Category Archives: Engl 16 – Blog Posts

In her article Uncreative Writing: Redefining Language and Authorship in the Digital Age author Maria Popova flips the traditional concept of creative writing on its head.  Her article points out that “creativity” is such a trite and meaningless term nowadays.  Popova teaches creative writing classes at Penn, and instead of encouraging her students to “be creative” she down-grades them for any attempt at originality and wants them to plagiarize and steal the works of other writers.  Popova argues that there is no shortage of content in the world.  We have so many books and written works both in print and electronic form that the old, romanticized version of a literary genius has become outdated.  Popova’s new idea of genius is one that has a mastery over information and its dissemination.  The face of this new genius is more like a programmer than the stoic faces of old such as the likes of Steinbeck and Hemingway.

“Good artists borrow, great artists steal.” – Picasso

Turnitin logo. Google Images

To me, much of what Popva is saying about writing is that it is like assembling a patchwork where the material that makes up the quilt are bits of text and other publications gleaned from outside sources and the creative aspect is how those pieces are stitched together to make the final product.  To many, this may deflate their passion for writing and prove to be outright blasphemous in the face of human originality and creativity.  After all it’s stealing.  Popva questions if there really is such a thing as originality in the first place.  Everything that we’ve ever conceived of imaginary or otherwise had to stem from somewhere.  Much like Thomas Hobbes’ philosophy that physical stimuli enters the body through our senses and is stored in the brain – we draw on this historical, stimulation database when we imagine something or think.  Our waking experience is the source of all that will ever be in our heads, and our subconscious mixes and disseminates these stimuli experiences to create entirely “new” thoughts and ideas.

This makes me critical of our school’s use of sites like Turnitin.com and the war against plagiarism.  I do my best to write my own essays and give credit where credit is due.  However, there are instances where I am at a loss of what to say and anything that I come up with – usually something for the (headache inducing) introductions and conclusions to papers – will sound nearly identical to the articles I’ve researched.  Every writing and English class I’ve taken in middle school and high school drilled the formulaic five paragraph essay into our brains.  I end up wasting so much time coming up with these banal sounding intros just so that I have some words on the page.  I believe this only detracts from my personal thoughts and analysis.  Why can’t I just copy and paste the wikipedia page on the subject to serve as my intro?

Electronic Ruins: Virtual Landscapes out of History by Dave Youssef begins by outlining the design plan for Paris under Hausmann and brings up the notion of ‘ruin value’ coined by Nazi chief architect, Albert Speer.  What do these two have in common?  In envisioning the design of their cities and empires, Hausmann and Speer both took into account the eventual demise of humanity and the end of the civilizations they were originally planning for.  Similar to how monuments are blocked off from people to climb on, live in, or otherwise, Hausmann wanted the design of his Paris to have the streets free of the poor and homeless as they would be a blight in the face of the greater city.  Speer envisioned the Reich to instill the same sense of power and grandeur of the Roman Empire.  They considered how their creations would be viewed in the eyes of the future.  A future with or without people.

This applies to the world of electronic literature because in the nebulous of the web, material is constantly shifting and changing.  The web ten years into the future will be a radically different place that it is now.  Webpages, like this one, that aren’t tended to will fall into oblivion and will fade into memory.

As Katherine Hayles states in her essay “Electronic Literature: What is it?”

Over the centuries, print literature has developed mechanisms for its preservation and archiving, including libraries and librarians, conservators, and preservationists. Unfortunately, no such mechanisms exist for electronic literature. The situation is exacerbated by the fluid nature of digital media; whereas books printed on good quality paper can endure for centuries, electronic literature routinely becomes unplayable (and hence unreadable) after a decade or even less

Youssef then takes a look at Stuart Moulthrop’s ‘Reagan’s Library’ and its design as an example of the ever shifting face of the net. Moulthrop’s idea was to create a work of electronic literature composed of hypertext links, where the user will be guided through a virtual narrative in a virtual geography.  The user is constantly linked to new frames of reference adding to Moulthrop’s procedural rhetoric.  These frames provide an omni-directional vantage point; a panoramic of the other ‘world states’ in the library. Often times, the user will visit a site up to four times before the site becomes stable. The point of all this is to provide a historicist framework where the user recalls coherence throughout their virtual journey in the narrative.

