Archive for March, 2008

Things I Know About Me.

Published on March 19, 2008 in Uncategorized. 0 Comments

My name is Eric Thomas. I am from Omaha, Nebraska.

This is Omaha…

omaha0025.jpg

But when I tell people I’m from Omaha, they think…

nebraskaland.jpg

Omaha, NE. Home of ConAgra Foods, which produce such brands as Hunt’s Ketchup, Orville Redenbacher’s popcorn, and Manwich canned Sloppy Joe Mix among other famous food brands.

manwich1.JPG

The Reuben. The Reuben sandwich was likely invented in Omaha by Reuben Kulakofsky. According to one version of the sandwich’s disputed history, it was first introduced to the world in 1925 on a menu in one of the Blackstone’s restaurants. Butter brickle ice cream was also first introduced to the world at the Blackstone.

blackstone.JPG

Malcolm X. I have been infatuated with Malcolm X ever since I read The Autobiography of Malcolm X: As Told to Alex Haley in high school (and then again in college). Malcolm X was born Malcolm Little on May 19, 1925 in North Omaha, at 3348 Pinkney Street, three blocks south of Druid Hill Elementary (where I went to school).

malcolm1.jpg

Enrollment Statistics for Druid Hill Elementary School:

dnc-9879160922.png

Browline glasses. Invented in 1947 by Jack Rohrbach, browline eyeglasses made up almost half of all the eyeglasses sold during the 1950s. As of 2008, Shuron is still producing these frames.

eric-with-glasses-blog-bw2.JPG

Dead Writers. Ernest Hemingway took his own life on the morning of July 2, 1961 at his home in Ketchum, Idaho with a shotgun blast to the head. In 1964, Hunter S. Thompson traveled to Ketchum in order to investigate Hemingway’s suicide. Thompson stole a pair of elk entlers above the front door of Hemingway’s cabin. On February 20, 2005, Hunter S. Thompson died from a self-inflicted gunshot sound to the head.

hem_with_gun.jpgelkhorn1.jpgthompson_hunters_320×240.jpg

Wu-Tang. Wu-Tang Clan’s love affair with chess is well documented. Wu leader RZA is a certified Chess King, and he’s got the 20-pound, gold-plated leather belt to prove it.

rza.jpg

Kool Keith. First emerged as part of the legendary New York crew, the Ultramagnetic MCs, back in 1987. From the Ultramags to his own solo releases under a number of different identities (i.e. Dr. Dooom, Black Elvis, and Dr. Octagon), Kool Keith has been responsible for now-classic hip-hop records, each one a testament to his bugged out sensibility and lyrical genius. On the critically-lauded Dr. Octagonecologyst (1996), Kool Keith played the role of a sexually deviant doctor.

kool-keith.jpgdr-octagon.png

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9VYzNUXGDA" width="425" height="355" wmode="transparent" /]

Fin.

March 18: The Continuing Story of Eric Taking Notes…

Published on March 18, 2008 in Uncategorized. 0 Comments

Writing New Media: Theory and Applications for Expanding the Teaching of Composition (2004)

I think we should call “new media texts” those that have been made by composers who are aware of the range of materialities of texts and who then highlight the materiality: such composers design texts that help readers/consumers/viewers stay alert to how any text–like its composers and readers–doesn’t function independently of how it is made and in what contexts. Such composers design texts that make as overtly visible as possible the values they embody (15).

Under this definition, new media texts do not have to be digital; instead, any text that has been designed so that its materiality is not effaced can count as new media (15).

David John Damon. “By the end of the year, he had failed out of the university–primarily because he couldn’t produce a traditional essay organized according to the print-based literacy standards of linear propositional logic, Standard English, argumentative development, and standard spelling” (49).

By adding a focus on visual literacy to our existing focus on alphabetic literacy, we may not only learn to pay more serious attention to the ways in which students are now ordering and making sense of the world through the production and consumption of visual images, but we may also extend the usefulness of composition studies in a changing world (72).

