Blog #2

1. So, I did not get a chance to tell my embarrassing story to the class but I suppose here is my opportunity!
I lived in Los Angeles (well, technically, The San Fernando Valley) from July 2006-January 2010. At one point in time during my inhabitance in California, I dated a guy who worked as a Casting Assistant on NBC's revival of American Gladiators. Typically, with television shows and movies, there is a "wrap party" held at the end of the season/filming. Well, the wrap party for American Gladiators allowed cast and crew to bring a plus one. Naturally, I was my then boyfriends plus one.


 The wrap party was held at a club in Hollywood and was flooded with the Gladiator athletes, NBC executives, minor celebrities, etc. There was food and drink and most importantly an OPEN BAR. A special alcoholic drink called "The Eliminator" was created in honor of the toughest course on the show. I immediately took advantage of the open bar situation and guzzled down several Eliminators proclaiming, "I don't think there's hardly any alcohol in these! It tastes like Ecto Coolers!" (for those of you who don't remember remember, Ecto Coolers were the Ghost Buster HI-C drink box with Slimer on the front).

The evening went from exciting to nauseating within a few short hours. My stomach began to churn and the room began to spin. "I think I'm going to be sick!" I declared. I was desperate to escape the loud music, flashing lights and high status attendees. My boyfriend was in no mood to deal with my drunkenness and was trying to mingle with higher ups in order to make contacts for possible jobs. I grabbed his arm and insisted that we leave the party immediately! I pulled him through the crowds while he protested our leaving. Suddenly, I couldn't hold my drinks in my body any longer. BLARGH! I puked all over the floor of the club. RIGHT IN FRONT OF SOME NBC EXECUTIVES. I could care less who the people were that i threw up in front of, but my boyfriend cared VERY MUCH. Needless to say, he was extremely upset with me and made sure I knew "just who those people were". The worst part? I had eaten Panda Express earlier that day...so my vomit was mixed with rice.  Upon which looking at I remarked, "aw, that was really good rice too!"


The moral of the story? Beware of open bars and drinks that taste like juice boxes!


2) McCloud describes amplification through simplification through cartoon faces. "Common wisdom holds that [a] photograph...[is] an icon that most resembles its real-life counterpart" (McCloud 198). But say, a cartooned drawing of the photograph eliminates the detailed features held in the photograph and creates a more abstract version of the same face. However,  McCloud explains that when a face is cartonned, “we’re not so much eliminating details as we are focusing on details” (McCloud 201. ) McCloud suggests that when an image is simplified, or cartoonized, we can more easily project our image onto that face. We can view it as a reflection of ourselves. The narrator claims that if he had a more realistically detailed face, the reader would not absorb the message because the reader would have, "...been far too aware of the messenger to receive the message" (McCloud 208). Thus, we must take care to amplify the right details and drop the right details to create a balance between reader and message.


Works Cited
McCloud, Scott. “The Vocabulary of Comics”. Visual Rhetoric in a Digital World. Ed. Carolyn Handa. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martins, 2004, 195-208.

Rhetoric retold

Below I reposted my interpretation of the article from DTC 475, as I still feel the same. However, I added an additional section at the end.

1) The definition of rhetoric, as described by Foss et. al, is captured within the first few paragraphs of the article, "...rhetoric is the human use of symbols to communicate" (Foss, Foss, and Trapp 1). I waded through the rest of the article and its historical outline of rhetoric, however, found that the most meaningful part of the article was in, as I stated before, the first few paragraphs. Upon thinking about this, I realized that my interpretation of the histories of rhetoric is a form of rhetoric in and of itself! For example, the article states, "...the symbols through which our realities are filtered affect and perhaps determine our view of the book and how we are motivated to act toward it" (Foss, Foss and Trapp 2).

I viewed the cataloging of rhetoric as dry and unfulfilling. However, I gained a greater grasp of the meaning of rhetoric through modern day examples and direct definitions given at the beginning of the article. What helped me in particular was the examples of how situations today can be rhetorical, "is someone an alcoholic or morally depraved? Is a child misbehaved or unable to concentrate because of an attention deficit disorder?" (Foss, Fossm and Trapp 2). To that end, does a chronological explanation of rhetoric provide clarity of its meaning or do examples of modern rhetorical situations provide clarity? While all the information in the article is relevant to the subject, its relevance to the individual may vary.

I sincerely hope I am understanding this concept of rhetoric correctly! If not, please let me know!

 As a cell phone owner, user and texter, I am automatically entered into a realm of digital rhetoric. When texting, one must interpret typed words from the perspective of a "cell phone user". If your friend texts you, "I WILL BE THERE SOON" - it could be interpreted as an angry text (because of the upper-case letters), or it could be interpreted as a mistake (he/she must have accidentally had Caps Lock on) or it could be interpreted as urgent (urgency to be there soon marked by the upper-case letters), etc. The upper-case letters are the symbols with which we are interpreting the message. These interpretation of this symbol could be affected by; mood, time of day, relationship with the sender, place, etc.

Other symbols related to texting include; emoticons, acronyms, and picture/video texts. Each of these represent symbols to be interpreted by the receiver.


2) Google definitions: 


"Rhetoric can describe a persuasive way in which one relates a theme or idea in an effort to convince" (WordIQ Dictionary)


"Cicero: Rhetoric is "speech designed to persuade" (Stanford University).

3) I began reading this article while my boyfriend was sitting next to me and I said aloud, "hey, I've already read this article!" He asked me what it was about and I said, "rhetoric". He asked me what "rhetoric" is. I looked around his room in search of an example I could illustrate. I stood up and pointed to his Avengers Invader

poster. "What do you notice about all of the male characters in this poster?" I asked him. His immediate response was, "they are all visibly muscular and fit". Precisely! I began to explain that the muscularity of the male figures in the poster was a form of rhetoric. The muscles are SYMBOLIC of the 'masculinity' or 'manliness' that are seemingly expected of superheroes. The muscularity can affect the viewers perception of what a"superhero" should look like. If a male superhero is pudgy or very thin, does it make him less powerful or 'cool'? To that end, if the average MALE isn't muscular, is he less of a man?

Perhaps my example was off the mark a bit - I am unsure. Please, let me know though!

Works Cited

Foss, Sonja K., Karen A. Foss, and Robert Trapp. Prespective on Rhetoric. 3rd ed. Waveland Press INC., 1-9. Print.


"A Few Definitions of Rhetoric." Stanford University. Web. 12 Jan. 2011. <http://www.stanford.edu/dept/english/courses/sites/lunsford/pages/defs.htm>.


"Rhetoric - Definition." Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - WordIQ Dictionary. Web. 12 Jan. 2011. <http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Rhetoric>.