task certain to bring relentless adventure and heaps of understanding into our academic lives. By way of logging entries onto this website, I look to enlighten not only myself, but also the legions of readers who will stumble across the works I will assemble in the coming months. My search for answers in the ever shrinking universe we live in along with my fascination of human society has led down this path to study the ancient way of the rhetor in the name of the acquisition of knowledge. The wondrous world of "civilized" humans meticulously and painstakingly developed over the past centuries has been directed by the ways of rhetor's and the artifacts which they create, whether it be speeches, writings, art, architecture, or media. I look to, as required of a student of this course, gain a general understanding of rhetorical criticism and (with the instructor willing) gain some hands on experience in writing rhetorical criticism of my own.
Until next time, this is "Rhetor's World" and you are living in it...