USEFUL VOCABULARY (from Kress and van Leeuwan’s Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design)

Visual impact: The overall effect and appeal that a visual composition has on an audience.

Visual coherence: The extent to which visual elements of a composition are tied together with color, shape, image, lines of sight, theme, etc.

Visual salience: Importance or prominence of a visual element.

Visual organization: Pattern of arrangement that relates the elements of the visual essay to one another in a way that makes them easier for readers/viewers to comprehend (76).

If educators hope to prepare citizens who can “participate fully” in new forms of “public, community, and economic life”–in other words–we must teach them to design communications using “modes of representation much broader than language alone” (55).

Caesura–the stylistic device most absent in our curricula (123).

Jeff Rice’s assignment asking students to pick the date of their choice and research what was happening then in areas such as history, politics, literature, film, comics, music, art, business, or science, building a hypertext catalogue of the results (Rice, then, has unwittingly re-invented Maciunas’s famous “Biography Boxes”) (125).

Another writer see as one of the “limitation” of new media work that “much of the information found on the Web does not meet the standards of text in print” (page 120).

Eye-Witnessing

Published on March 17, 2008 in Uncategorized. 2 Comments

This book contains a delightful assortment of assignment ideas.

I have been truly inspired by the Holy Spirit of New Media. In fact, I plan on imposing the “materialities of seeing” on my peers and fellow instructors by subjecting them to the exercise “eye-witnessing” as described on page 24. Whether my 8010 peers approve or not, they can expect me to interrupt their classrooms when I run in and shout, “Where’s Kim? Have you seen Kim?” and run off as quickly as I appeared. Or maybe I’ll just bang on the windows and shout, “Hey, you! Don’t you look at me, you puzzle-wit!”

I thought about dressing up in a garish costume (my ideas includes a long mustache, a cane, and my Italian straw boater’s hat, etc.), but then I thought it would better test the notion of “eye-witnessing” if I appeared as inconspicuous and everyday as possible.

And I don’t intend on letting you know when I plan on running into your classroom. I can’t trust you to “act” nonplussed. You’re reaction must be as genuine as your students.

Oh yes! Be prepared, my 8010 peers. Like it or not, I am coming to your classroom this fall.

“Where’s Kim? Have you seen Kim!?”

Post #47

Published on March 17, 2008 in Uncategorized. 0 Comments

paul-simon-blog.JPG

Filling in the gaps.

Published on March 16, 2008 in Uncategorized. 2 Comments

Hello, my 8010 peers. I have returned from the great states of Nebraska/Iowa, and I’d like to know what I missed during my absence. Columbia appears to be in one piece, but who knows, there might be a disease looming beneath the surface.

So, what’s the skinny?

What happened in 8010 while I was away?

Are we still known as the University of Missouri, or did we change our name while I was gone?

Did Rhetoric & Composition hold a coup and split from the English department?

Did Rebecca dye her hair eight different colors over the past week?

Are freshmen in the Writing Lab still deconstructing the Lord of the Flies and the war in Iraq?

Who thinks it was all downhill for The Clash after their debut self-titled 1977 LP?? (And don’t give me the usual jargon and critical aphorisms about London Calling.)

And so forth, etc. …ad infinitum.

Textbook Review II: Envision

Published on March 9, 2008 in Textbook Reviews. 0 Comments

–Envision: Writing and Researching Arguments

–By Christine L. Alfano and Alyssa J. O’Brien. Pearson Education, 2008.

I feel unable to write this review without referencing (i.e. comparing it to) my first textbook review on Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students. The editors of Ancient Rhetorics thoroughly emphasized invention rather than convention.

That being said, Envision: Writing and Researching Arguments implicitly emphasizes convention under the guise of invention. What I label as “conventional,” the editors of Envision describe as “time-honored writing techniques based on classical rhetoric” (xiii).