The Matrix. Google Images

As the sites congeal, their previous forms fade away.  The site shifts again, but in a historicist framework.   Moulthrop wants to bring to attention that the idea of projecting a monument in the future is futile because it will not be maintained with the same vision, intent, or purpose and people will essentially become disconnected.  The monument will become meaningless to the dismay of people like Speer and Hausmann.

The content of the net is so expansive that the landscape that is created won’t be able to recall its own history.  The inverse relationship of web content and its longevity is akin to a dying sun; growing larger, but fading at the same time. The digital medium is more easily prone to tampering, destruction, and eventual outpacing by new innovations in the medium itself as opposed to printed material (Youssef).

He closes by pointing out that the library being bounded by hypertext link is like the what binds us to the present when we view monuments of old: time.  The instantaneous nature of the links  in the library effectively filter out crucial pieces of information which as a whole disintegrates the collective meaning as the user forges their own.  So as much as we may think we know what we know, we may never know. We can only point and guess.

Game designer, researcher, and gamer Ian Bogost examines the rhetoric of videogames and their ability to present arguments or a point of view. Videogames are a recent phenomenon that most associate as a leisure activity.  Bogost goes a step further and finds a few choice examples of certain videogames that do more than simply entertain us.

As the title  The Rhetoric of Video Games suggests, Bogost supports the notion that videogames are a type of visual rhetoric.  Rhetoric, as have we read, is an art form of communication and persuasion.  Bogost adds that the still and moving images of videogames are just one part of what comprises videogames as rhetoric.  He puts the procedural aspect, essentially the coding and playability of the game itself, above the images.  He argues that the rhetoric is woven into the process of playing the game.  Unlike written text or spoken word, the rhetoric of

Ian Bogost. Google Images

videogames is vested in how to the player advances through the game.  Bogost uses the term ‘procedural rhetoric.’

Procedural rhetoric is a general name for the practice of authoring arguments through processes.

Procedural rhetoric deals with a symbolic medium and therefore serves as a model for conceptual systems.  Animal Crossing is a game that demonstrates the workings of consumer capitalism.  The McDonalds Videogame is an example used to demonstrate how the procedural rhetoric of videogames can be used to critique existing institutions.  Unlike most videogames, The McDonalds Videogame‘s main focus is to call to attention the workings of a global corporation and all of the nitty-gritty, behind the scenes action that takes place.  It isn’t a traditional videogame in the sense that its mission is to provide entertainment; it’s more focused on “a procedural rhetoric about the necessity of corruption in the global fast food business, and the overwhelming temptation of greed, which leads to more corruption” (Bogost, 11).

While I think Bogost wrote a compelling article, I believe that there are some oversights to his argument.  His claim that videogames have become and can further advance as rhetorical platforms neglects to account for those who will completely miss the message – people like me.  In his article he gave the example of how the game Bully served to satirize social cliques and the politics of high school.  When I was playing this game, I definitely didn’t come away with a changed perspective towards high school social groups.  I was main

ly focused on the fun aspect of the game: preying on fat kids, police, and civilians.  I think that the procedural rhetoric of videogames makes it more difficult to convey a message than traditional rhetoric.  The message gets lost in translation unless the game makes it explicitly clear what message they are conveying – a

Mario is a game without any special lessons. Google Images

game like The McDonalds Videogame is a good example.  Of course, these ‘games with a lesson’ will be less likely to reach a mass market of gamers who are out to slay dragons and eat shrooms.

In connection to our previous reading, I revisited the blog of the blogger I chose for our Webzine article.  Jaymie Heimbuch is a blogger for one of the most widely read environmental blogs on the Web, Treehugger.com.  Heimbuch’s articles center around her interests in wildlife conservation, water issues, and technology.  In her article, Can Wireless Sensor Technology Make Us Happier People?, Heimbuch contemplates technology’s impact on our daily and working lives and wonders if all the advances in wireless technology really make us truly happier people.

Heimbuch discusses breakthrough technologies including sensors built by Hitachi that are designed to monitor us along with virtually every aspect of our immediate environment.

Now, a wireless device by Hitachi worn as a lanyard can detect body movements as slight as head nods or finger-pointing, voice level, ambient air temperature, lighting, and other conditions in one’s social environment. The badge can then download the day’s information to be analyzed at the maker’s data center where reports are provided back to the wearer.

Like a thermometer is used to gauge the temperature, happiness sensors collect a vast array of data to gauge your level of happiness. Google Images.

