Sin City, USA
Last night’s Democratic Preseidential debate was held in Las Vegas; it was broadcast from UNLV. Nevada has earned an early caucus slot this presidential election cycle, different from previous years, and so the state’s issues have been in the news as candidates have been paying significant attention to Nevadans’ needs (thus the geography of the last night’s contest).
In the lead up to the debate, the Online NewsHour presented a comprehensive series of reports on the Silver State’s state: “Big Picture: Las Vegas”. A great series well worth taking a look at. It’d do you well to be informed, and you may find that Nevadans and Arizonans share some common concerns.
I’ll be posting the question form later tonight for those that took advantage of the extra-credit opportunity last night. Get it to me by the end of the middle of next week, please.
The Democratic Debate
Girard here, with Casey, Logus, Mike, Areanna, Blaise, Andre, and both Hannahs watching the Democratic Presidential debate being broadcast from UNLV. We’re having an awesome time here in T-12!
We’re all about schemes and tropes, common ground and values, emotional manipulation, and political slipperiness tonight.
Senator Joe Biden, Governor Bill Richardson, Representative Dennis Kucinich, Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Chris Dodd, and Senator John Edwards are ducking, dodging, and dancing around the issues Americans are concerned about.
Is there any better way to spend a Thursday night? I can’t think of one.
Go republican democracy! Go Casey for bringing pizza!
Linkjam!
“LinkJam!” is a new feature I’ve decided to implement on the site. It’s my own delightful take on “logjam”. A linkjam happens when I get backed up posting links to text or a sties that I think may be relevant to class. Logjam/linkjam. Get it?
Instead of writing a post for every neat link I think may complement something we’ve discussed in class, which can be time-consuming, I’ll post a few links at a time with a little description about each.
Mike A. asked about Stephen Colbert’s recent effort to get on the South Carolina presidential primary ballot. The satirist was unsuccessful in his home state, but found support in Virginia: “Colbert in Three-Way Tie for Water Board Seat”.
On the topic of elections, it seems some of the post-secondary members of your Generation Y cohort are more materially- than politically-minded: “Most at NYU say their vote has a price”. God bless America!
Finally, for APELC students, as we prepare to read The Autobiography of Malcolm X, take a minute to read over this article about a recent investigation by the Pew Research Center: “Study: Black pessimism worst since 1980s”. Consider this reality as we begin to see the world through the lens of Malcolm X’s worldview.
Language in Flux
Here’s an ignorant statement I heard on a recent episode of Grammar Girl from the podcaster herself regarding nominative and objective pronouns:
I hate it when language is in flux [. . .] because it’s easy to get confused. But a lot of people have asked me these questions, and in the end, I believe it’s best to know the traditional rules and then if you decide to break them you can do so knowingly and with conviction.
All languages are always in flux. All languages change over time. So called “traditional grammar” rules are merely one set (and not standardized set, mind you) of prescriptive usage strictures that, according to context and taste, can be applied to certain politcal, social, academic, and cultural situations.
Don’t be fooled by the usage-mavens, kids. Language is powerul, infinitely creative, and not confined easily to monlithic rules of “correct” and “incorrect”. Don’t allow others who think they maintain some special standard of language perfection make you feel ashamed about your English use.
Think You’re Challenged?
Whenever I hear students wonder aloud why their lives must be filled so with untenable adversity, I try to offer something that might help them realize the advantages they enjoy, advantages they may daily take for granted. And I don’t just mean the manifold opportunities they have at school or the variety of choices they have living in free-market America. I mean something even more fundamental, something like the use of their hands. Thus this recent USA Today article on foot and mouth painters: “Disabled artists get broad stroke of resilience”.
I’ve mentioned foot and mouth painters to students many times before, almost every year with every new batch of kids that come through my door, and highlight what a man or woman can do if he or she is determined despite seemingly insurmountable odds:
Dig that.
“Student Collapses”
No homily, no lesson, no comment―just a sad story: “Student collapses, dies after taking test”.
Cussin’ and Spittin’
You might hear me drop an expletive or two if you were listening to me and my friends shootin’ the breeze around the grill on a Saturday afternoon or if I stubbed my toe in the middle of the night heading to the kitchen for a glass of water. But would I lace my conversation with choice taboo words if I were meeting with Dr. Gemma? Or swear up and down to punctuate my points in front of your folks during parents’ night? Probably not in those situations.
I swear, many of you swear, lots of people swear. Some might tell you that swearing is never appropriate. I’d argue that it would depend upon the context you find yourself in. Here’s some comforting news on the taboo language front from the BBC: “Swearing at work can ‘cut stress’”
Got a thought? Leave it by clicking the link above.
“Cool” Will Never Go Out of Style
Why don’t I hear people use “bitchin’” to describe something that’s bitchin’ anymore? The first time I remember hearing the word used publicly―I’d heard it many time at school in California―was during a 1985 episode of Friday Night Videos by Michael J. Fox the evening he and Justine Batemen, riding the wave of popularity generated by their joint work on Family Ties and his star-turns in Teen Wolf and Back to the Future, guest hosted the program. The next time I heard it boldly in public was on an episode of The Simpsons, “Brush with Greatness”, when Bart hollers it as he goes down the H2WHOA! at Mt. Splashmore. It’s never completely been ameliorated, and remains slightly taboo (but I’m on a quest, as you know).
