Of Journeying the Benefits are Many

Of Journeying the Benefits are Many

-Sadi Gulistan

This semester, many of my friends are traveling abroad. From London to Luzerne, my best friends are scattered, experiencing new food, people, places, and cultures –in general, ways of life. Much like our classroom blog replacing the reader response journal of old, Webshots and e-mail have been substituted for travel memos and postcards. As I skimmed through their countless albums entitled, “London 2007” or “Arriving in Athens”, naturally I felt a twinge a jealousy; however, I was also excited for them. This idea of traveling and experiencing new ways of life reminds me of when Ramage brings up the Tao in chapter one of his book. “Tao” means the way, or “the way of the world, the laws and regularities that govern the physical universe, and its inhabitants…to achiev(e) happiness according to the followers of the Tao was to yield to these laws…forgo the futile quest to rise above or master them…The way became…a verb one did…a noun one subscribed to.” (Ramage 11.) So what does that mean? In the case of my wayfaring friends, does it mean they completely incorporate these new ways of living into their lifestyles, wholly abandoning their formers selves? In the case of Ramage readers, do we take everything he writs word for word and accept it, even thought a majority of us detest it? Thankfully, for rhetoric, the answer is no. My friends may return from their semesters abroad with a new liking for souvlaki, but I doubt they will adopt the toga and sandals looks as a daily fashion statement. For the many disgruntled readers of Ramage, he most likely won’t be the one we quote in our papers years from now, but his presentation of the principles and methods of rhetorical device are what will remain with us. My journey through Ramageland is a memoir of circumstance, and I’ve filled my suitcase with Ramage’s devices and strategies. It wasn’t always the most entertaining journey, but folks like P-Dog and the Harley Guys did make me smile. Like the Taoists, I did not fight or resist “the way” of the Ramage world; but, like a rhetorical person, I didn’t accept it completely, either.

Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric is where my “circumstantial” journey through the world of Ramage begins. Aristotle describes rhetoric as, “the capacity to find the available means of persuasion in a given circumstance.” (Ramage 6.) This seemingly simple definition has an endless number of highways and byways to wander down, the first being the term “circumstance.” Later in his book, Ramage makes the point, “circumstances alter cases,” or “one must look beyond the words on the page to the circumstances that gave rise to them and to the consequences that flow from them to understand and judge them.” (Ramage 24.) So, if circumstances alter cases, how can we look beyond them and to them at the same time? Easy, with rhetoric. Aristotle’s definition uses the phrase, “the available means of persuasion.” In other words, sift through the circumstances, or surrounding elements, of your case and use the ones most favorable to you and most disagreeable to your opposition. Sound unfair? It’s not, it’s rhetorical.

The second road of rhetoric’s definition that I meandered down is an offshoot of Circumstance Way and it connects to Existentialism. One of my favorite points Ramage makes in his book is his collective grouping of the existential philosophy under the banner of multiculturalism. This is one souvenir I’m taking home. “The once highly touted “situational ethic’…today flies under various banners such as ‘multiculturalism…’” (Ramage 6.) According to Existentialists, one does not look to any moral law or code when determining the right thing to do in a situation. “Every individual is free to pursue their own course according to the particulars of the situation.” (Ramage 6.) “Particulars of the situation” has a very reminiscent tone of “circumstances”. To describe multiculturalism as existential is clever and unique, for me personally. As a secondary education major, I am constantly hearing the praises of multiculturalism sung, with words like acceptance and unity wiggled into its chorus. However, the way Ramage reveals multiculturalism is a bit more solitary. The previous hand-holding around the campfire hymn is transformed into a one-man band that could care less whether you like his artistic vision or not. “Everyone finds their own way in their own situation” (Ramage 6.) Multiculturalism described like this rings more true and makes a lot more sense. One child’s bedtime story in the city of Guadalajara, Mexico, is going to be much different from the one told in Manhattan, New York. For one thing, it will be told in different languages. For another, the one in Guadalajara may be shorter, due to the warmer climate’s assistance in lulling the child to sleep faster. In Manhattan, the story may be told in a sixth story, air-conditioned apartment with the windows shut to keep out the noise of traffic. In Mexico, perhaps it is told in a first story bedroom with the windows open to allow in a cool breeze. No one story or method of telling is right or wrong. However, using rhetorical device by examining the circumstances of both “cases”, one could make a variety of persuasive points. For example, a critic of the Manhattan bedtime story could say, “With the windows shuts, the child won’t get enough fresh air, thus he won’t receive enough oxygen to the brain enabling him to truly absorb the story and master its concepts.” A critic of the Guadalajaran bedtime story could just as well say, “With the windows open, the child will become distracted by the heat. He will fail to grasp the story’s meaning due to this distraction.” One telling does not affect the other, however a rhetorical analysis, as well as the aforementioned Aristotelian pick-and-choose, of the circumstances surrounding both cases can strongly sway our perceptions of them.