As more studies are conducted and more data is gathered, researchers believe that  we will have technology to help point us towards living happier lives.  Heimbuch remains skeptical as to whether or not this technology is really necessary.  She argues that by simply practicing mindfulness, we can avoid having a devices to tell us how we (should) feel.  Mindfulness simply means taking time to stop what you are doing an assess your emotions, body language, and word choice in a particular situation.  Heimbuch points out that all of this is hard work, and that we turn to technology to make it easier for us.  She believes that we are in fact making our path to happiness more convoluted by trying to make a device to tell us how we are feeling.

Although the advances in wireless technology have made it so much easier for us to stay in touch with one another, the flip side maybe causing us to lose contact with ourselves.  I personally feel that if society were to implement these ‘happiness sensors’ on a wide scale, we risk fostering a culture of severely disconnected people.  And by disconnected, I don’t mean social isolated, I mean we risk losing the ability of self-evaluation and reflection.  These are invaluable skills that are part of what makes us human.  Do we really want to sacrifice this for the simple sake of convenience?

Happiness is a journey not a destination – Ben Sweetland.

This quote nicely sums up the sentiments of the article.  The best things in life come with work and persistence.  It is clear that these wireless happiness sensors simply cater to instant gratification.  I think it’s a key part of life and greatly worth putting in the effort to grow from your experiences and learn to become more in-tune with yourself and those around you.

Professor Olin Bjork and Professor John Pedro Schwartz examine the range and capabilities of new technologies on location publication in Writing in the Wild: A Paradigm for Mobile Composition.  Conventional writing typically takes place in a largely homogenous environment.  We envision our essays being written on a computer that is situated on desk in a room sheltered from ambient light, where the temperature is set to a comfortable 70°.  Bjork and Schwartz posit that a person’s writing environment can greatly affect the end result, and a potential problem they highlight is that the conventional writing spaces (ie. a library, dorm room, or coffee shop) tend to be removed from the subjects they are writing about (Bjork/Schwartz, 223).

Tablet use outdoors capturing multimedia. Google Images

The proliferation of mobile and wireless devices enable us to expand our boundaries and give us the ability to publish content virtually anywhere.  It reminds me of the Sprint commercials advertizing that their device allows users to record and document “the entire human experience” where ever and whenever they please.  As opposed to the conventional notepad and pen, mobile devices not only have the ability to record text, but can also take photos and record audio/video.  The broad array of tools at our disposal can be utilized to capture the moment in the best way we see fit.

An advantage to being able to instantly record material is that you can do so whenever inspiration strikes.  Inspiration is fleeting and may not come to you when you decide to sit down and start typing at your computer.  Taking a picture or recording a video when the moment is right may be more powerful than if you were to try and recall that event several hours later at your desktop.  However, a potential drawback to publishing out in the field is that the quality of writing diminishes.  By design, mobile phones and tablets do not lend themselves to writing a large amount of text.

Bjork and Schwartz discuss how this wireless revolution has made its mark in the classroom.  Teachers and professors have increasingly switched to integrating mobile devices to become a part of their assignments.  However, this integration has not been completely institutionalized, and many have observed that the “trend toward spatially distributed education” results in a severe disconnect between teachers and students.  Less students bother to show up for class when they realize that all of their lectures can be streamed as podcasts.  Not to mention the pervasiveness of mobile technologies act as a constant distraction even if the student is sitting in class – how many times do you see people using their laptops for Facebook instead of taking notes?

In just the last two years, we have seen a number of major world events in which mobile composition has played an integral role.  Arab Spring and the Occupy Movement are just two instances.  “Moblog, mobile and blog, consist of text, audio, photos, and video posted to a blog from a mobile device” (Bjork/Schwartz, 233).  Howard Rheingold states that mobile devices have enabled everyone to post real-time, independent, news reports directly to the Web (233).  The advent of tech-savvy street bloggers has become somewhat of a cultural phenomenon.  Though moblogs focus on personal interests, it may only be a matter of time before we see the rise of smart mobs mobilizing in great numbers and force.  This last point ties into Bjork and Schwartz’ closing statement that the lines between known ‘writing-spaces’ and the rest of the world are dissolving before our eyes.  The materiality of writing should seek to grow with this new paradigm shift.