And surely, the “classical rhetoric” espoused in Envision does not refer to the same sophistic rhetoric and process pedagogy described in Ancient Rhetorics. Rather, the “classical rhetoric” in Envision seems to fall in line with the formulaic “modern rhetoric” disparaged in Ancient Rhetorics.

To be fair, the editors of Envision are quite comfortable with these “time-honored” conventions: “We walk students through interactive lessons on crafting thesis statements, structuring argumentative essays, developing research topics, evaluating sources, integrated quotations, revising papers, and, finally, designing and presenting effective presentations and writing projects (xiii). And don’t forget the token chapter on documentation and plagiarism.

Let me return to my initial statement: Envision emphasizes convention under the guise of invention. What I mean by “under the guise of invention” is that the book employs images, advertisements, cartoons, films, and other contemporary examples in an attempt to capture student interest while also building a “solid rhetorical foundation” in the core skills of analysis, argument, and research writing.

However, the pairing of contemporary media and “time-honored writing techniques” feels a little arbitrary and superficial at times. For example, editorial cartoon and comic strips are paired exclusively with a chapter on “analyzing texts” and developing thesis statements, while film and movie trailers are paired with a chapter on “organizing and writing research arguments.” The chosen media focus that parallels each chapter is perhaps a bit random. (But I would never deny my enjoyment of Calvin and Hobbes.)

[Note: this textbook, like Ancient Rhetorics, mentions Jon Stewart of The Daily Show. This must be a new requirement of composition textbooks.]

Now, whereas Ancient Rhetorics belittled the value of the personal narrative and expressive discourse, Envision has got you covered. A number of the “Writing Projects” and “Creative Practices” in this textbook ask students transform their reflections into a personal narrative essay.

Moreover, the editors of Envision are proponents of collaborative pedagogy, and each chapter contains a “Collaborative Challenge” that asks students to work together and often share their results with the class.

Interspersed throughout the textbook are invitations to check out “Student Writing” online. For example, during the chapter on pathos and “appeals to emotion,” the text invites you to check out Cyrus Chee’s rhetorical analysis of “two poster ads for contemporary films about the Holocaust.” Check it out at www.ablongman.com/envision/207.

Are you a thesis junkie? Well, Envision can calm those jitters and hook you up with a cheap fix. Whether it’s the six steps to developing a working thesis, or simply the abundant examples of clear and persuasive thesis statements, Envision can quench your thirst for significance in a single sentence.

So, Eric. Is this textbook practical?

Well, if you’re thinking about assigning five-paragraph essays, then Envision might be able to provide some colorful assistance. If you’re thinking about deconstructing advertisements, Envision could prove useful. There is potential here, but it’s all about how the instructor selectively reaps the benefits.

P.S. – Doesn’t “Envision,” the title itself, kinda sound like a pyramid scheme?

Textbook Review I: Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students

Published on March 9, 2008 in Textbook Reviews. 3 Comments

–Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students. Fourth Edition.

–By Sharon Crowley and Debra Hawhee.  Pearson Education, 2009.

First and foremost, this textbook defied nearly all of the assumptions that I had formed simply (and narrow-mindedly) based on the notion of “ancient rhetorics.”

I initially assumed that this textbook would be conservative – a proponent of the “philosophical rhetoric” outlined and bludgeoned by Victor Vitanza.

I was wrong. This textbook is forward-thinking and rooted in cultural studies, adopting the ancient premise “that nobody thinks or writes without reference to the culture in which he or she lives” (xii). (I shouldn’t have ignored the key phrase “for contemporary students” located in the title.)

Indeed, this textbook does consistently delve into facets and terminology of Aristotle’s Rhetoric, but the book does not treat Aristotle as the “be-all, end-all.” (The editors even call him “grumpy” at one point.) Furthermore, the textbook abundantly cites the sophists (i.e. Protagoras, Gorgias, Isocrates, etc.) and lauds their enormous contributions to rhetoric.