A third destination I would like to revisit isn’t too far from circumstance or Existentialism, it is identity. The bridge to Ramage’s “tripartite division of identity” is a one-way. If you try to go back over it the way you came from Existentialism, you’re going to bump heads with another Ramage reader, and that hurts. They just aren’t compatible, or are they? We may just have to slip on those rhetorical-rimmed lenses again for a closer look, but that’s for later on.

Ramage’s identity triumvirate is as follows, “the given, the readymade, and the constructed (or homemade).” (Ramage 42.) Ramage describes the given as “inherited” or “acquired.” The readymade is “prefabricated by others…(and) on offer through the workplace, the marketplace, and the cultural space we occupy.” The constructed is based on available models “within limits” which we can choose to accept or reject. (Ramage 42.) Ramage begins to describe the identity trio with a reference to “however much he may desire to be an NBA center,” extraordinary height is not in his DNA so the dream cannot flourish. To make this clearer, I’ve chosen the lead singer of the band Weezer as my example in presenting the identity trio. Ramage’s remark about DNA and height reminded me of a random anecdote about Cuomo I discovered on Wikipedia. The artist was born with “his left leg 44mm shorter than the other.” (Wikipedia.) He underwent a painful surgical procedure which he likened to “crucifying” his leg in order to correct the difference in length. The medical malady is a part of Cuomo’s given identity. He was born with it. The disproportion of his limbs is an inherited, genetic trait. His desire to correct the physical flaw can be attributed to his readymade identity. Attending high school in the late 80s, early 90s America, one can assume his readymade self-conscious identity can be attributed to the aesthetically obsessed society he matured in. Perhaps a cruel joke or rude concentration on his deformity planted to self-conscious stigmatic root in his cultural readymade identity. After Weezer’s financial success with the release of their first album, “The Blue Album”, Cuomo opted to have the experimental leg-stretching surgery. Did he choose to have the painful procedure because his defect didn’t coincide with his constructed, chosen “rock-star” identity? Or, did the decision have to do with his given identity? Did the genetic makeup of his vocal chords that enabled him to be a successful singer make it financially possible for him to have the surgery? Ramage’s “tripartite division of identity” is more of a lattice work than a division. While the three elements are significantly different, they are also critically intertwined. If what Ramage says is true, that the given identity is affected by our surrounding circumstances, our readymade identity is affected by the prefabrication of consumer offerings, and our constructed identity is affected by available models within limitations, why didn’t the isolated existentialists get the memo? They did, however, the tool of rhetoric has reared its persuasive head, yet again. “Every individual is free to pursue their own course according to the particulars of the situation.” (Ramage 6.) “Particulars of the situation” is just a fancy way of saying circumstance. The interweaving of the identity trio is cut from the same cloth of circumstance as Existentialism is; because “Circumstance alters every case,” right? So while you may not be able to charge across the one way bridge to Existentialism from identity, the stream underneath is shallow and you could certainly, though carefully, wade across.

There you have it, my detailed account of my jaunt through Ramageland. Like Beveridge’s Alaska, I’ve experienced the various geographies of the vast countryside and picked up some interesting chachkas specific to my circumstances along the way. Though I didn’t return a Ramage-phobe, I certainly have incorporated a bit of his culture into my own writing and discourse. Would I recommend this journey to others? Sure, the benefits are many.