In his essay, The Visual Rhetoric of Data Displays: The Conundrum of Clarity, Charles Kostelnick examines the visual rhetoric of data displays and how its dramatic change in the last fifty years has affected rhetorical approaches.  Kostelnick theorizes that there has been a democratization effect of data design technology.  Similar to what Richard A. Lanham explains in the Economics of Attention, our perception of the world has been become increasingly shaped by the synergistic relationship between data and design.  Our understanding of the data we are presented with hinges on the clarity of its presentation.  The design of the pie chart, spread sheet, or graph is equally important as the data it presents.

We are immediately drawn to Tufte’s maxim that “[g]raphical excellence consists of complex ideas communicated with clarity, precision, and efficiency,” that it “gives to the viewer the greatest number of ideas in the shortest time with the least ink in the smallest space” and that it “requires telling the truth about the data”

Tufte’s maxim roughly outlines Quintilian’s guide to good rhetoric.  Ideally, good visual rhetoric serves a utilitarian purpose to condense complex ideas and communicate them efficiently.  Displaying data is an effective way to present facts that transforms a passive activity such as reading into an interactive experience.  The great number of visual data displays at our disposal has enabled us to “move and delight” our audience like never before.  The genre of graphing software has expanded to include a number of different charts and graphs such as:

• Bar
• Horizontal Bar
• Pie
• Line
• Area/Mountain
• Surface
• Scatter
• Radar
• Donut

With so many options to choose from, it is often difficult to determine which display best presents and communicates the data.  Since our brains are all hard-wired differently, there is no universal answer to this.  However, scientists have researched which method produces optimal clarity to which designers can  use to gauge which type may best suit their purpose.

Kostelnick observes that out of all this comes ethical considerations.  “Designers, unconstrained by graphical standards or professional oversight, can manipulate charts and graphs for their own ends” (Kostelnick, 3).  Tufte’s “Lie Factor” measures the discrepancy between the size of the data and its visual representation.  In other words, the apparent size of the data is not the same as the actual size of the data.

In another class, our teacher showed us how graphs can often times distort the data.  The example of 3-D graphs display data as volume.  Area only goes up by square in a linear dimension (πr^2).  But volume goes up by cube (length x width x height).  The distortion here is exacerbated by foreshortening and improper scaling.  MSN and Yahoo appear to tower over Google, when in reality they are only up by 5%.

3-D Graph. Envs21 ppt.

Data can also be misconstrued when it is presented as counts instead of rates.  The first graph (pink) may appear to indicate that younger drivers are involved in far more fatal car crashes than elderly drivers.  Of course, the graph doesn’t reveal the total number of drivers in each age range.  There are far more younger drivers on the road than elderly drivers.  If the data is presented as a rate (blue), then we can see that the rate of fatal car crashes is actually higher amongst elderly drivers.

Data presented as Count, Envs21 ppt

Data as rate, Envs21 ppt

Svenja Adolphs, a Lecturer in Applied Linguistics at the University of Nottingham, provides a guide to the area of corpus linguistics in her book Introducing Electronic Text Analysis.   Corpus linguistics extracts patterns from text to help us gain an understanding of the governing rules and interconnectedness of language.  Her work also looks at how electronic texts and analysis software are “being utilized by researchers in a range of diverse areas in the arts and humanities and in the social sciences.”    It’s hard to believe that this area of study was first conducted before computers were around.  Corpus linguistics seeks to bring order to and make sense of the breadth of information and diverse use of language available to us.

One of the methods Adolphs’ presents us with is concordance data.  The Key Word in Context (KWIC) concordance takes a body of text and examines certain words and phrases.  “A concordance is a way of presenting language data to facilitate analysis” (Adolphs, 5).  However, language is complex because you can have multiple meanings for certain words and those meanings change over time.  The output format in a KWIC concordance helps us to analyze a word in context.  This greatly affects how we interpret historical texts like the Bible, Shakespeare, and even the US Constitution.

The original intent/meaning of the US Constitution has been hotly debated in our Supreme Court.

Researchers greatly benefit from existing corpora such as the Bank of English corpus, “which exceeds 500 million words at the time of writing” (Adolphs, 18).  An extensive body of corpus grants more possibilities to researchers.  In general, drawing from a larger body of data is more scientific and adds “to the robustness of the analytical results” (Adolphs, 19).  Various qualitative and quantitative methods have been devised to “provide a way into the data that is informed by the data itself” (19).