Scientific American, recently published a piece on rates of change in language: “Use It or Lose It”. It seems the more a construct enjoys popular use the more it tends to become embedded in the standard and less subject to change and loss. So, it’s up to us on the cutting edge of language to keep words like “jaunty” and “puissant” in vogue lest we lose them to history.
CUL8R!
The Myth of Che
Human beings love icons, indexes, and symbols. Wedding rings, sunglasses, dwellings, statues, flags, banners, cars, posters, money―all of these are in some way iconic, indexical, or symbolic in nature. Don’t think you have your own appreciations? Look at the way you style yourself for public consumption, think of the words that come out of your mouth, think of the fetishes you enjoy. Maybe it’s collecting troll dolls, or maybe it’s the new rims you just got for your ride, or maybe it’s the books you read in public spaces with the covers showing ever so slightly so that others can wonder at the genius who’d read such great works―each of these, and almost everything we do is somehow metaphorical or tropic (see number 2).
What happens when symbols are turned on their heads? (Witness the irreversible change in conventional meaning of the swastika from its roots.) What happens when a symbol of Marxist social and economic revolution becomes a meaningless icon for commercial consumption? Read about it at The Economist, “A modern saint and sinner”.
Leave a comment by clicking the link above.
What Age to Drink?
Here’s a fun one. One of the standard topics floating around the agora is that which relates to the age at which it’s legally permissible for people to drink alcohol. So dear is it to many young people’s hearts that it became a point of discussion at the Dartmouth Democratic debate in September, which engendered the following piece at ABC News, “Group Stirs Debate on Legal Drinking Age”.
I’m always particularly interested in how students and other young people tend to work this issue out. Of course, the standard line goes something like this, because I (any young person under the age of 21) am old enough to vote and to enlist to fight and perhaps die for my country at the age of 18, I should also be allowed the right to consume alcohol at 18 also. Interesting, although I’d argue that the reasoning is fallacious, perhaps of the common practice, even red herring varieties.
One of the main problems with this type of argument is that youth generally want it both ways, the “it” being that they be evaluated differently according to their age according to the situation. For example, while some young people I’ve spoken with have towed the lower-the-drinking-age-in-consideration-of-our-maturity line above, they’ve simultaneously argued, in defense of Monica Lewinsky, that she was young and naive when she began her indiscretions with President Clinton, that she be, if not forgiven, at least reevaluated mercifully in consideration of her age. (She was older than the legal drinking age at the time of her dalliance with the President.)
In regards to the original subject, check out this summary of the research on the minimum legal drinking age. So, what say you? Argue away by clicking the link above.
The Rhetoric of the Helmet
Helmets have to be cool. So argues Tyler Hansen in an article in today’s Star, evaluating the football helmets of several of southern Arizona’s high school teams. Among the headgear being judged, my former school’s deep blue and flaming “P” (cool site, no?) and CDO’s own unmistakable Dorado-embellished green (level 1).
Why do they have to be “cool” (level 3)? What’s the uniform, in general, arguing (level 2 leading to level 3)? What else is there to note about the uniforms not only our athletes and others wear, but the ones we wear everyday (levels 1 and 2)? (Do we wear uniforms? You bet we do. And everything we wear and how we put it together―presentation, figure, logos―as you know, is an argument.)
Click the link above to comment.
A Little Scheme
Here’s an interesting piece of cultural history about and insight into the rhetorical possibilities of a very simple piece of text, a little percussion scheme (presentation, figure, logos) from the Winstons’ 1969 song “Amen, Brother”. It’s called the Amen break or just the Amen.
You’ve probably heard this riff before because it’s been manipulated over forty years by a variety of “speakers” to appeal to a variety of audiences in a variety of contexts, that is, it’s been used to establish a common ground (ethos) and anticipate and manipulate audiences’ emotions (pathos) according to the context in which those audiences exist. Be aware that a snippet of an NWA rap is used in the following video and contains language that you or Mom and Dad may find objectionable. (Why not listen to it with them and show them how to process the text?).
The particular information I thought interesting and relevant to class was the versatility of the six-second scheme, the Amen break itself. But the creator of the video, itself a piece a rhetoric built around an argument, has a different purpose than just to expose auditors to a piece of groovy music. How do read his message?
Leave a comment by clicking the above link.
“Pushing the Limit”
Something new to be added to the annals of high school jackassery, some members of the student body at Oyster River High School in Durham, New Hampshire tried to pull a fast one on the rest of their graduating classmates. Many decided not to participate in the idiocy that their money was used for. Good for them. Here’s the story: “‘Pushing the Limit’: High School Senior Tee-Shirt Features Concerning .08 Image”.
Elections ‘07 and ‘08
Are you paying attention? I hope so. There’s more going on and there’s more at stake than you probably realize. I just added some new links to the Activism page that will lead you to vital election information.