The editors openly disparage what they call “modern rhetoric,” that is, the generic formulas, outlines, thesis statements, and conventional approaches to essay writing. “For example, modern rhetoric textbooks insist that every composition display a thesis. Ancient teachers, in contrast, were not so sure that every discourse has a thesis to display” (9). The predominant emphasis of this textbook remains focused on invention rather convention, and this attitude reflects a process-oriented pedagogy rather than a product-oriented pedagogy.

In ancient times, the study of rhetoric was equivalent to the study of citizenship. Thus, the editors avoid an ego-driven pedagogy that begins and ends with the self, and instead argue for the importance of inserting one’s voice within the discourse of a community.

As a result, this textbook never asks students to write personal essays or to generate expressive discourse. “We do not accept the assumption that writing should begin with personal expression and move outward into expository and persuasive modes” (xv).

The book is openly political at times. The editors acknowledge that “power is distributed unequally in our culture… that men have more power than women and that white people have more power than people of color” (page 6). Accordingly, the editors assert that rhetoric has the potential to remedy these inequities among citizens.

The language of the textbook is accessible and lucid (“An ancient teacher of rhetoric named Aristotle defined rhetoric as…”), perhaps meant to accommodate the freshman level of understanding and to “balance out” the foreignness of ideas like kairos and stasis theory. Moreover, the book frequently cites current events (e.g., the shooting at Virginia Tech) and popular figures (e.g., Jon Stewart of the Daily Show) to appeal to the typical freshman’s sense of relevance and taste.

Show me another textbook that employs a comparison of Achilles and Hector, followed by a comparison of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to help elucidate the meaning of ethos and ethical proof.

Each of the twelve chapters ends with a number of “Rhetorical Activities” and progymnasmata (the elementary rhetorical exercises used in ancient schools of rhetoric). Interestingly, the notion of thesis was the last, and most difficult, of the progymnasmata completed by ancient students of rhetoric.

But you want to know: Is the book useful? Would you use it in your class?

The text is long (over 400 pages) with few pictures and illustrations. Some of the concepts are dense and probably not worth introducing to an incoming freshman. Therefore, I probably wouldn’t use the book as a whole. Nevertheless, the three central chapters on logos, ethos, and pathos could prove incredibly useful for a freshman composition course. Is it legal for me to make photo copies of these chapters, and thus avoid having freshman buy the book?

8010 Notes. Monday 4, 2008.

Published on March 4, 2008 in Uncategorized. 0 Comments

From Rice’s blog:

What are the readings complicating regarding the teaching of writing? Assignment creation?

To pose an assignment as part of a Thing, or circulation, then, means you have to think of the Whole, not part.

This means you have to think of the class, not the one assignment. Our challenge now is to be seeing the class as a whole, not as scattered pieces.

Let’s start in that direction: Class goals. Context. Book. Day to day.

Particularly if you are imagining argument or critique as central to the work you will do.

Rather than pro/con, controversial issue, “something of importance,” or related assignment that does not get at what this week’s readings propose, construct the assignment(s) within the larger course based on the whole. In other words, don’t teach the matter of fact assignment (Latour). Instead, can you teach to write matters of concern (Latour)?

First step: what would you read? (invention - see Walker, Corder)

Second step: what does that reading allow students to do? (rhetoric - see Vitanza, Brodkey, Davis, Ray, Barthes)

Third step: what are the larger issues, “gatherings,” gestures, moves, material conditions you want students to engage with and express?

Fourth step: how would students go about researching or exploring the issue/problem/idea/gesture (Johnson) or use the details of their research (Brooke) to remake, rethink, redo (Harris) and rethink assumptions (Skorczewski) in an inventive way (Ulmer, Bishop) where language drives the work (Vitanza, Hartwell, Williams)?

What would be gathered or assembled or added in such research (Latour)?

How might the course/assignment/writing be intertextual/inter-connected (Vitanza)?