Ramage and Rhetoric, A Personal Account

The world opened up when I hit age 20, or perhaps I opened myself up to it. Regardless, this was the age when events in life began to happen that more clearly defined me as a person. Through travel, both international and domestic, I was able to immerse myself in foreign situations, therefore allowing development of a clearer picture, not only of who I am, but also how I came to be this person. Camping in the high desert of Utah for two months after studying for a month in England and France was the ultimate removal from the comforts of the familiar and unknown, allowing time to reflect on experiencing everyday moments in my journey through life. Delving into Rhetoric A User’s Guide by John D. Ramage has produced similar results in the realm of self-reflection. As I trek through Ramage’s views and definitions of rhetoric, both my reactions, and the subsequent reasons for those reactions, to his concepts bring forth deeper understanding both of rhetoric and of components of myself not yet explored.
Define what something is not and you will become more aware of what it is. What a backwards thought it seems at first, but upon closer inspection-and application- this concept develops a bit of solidarity. Ramage’s use of the Anti-Rhetoric Spokesperson introduces readers to this idea and initially, it was difficult to follow and grasp his motivation behind its usage. He was talking nonsense; why not give a simple, square definition of this “rhetoric” he was speaking of? I trudged through, making notes of the hypothetical Anti-Rhetoric and his anti views, unsure of where Ramage was taking me. What I did not realize on first inspection of this section was that the donning of the Anti-Rhetoric was itself a rhetorical device, and without my counscious awareness, Ramage was already engaging in a rhetorical ride. Coming to this realization was an excursion all its own.
Two years ago at a small Virginia university nestled in the Blue Ridge mountains, a younger version of me sat in a basement classroom studying the wonderful, drab, downright confusing but eventually enlightening world of Plato’s The Republic. This was my first encounter with a philosophical work that engaged and spoke of rhetoric and initially the road was rough. Eventually, the analogous stories and seeming illogical tangents took on deeper meaning as my understanding of rhetorical language began to develop, and I grew accustomed to the nature of discourse held between Socrates and his associates.
Fast-forward a spell and I am now a studious junior at Kutztown, beginning an Advanced Composition course that requires the study of Ramage’s book. After the first few pages of the Anti-Rhetoric spokesperson and a step into the next few that hinted what rhetoric actually is, memories of my freshman year dance with Plato flooded my mind, and recalling the style of The Republic helped me to understand the manner in which Ramage introduces rhetoric. In the section titled “The Rhetorical Retort” in the first chapter, Ramage states that use of the Anti-Rhetorical spokesperson was really a “rhetorical device we employed to set up our arguments in support of rhetoric as a legitimate way of understanding the world (9).” Reading this line spurred an ah-ha! moment in my mind where I saw the lessons of my past (which I’d expected to forget) come into play. Renewed faith in my ability to understand the inner workings of rhetorical style kept me motivated through the rest of the first chapter, although the going was at times extraordinarily slow. I found the content of the second chapter much more engaging and rewarding, as it challenged my views and thoughts on identity.



It's a start, if nothing else.

Paper draft

A journey to find the true meaning of rhetoric lay before me, a whole book to thoroughly explain the concept, or so I thought. Beginning this experience with very little idea of what rhetoric is left me scrambling to find any type of dictionary definition that could at least start the process. The "User's Guide" by Ramage left me with no such definition and now in search of a new game plan to try and figure out this concept.
Starting back at square one, it seemed as though the only way to make this book work for me was to just pick out anything that made sense and then try to make those points make sense together. My starting point was a portion on the first page that described the idea at question by saying, "it always has to do with the production/interpretation of symbolic acts and usually has to do with persuasion" (Ramage 1). At this point I became intrigued at the idea of individuality and persuasion working in unison to achieve a certain effect. Think about it, if all of those "As seen on TV" products were advertised in the same exact way, yes, they would still be persuasive but not as persuasive as if they had some unique way of approaching the presentation of the product. Similarly, Miss America can't win the title without using her individuality to persuade the judges that she is the best person for the job and somehow not only that stereotypical "barbie doll" image. So it seems as though rhetoric makes sense in the combination of persuasion and individuality.
At one point I came to a screeching halt and even found myself getting really mad at a particular idea that Ramage brought up. He discusses the idea of rhetoric and schools and everyone's favorite, standardized tests. He discusses how it seems that our society has said, "schools are supposed to be 'accountable' instead of, say, 'effective'" (Ramage 48). What a great way of describing such a true phenomenon that has been taking over our society. Now as a once Elementary Education major and hopefully still someday teacher, this realization hits hard and struck a chord with how much word choice really makes a powerful difference on the outcome of something. When did the word "accountable" even surface for schools? I would assume that it comes along with the government and it's increasing role in the schools. Although I agree with the idea that there should be certain basics of uniformity that every school district should have to follow in order to achieve an overall "sameness" in education for all children, I don't understand where accountability became able to simply replace the effectiveness of teaching. Under this system, I am constantly the average to dumb kid when trying to fill in a bubble with a number two pencil. The system rewards uniformity and rewards the "serious people" who are following a "cow path" education system.