I encourage you who are interested in Presidential electioneering (which should be all of you, that is, the seniors and juniors who’ll be voting next year, and even the freshmen who’ll be in a few years) to check out the Online NewsHour’s Vote 2008 pages with even coverage of all the Democratic and Republican hopefuls. So called commerical, “mainstream” media devote very little, or at least not equal, time to any candidates but the frontrunners. Are you gonna trust CNN and FOX and CBS and NBC and ABC to deliver the whole story?
I hope you’ll take the time to educate yourselves. Maybe it’s not as fun as watching “That 70’s Show” or “Parental Control”, but it’s important. I mean it. Important like you can’t even begin to believe. Be informed by informing yourself―it’s your responsibility as a citizen of the state of Arizona and the United States of America.
Here’s something you won’t necessarily see on FOX or CNN except as the butt of a joke, the debut campaign video from former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel who’s currently seeking the Democratic Presidential party nomination:
And check out the Senator’s recent interview on the NewsHour―very different from other candidates. Amateur rhetors: Speaker, context, audience, argument? Presentation? Common ground or values? Emotional anticipations or manipulations? Action? I dare you to give it a try.
Gotta Problem with Our Monitors?
This is what’s happening to your peers in the state next door.
More here, “School guard assault”, and here, “Mothers seek action from school after children suspended”.
“Don’t taze me, bro!”
English language aesthete Grammar Girl addressed word creation in her most recent podcast, “Verbification of a Noun”, apropos of our class discussion last week in which we discussed the transformation of a noun to a verb. “Can it be done?” asked one of Grammar Girl’s listeners. “Yes, it can”, she answered, but in cautious, warning tones. Of course, Grammar Girl would never let out that language really isn’t the ”pure” monolith she and other grammar mavens preach and want the genral public to believe.
What Grammar Girl was talking about is a morphological process of derving new words by affixing bound and even free morphemes (words and parts of words like prefixes and suffixes) to existing words, thereby changing their category (part of speech). She discussed the “verbification” of the noun ”TASER” (itself and acronym for Thomas A. Swift’s Electric Rifle) to the verb “taze”. We derive new words in this manner. And you know what? It’s okay to do, and you’d do well to remember it the next time you get Eiffel Towered.
And there’s even more action on the morphology front: The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary is now less 16,000 hyphenated words, that is the hyphens have been dropped from many compounds. The story, “A Farewell to Hyphens”, suggests that this change indicates a move toward American spelling standards. How will usage purists react to this?
Wanna comment? Ain’t no problem. Click the link above.
Jena, LA and Little Rock, AR
On Thursday some APELC students were considering the context of Gloria Naylor’s “The Meanings of a Word” and wondering about issues of racism and violence. It’d be nice to think that particularly in the West, we’ve begun to overcome differences of race and ethnicity, but make no mistake: Racism and racially motivated violence (and the eruptions that ensue) are alive and well in the 21st century and in no way are threatening to abate. Witness the winter 2000 riots in Spain, spring 2001 riots in Cincinnati, Ohio, the summer 2001 riots in Britain, fall 2005 riots in France, and the current unrest in Switzerland over apparently racist propaganda.
Hopefully (sentence adverb―score it!), you’ve been following the recent controversy in Jena, Louisiana over some black kids, some white kids, a tree, and some nooses (litotes). These are the events of the day, kids, the events that will define and motivate us to justice and best action.
Take some time to listen to the NewsHour piece, and examine the full coverage of the Case of Louisiana’s Jena Six at NPR. And it might be worthwhile to reflect on the history of race and rights by listening to the story of “Daisy Bates and the Little Rock Nine”.
Don’t be afraid to post your thoughts on these most important issues. Click the link above to leave a comment.
“F*** Bush”
No, I’m not posting a personal opinion, but I’m sure some reader will misunderstand the title of the post and not read the posts’s actual content, and I’ll probably catch heat for it. C’est la vie. I’m posting a link to a controversy that began last week when editors at CSU in Fort Collins chose to publish an editorial using loaded language: “CSU editor: Used profanity to make point”. Worth taking a look at if you’re at all interested in the responsible practice of citizens’ first amendment rights and the limits of free speech.
Follow the editors’ and others’ arguments and you decide: Thoughtful speech intended to stimulate conversation, or loaded language merely used to shock? Mature stance or peurile goading? Where do you stand?
Leave a comment by clicking the above link.
Iraq Polls & Editorials
Plenty of you have opinions on the progress and future, and the right and wrong of the war in Iraq. Hear what others are thinking and saying about the war by listening to the NewsHour’s recent piece, “Polls, Editorials Reflect Public’s Differing Views on Iraq”.
Have an opinion? Leave it here by clicking the link above.
Campaigning Candidates
Are you paying attention? If you’re not, how’ll you be able to make an informed decision come voting time? How do you know who to support? Do you even know the Democratic and Republican candidates? Do you know their histories? Have a listen to NPR’s series detailing the ‘08 Candidates’ First Campaign.
Who’re you supporting and why? Leave a comment by clicking the link above.