The type-token ratio examines lexical density and “can be useful when assessing the level of complexity of a particular text or text collection” (Adolphs, 39-40).  While this method gives us a basic insight to a text and maybe helpful in organizing, a closer examination of the words and phrases is required to make any sort of concrete evaluation of the complexity of the text.

Examining the words used in text or even spoken conversation can yield invaluable information to those in research as well as professional fields.  Studying wordlists reveal the frequency of certain key words or phrases used.

In political science it may be the comparison of linguistic devices used by different political parties, for example in the context of election campaign discourse.

The frequency of words observed in wordlists are expressed as ratios within the body of a text.  This is useful because texts vary in size, and ratios “provide a better basis for comparison of frequencies of individual items” (Adolphs, 43).  The CANCODE corpora represents a list of general spoken English.  In Adolphs’ comparison of the corpora of Health Professional (HP) and the CANCODE corpus the frequency of positive keywords reveal that the HP corpora are more geared towards speaking in the present tense.  This comparison to the CANCODE corpora can help us form hypothesis about the nature of the health profession based on its lexicon.

The onset of the Digital Age has dramatically altered our perception of the material and immaterial.  For the first time in human history, we have placed a greater premium on ideas and information over what scholar Richard A. Lanham simply refers to as “stuff.”  This paradigm shift has largely replaced the norms of the Industrial Age: an age characterized by factories and production.  In his book The Economics of Attention, Richard A. Lanham observes this shift and discusses the impacts and implications it has on modern society.

Throughout the first chapter of his book, Lanham discusses the differences between ‘stuff’ and ‘fluff’.  Stuff refers to material items while fluff includes thoughts, ideas, raw data, and information.  In our waking lives we are constantly bombarded by information.  Our brains cannot possibly process the sheer amount of data that we encounter on a day-to-day basis.  Our attention spans can help us scale down the data that we perceive.  It acts as a sort of filter.

Elmer Wheeler

Lanham discusses that our attention spans are easily susceptible to the “centripetal attention structures” created by the media and company advertisements.  Even though we are largely obsessed with the stuff portrayed in commercials, a key point that Lanham raises is that it’s all of the fluff surrounding it that entices us to it in the first place.  To draw from legendary American salesman, Elmer Wheeler, you do much better by selling the sounds and smells of cooking a hotdog instead of selling the hotdog itself.  In other words, you ‘sell the sizzle‘ because otherwise you are just selling dead pig.

While sounds and smells of hotdogs cooking on a grill may stimulate our senses enough to get us to buy the hotdog, companies have gone a step further to compete for our attention.  Lanham discusses that companies place more effort into the fluff surrounding their product than they do to the product itself.  He points towards the manufacturing of cars as a prime example.  In that market, design is everything.  It doesn’t matter that the combustible engine has largely remained unchanged from the time it was invented.   If you hire a good enough graphic designer, the car will sell based on its style as opposed to its substance.

“Design” is our name for the interface where stuff meets fluff. The design of a product invites us to attend to it in a particularway, to pay a certain type of attention to it. Design tells us not about stuff per se but what we think about stuff.

The shift to into the Digital Age (or the Information Age) from the Industrial Age has been largely responsible for the dramatic shift in our economy.  The United States transitioned from factory-based, industrial production to specializing in intelligence and information distribution.  Now, the major jobs are created in the service sector – not in the assembly line.  It is the reason why places like Detroit and the rust belt have crumbled and the Silicon Valley have boomed.

The toggling between stuff and fluff is what the economy of attention rests upon.  Lanham provides many examples of this oscillation between reality and our ability to perceive it.  Artists in general toggle between the world of stuff and fluff.  Digital artists use data (fluff) in the form of algorithms to make their artwork (stuff).  “You see the ‘information’ in the image, the mathematics that inheres the image.”  Paradoxically, the fluff becomes the stuff. Another example he gave was playing video games.  You process the information in the world of the game while you simultaneously control what goes on from your controller.

“Net of Being” is a piece by visual artist, Alex Grey. Grey used a logarithm to create the ornate spiral patterns featured in the painting. Plus, I like Tool.

A liberal education matters in a world of fluff.