**Ok, I'm going to stop there... :)

Ramage 3

Here is the first few paragraphs of my essay!!! See you in class!!

Sitting down to begin my journey into the word of rhetoric according to Mr. Ramage began with a sense of reservation and then accompanied by a strong sense of boredom. Although I was hesitant about exploring what intellectual stimulation I would gain by reading the book, I tried to remain optimistic as my travel unfolded. I began reluctantly but tried to stay open-minded and optimistic. I opened the first page and started a long and tedious expedition into the mind of John D. Ramage.

My first stop on my way through the user’s guide concerned the basic idea of rhetoric and what essentially it means. “Rhetoric can only hold sway in an imperfect world where words can have more than one meaning, where truth is not universally acknowledged, and where people are vulnerable to unprincipled, persuasive gambits” (4). As my eyes passed over this line, I got a sense that rhetoric was known in our imperfect world and we use rhetoric as a way to use words that have more than one meaning. Through Ramage’s wordy and sometimes incoherent responses, I was fulfilled with this idea that rhetoric would encompass things that our imperfect world holds as truths. For my first glimpse into the world of rhetoric, I began to understand what the author was saying by applying this anti-rhetorical quote.

Rhetoric paper

The sun is down and the evening quiet, my soul is not at rest. Over and over I replay the images that I have been subjected to in the past weeks, like some Clockwork nightmare haunting me in my waking moments; it is hard to believe that I have made it out. I used to love basking in the sunlight, book open in my lap as I sat next to a window or, on a warm day out on my deck sipping coffee and expanding my knowledge. Then a dark cloud with no silver lining was cast over my happier days of reading. The dark cloud, I named Ramage, and the burning droplets of acid rain it spewed down upon my once sunny day, “A User’s Guide to Rhetoric.” I was brought to tears as my windows were boarded shut, seeing as though I could not read this book with any outside distractions. There were no distractions to be had though, in the wake of the firestorm brought by this bastard book, my sunshine and roses turned to brown grass and dust. The overbearing shadow of P-Dog, standing over me, myself, the fire-hydrant, and P-Dog with leg lifted peeing down nonsensical affirmations that I could not understand, seeing as though I could only plead one-sidedly.
I began my painstaking journey through John Ramage’s “A User’s Guide to Rhetoric” on Wednesday January 17th, already two weeks ago. It is hard to believe that my voyage only set sail a mere two weeks ago seeing as though it has felt like decades of eternal unanswered questions and pure hatred for the one called Ramage. As you can tell from my blog postings over the past two weeks, I fell into a seemingly endless whirlpool of question and fear. The only thing that got me through was the knowledge that I was not alone. It seems that I was not the only one. I am not the only survivor! I met the other survivors, and spoke with them, discussed with great pain and some breakdowns, the cruel burden of carrying “A User’s Guide to Rhetoric” in our book bags as we climbed the Everest of Barnes & Noble rejects.

First Paper - Rough Draft

Hey all,
These are the first few paragraphs of the first paper. Be Kind:

I Have My Ramage, Where’s My Passport?

Unlike the journey through Ramage of my peers, mine started a little behind. Not that I procrastinated on starting the reading, but one of the perils of adding into a class a few days into the semester is being behind on almost everything. And, as I have found out, being behind on reading John D. Ramage’s “Rhetoric: A User’s Guide” is far more detrimental to my learning process that being behind on reading something, for instance, by Jane Austen.

The day my journey with Ramage began, also presented a package in the mail, with my name on it. Inside lay my first passport. Of course the picture was a horrible likeness of me, but nonetheless, I was excited of the arrival. After stashing the passport away, I began my journey with Ramage. I wanted to level with the rest of my peers and become acquainted with Mr. Ramage and his musings on rhetoric, as the rest of them had a week before.

The most important item on my packing list: www.yourdictionary.com. Just to be sure, what the heck is rhetoric anyway? I had an idea, but why not be safe and feel confident in my own definition. I also pack my glasses, patience and some soda for a caffeine boost (as I hear I should be needing it), and then it was time to get on the long highway (so I’ve heard) of reading Ramage. During the first few pages of the primary chapter I started to wonder, “Why were my classmates moaning and groaning over Ramage’s writing? “. Firstly, I amusingly contemplated that the reason I comprehended this man was because I suffer slightly from A.D.D., and maybe so does he.