Rhetoric, according to Lanham, acts as a filtration system for the information we process.  While rhetoric was first used in ancient Greece to argue cases, its modern context may enable us to better differentiate the blurred lines between stuff and fluff.  However, he uses the term “stylistic filtration” which carries with it the implication that the filter can be morphed by ideals and societal norms.  Since culture is our operating system, by extension, this even applies to how we question the material we are presented.  This is where a liberal education may prove invaluable.  Lanham argues that it “creates attention structures to teach us how to attend to the world, [and] must be central to acting in the world as well as to contemplating it.”  In other words, avoid taking things at face value because if Lanham taught us anything, it’s probably just fluff.

The famous Roman rhetorician, Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, describes Roman philosopher, Marcus Tullius Cicero, in his Institutes of Oratory as the “perfect orator.”  Despite having claimed that perfection in oratory is nearly impossible, it seems that Quintilian made an exception for Cicero.  Quintilian’s book outlines the qualities of an effective orator.  Only good men can become good orators because, unlike bad men, their minds are not “obsessed with obtaining their vice and satisfaction.”  Quintilian states that you must also speak with eloquence and honest feeling.   Since “eloquence comes from the deepest source of wisdom,” Quintilian observes that the art of oratory is fit for philosophers (like Cicero).  People with years of experience speaking and who hold vast amounts of knowledge in their head make for the best orators.

Bust of Cicero

However, simply having knowledge about a great many topics is not enough.  Quintilian points out that while dialectic may be useful, the orator shouldn’t bog the audience down with facts, but “must move and delight them.”  Instead, Quintilian stresses that good oratory rests on logic and ethical science.  In other words, a good orator appeals to facts as well as the audience’s emotions.

In a long and passionate speech, Cicero condemns the treacherous actions of Lucius Catilina and advises the Roman Senate to follow with just punishment.  The accounts of the trial reveal Cicero’s skill as a master orator. Throughout the trial, Cicero employs a number of rhetorical strategies in order to convince the Senate that the traitor, Catilina, must be banished from the city along with all of his accomplices.

In his own book, De Oratore, Cicero clearly lists the business or art of an orator into five parts:

• Find out what to say
• Dispose and arrange your matter
• Clothe and deck your thoughts with language
• Secure them in your memory
• Deliver them with dignity and grace

During the trial, Cicero executes these with ease while, in addition, utilizes a number of rhetorical strategies to convince his audience.  Cicero repeatedly asks rhetorical questions which call to question Catalina’s loyalty.  He asks, “do not the looks and countenances of this venerable body here present, have any effect on you?” and “What life are you leading?”  While effectively shaming Catalina, Cicero’s questions also serve to capture the emotions of the audience too.

Cicero takes careful consideration to lay out the structure of his speech in order to persuade the audience.  Part XXXI of De Oratore, states that your must provide backup info and refute what the other person says.  Cicero presents specific evidence against Catalina in the form of a rhetorical question.

Do you recollect that on the 21st of October I said in the senate, that on a certain day, which was to be the 27th of October, C. Manlius, the satellite and servant of your audacity, would be in arms? Was I mistaken, Catiline, not only in so important, so atrocious, so incredible a fact, but, what is much more remarkable, in the very day? I said also in the senate that you had fixed the massacre of the nobles for the 28th of October, when many chief men of the senate had left Rome, not so much for the sake of saving themselves as of checking your designs. Can you deny that on that very day you were so hemmed in by my guards and my vigilance, that you were unable to stir one finger against the republic; when you said that you would be content with the flight of the rest, and the slaughter of us who remained?

Over the course of the trial, Cicero shifts between cross-examining Catalina and appealing to the Senate.  His formulaic approach, eloquent delivery, and use of rhetorical questions all help to build momentum in his speech.  Like a boat moves forward by its rowers even after the rowers stopped rowing, so too does Cicero’s speech capture the members of the Senate (De Oratore, part XXXII).

Cicero reminds Catalina, as well as the Senate, that these types of crimes are punishable by death.  Cicero lists other similar instances and explains to Catalina that he should be lucky that he hasn’t been executed already for such treasonous acts.  At the same time, Cicero gives a subtle nudge to the Senate to take action by asking another rhetorical question addressed to Catalina: “For these twenty days [we] have been allowing the edge of the Senate’s authority to grow blunt.”  This certainly appeals to the audience’s attention, and later Cicero imposes his own solution to banish Catalina and his accomplices from the city.

But if he banishes himself; and takes with him all his friends, and collects at one point all the ruined men from every quarter, then not only will this full-grown plague of the republic be extinguished and eradicated, but also the root and seed of all future evils

Cicero’s demonstration of oratory is not too far off from another great mind of the ancient world.  The great Greek philosopher, Socrates, demonstrated equally effective oratory during his own trial.  Despite losing his life, Socrates employed rhetorical strategics not dissimilar to those used by Cicero.  Both asked rhetorical questions to the audience along with relying heavily on logos and ethos.

Trial of Socrates

The subject matter in Aristotle’s Rhetoric and Plato’s Phaedrus both address themes that can be directly related with blogging. Book I Chapter 3 of Aristotle’s Rhetoric explains that rhetoric is composed of three parts: speaker, subject, and person addressed.  While the speaker has control over the subject, it is ultimately the person addressed, or hearer, that the speaker is trying to convince.  This is the purpose of the rhetorician.  Aristotle defines rhetoric as

“the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion.”

With that said, most bloggers can be considered rhetoricians.  Each blogger is a speaker who posts material on a subject to an audience.

“The rhetorician may describe either the speaker’s knowledge of the art or his moral purpose.”

There are a number of bloggers who use their blog posts to validate their knowledge of a certain topic amongst a community of like-minded bloggers.  The quality of the posts will affect how the speaker’s audience perceives the subject with the added hope that it will generate a discussion or even a following.  Aristotle points out that good rhetoric can be a powerful tool if used properly.  It is important for bloggers to monitor the tone and content of their posts because it can so easily be criticized by the wider, unseen audience.  With that in mind, any blogger who manages a public blog containing material relevant to a discourse must be prepared to deal with feedback from the readers.

Socrates: What would Sophocles or Euripides say to the professors of rhetoric? And suppose a person were to come to Sophocles or Euripides and say that he knows how to make a very long speech about a small matter, and a short speech about a great matter, and also a sorrowful speech, or a terrible, or threatening speech, or any other kind of
speech, and in teaching this fancies that he is teaching the art of tragedy?
Phaedrus: They too would surely laugh at him if he fancies that tragedy is anything but the arranging of these elements in a manner that will be suitable to one another and to the whole.
Socrates: They would say to him in the most courteous manner and in the sweetest tone of voice, “You only know the alphabet of your art.” But I do not suppose that they would be rude or abusive to him: Would they not treat him
as a musician would a man who thinks that he is a harmonist because he knows how to pitch the highest and lowest note; happening to meet such an one he would not say to him savagely, “Fool, you are mad!” But like a musician, in a gentle and harmonious tone of voice, he would answer: “My good friend, he who would be a harmonist must certainly know this, and yet he may understand nothing of harmony if he has not got beyond your stage of
knowledge, for you only know the preliminaries of harmony and not harmony itself.”
Phaedrus: Very true.

Socrates reminds us that one’s rhetoric will be improved the more a person practices the art.  So too with blogging, the more you blog, the more you are building on this online persona that with each new post builds on your understanding of rhetoric and how to present your material to your audience.  So in the initial phases of your entry to the blogosphere, encountering constructive criticism should be welcomed and used to better yourself.  If anything, feedback that critiques your work should be used to point you towards the right direction.

Socrates: But even to fail in an honorable object is honorable.

Danah Boyd at confrence

Danah Boyd’s article “A Blogger’s Blog: Exploring the Definition of a Medium” seeks to examine the meaning of what a blog is and provide clarity to its purpose in today’s world.  Boyd works in the School of Information at the University of California – Berkeley.  Her methodical approach to the subject matter includes information compiled from sixteen different bloggers over a nine month period.  Aside from providing a brief history and formal definitions of blogs, blogging, and bloggers, she utilizes her research to shed a more realistic light on what blogging means to the people who do it.

Managing a blog allows you to have control over the content you publish and who can view it.  Some chose to create private blogs, while others allow their blog to be viewed and even commented on by the public.  The aims of who bloggers are trying to reach also differs greatly because while some bloggers try to capture as many people possible, other simply try to speak to a like-minded audience.

Blogging means many things to many people.  There is no right way to use a blog, and over time there have been numerous ways people use blogs to express themselves.  People may use blogs as their online journal while others use blogs to become part of a discussion or larger online community.  Some even choose to create a photo blog.  Essentially, blogs are as diverse as the people who use them.  Boyd observes that a blog is an extension of oneself – a digital persona that is built overtime with each new post.