I worried, that what the title suggested was a long and loathsome journey, plagued with road bumps and many, many detours back to the aforementioned website. Conversely, the first few pages seemed to offer a bit different journey. These few lines in particular allowed me to think so: “Those quacks and mountebanks on late-night TV who flog fat-burning elastic belts practice rhetoric; those Sabbath gasbags” who pontificate endlessly on Sunday news shows practice rhetoric; those shameless mopes who phone during dinner and plead with us to buy a time-share in Orlando practice rhetoric; that ingratiating little weasel who sat next to you in French and got a C on the midterm but managed to wheedle a B- out of the teacher practiced rhetoric” (2-3). Humor? In discussing rhetoric? That was indeed a surprise, and a landmark I hoped to be revisiting much more throughout my trip through Ramage.

A Journey Through The Land of Rhetoric

Rhetoric is what my professor said we would be reading. As he brought up the blog page on the first day of class, I was in no way ready for what would be revealed. During the weeks before that, winter break, I was so concerned about all of the reading I would have to do for my Teaching of Adolescent Lit. class. Jumping back and forth between Half.com books and Amazon, I was able to acquire the book for the course I'm in now. When I looked at the thin blue and beige book I thought to myself, “Hey this will be a easy read”. As we went through the blog page and Dr. Mahoney explained the reason for the blogg and the results of it being used for the course; I thought wow this is going to be a piece of cake. Then we proceeded to read some of the old postings as a class and that’s when I realized that this one book, Rhetoric, by Ramage was going to be the reason for my death. I just figured I would have to suck it up and just read the book and try to get something out of Rhetoric. So I laid out across my bed, opened the book, and that’s when my journey began.
There were tons of abolishing signs at the first place I came to. As I began to read them I noticed they were all about abolishing rhetoric. It seemed that this was a big deal. Reaching the center of the town, there were people everywhere giving various reasons as to why rhetoric should be abolished. I was so confused here I was in the mist of all of this and I didn’t even know what rhetoric was. I asked myself aloud, “Rhetoric, what the hell is it?” Well, I guess someone next to me assumed I was speaking to them and answered me with one idea of what it was. The answer I got was, “the capacity to find the available means of persuasion in a given circumstance.”(Ramage 6) I still didn’t understand what it was and of course saying this aloud to myself again, another person responded with their explanation of it. The explanation they had for me was, “ For rhetoric, the world is full of overlapping partial truths and the task of reason is to figure out which is truest - most meaningful, most effective – in a given situation, setting the others aside for the time being, possibly holding them in reserve for a different occasion when one of them may be the more appropriate choice.”(Ramage 10)

Yea Yea Yea

So I just remembered that I am suppose to talk about patterns in our blogs. Honestly I agree with the people before me all we do is complain. We complain about how he at times makes absolutely no sense. We complain about how we have to read pages and pages of his fatal writing style. All we do is complain!!! Yea he uses big words, it pisses me off, but he is smart so we should probably expect that of him. However, we do recognize good points he makes in his writing (as well as the bad, but whatever). It is what it is, what more can I say.

Mental Ward..

I can never remember to post on here. For some reason, it always slips my mind.
Anyway, after reading the blogs posted before mine I have to agree with what someone said about our posts being overall "whiny." It's not exactly the most pleasant word one can use to describe a group of people, but I'm thinking its pretty accurate. I'm not accusing or pointing the finger, by any means. I'm just as guilty as the next person of whining and wishing we were reading something a little more in my grasp. This book makes me feel very unintelligent, especially when I hear people talk about how they can relate and how right they think Ramage is. And let's face it now, if you're put in a sitatuation for an extended period of time where you're extremely uncomfortable, eventually all of your defense mechanisms are going to fail. So what's left to do? Whine, exactly. And sometimes, you'll even get your way if you whine enough.
Other than that, I'd say the overall focus of the blogs are vocabulary. The wording Ramage uses is enough to make even the most intelligent of men look twice and scratch their heads. It's also something easy enough to focus on if you forget to post your blog until 11 o clock the night before and have nothing else to write about. I guess whining is pretty easy too..
Ok, I have to go get started on this five page paper considering my conference is tomorrow..wish me luck, please! I honestly have NO idea where to even start my description of my journey to Ramageland because the only place I've gone is the bus to the mental ward..

Secondary Dromedary Education

It’s 11: 47 in Kutztown. Snow comes down silently, falling on the warm asphalt of the street and melting instantly. Each unique flake, the personal handiwork of God, is obliterated with heat as it touches the ground. One flake after another, the snow comes down in waves—torrents pushed on by gusts of wind which swirl the little masterpieces like miniature cyclones. But silently. It comes down heavier and heavier until, as I watch from my window, the house directly across from me is obscured by the blizzard-like conditions. But the air is warm. The road is warm. And no matter how much snow falls on Noble Street, those little masterpieces are reduced to nothing, one by one. In the midnight darkness I can only see what happens in the cone of light cast by our streetlamp. The snow floats in and out of the beam. Churning like water in the wake of a boat until it crosses the boarder of light and then it all but disappears into the night. For all I know, it doesn’t even exist.

It’s deprivation time. Decrease all external stimuli. Focus. Just like the first two chapters, the only way I’ll get through this is by shutting out the world. And what do I expect to get out of reading Rhetoric? Pearls of knowledge uniquely and expertly crafted by some “all knowing” being. They’ll flutter down like snow from above, swirling like a delicate ballet on the night air, just waiting to be appreciated. Then they’ll land lightly on the asphalt of my mind and be destroyed. Melted with extreme prejudice. So in the end the ground is changed, but it’s wet, not covered with snow.

When I think of what Ramage has done to our class, my mind repeatedly wanders to Lawrence of Arabia, the classic book by Alistair MacLean chronicling the heroic struggles of someone who was decidedly not Peter O'Toole. The real life Larry redefined what "endurance for a cause" meant—and still means—to educated Englishmen. He grew up in luxury and comfort, but enlisted in the army and helped the Bedouin Arabs throw off their Turkish oppressors during WWI. To do this required extended treks through pure deserts, lasting for months on end sometimes. All their food had to be carried with them, as nothing edible lived in the sands of Arabia. All their water, too, as liquid was just as scarce as sunshine was plentiful. Their missions were to stir up rebellion, blow up bridges and rail lines, spy when they could, and try their best to make it back alive. Meanwhile, the Turks were doing everything they could to kill ol' Larry and his mischievous group of scoundrels. This was an Arab fight, to be sure. But Lawrence suffered and struggled through it nonetheless.

Why do I bring all this up? Well, like I said, Rhetoric and the story of Lawrence of Arabia are inextricably linked in my mind. I see it like this:

Our class struggled through a long and arduous journey (30 pages somehow seems like 50 or 60). Danger lurked around every corner (paper cuts, depression, alcoholism, etc.). We were driven on by fear (Failure with a big, fat, juicy F) and the desire to squash our enemies (don't know about you, but I don't like being dumb). Plus, there was the constant battle with insanity (nothing witty here—this one is what it is).

But of course there were a few differences between our class and LoA. The main one being that we dragged our feet a hell of a lot more than ol' Larry did. We bitched and moaned and complained about 10 dollar words, oh yes we did. We cried about not "liking" the author. But Larry wandered a scorching desert for half a decade in constant fear of starvation, fatal dehydration, sunstroke, and being gunned down by an extremely hostile enemy (the Turks garnered a particularly brutal reputation around that time). He fought on the very same sand that beige-speckled American troops are fighting on to this day. See, our connection with the deserts of Arabia are stronger than most college-level Americans admit to, or even realize. Complaining about suffering through Ramage's cruel vocabulary seems weak and extremely unbecoming of our typical zeal. As a result, the tone of eng230.blogspot.com is timid and whiny. A lot of the time insightful, thoughtful, and funny, but not brave.

Please don't take this as negativity. I feel like I missed the point in a few of my posts, and a lot of you did much better than me. What I'm trying to say is that I hope the trend we see here goes from postings of "feelings" to postings of "convictions." Maybe having every one's writing in such a public forum had some kind of effect, or maybe it just took some time to get back into the swing of school after our break. Either way, I have no doubt we'll be kickin' ass like the Zapatistas in no time.

So with that said, here's a toast to getting over the next hump, like ol' Larry.

Minimum Wrage

Rollercoaster

I believe the best way to describe our blog pattern in relation to Rhetoric by John Ramage is a rollercoaster. As a sum, we go from understanding Ramage's way of describing rhetoric and relating it to our own experiences to bashing Ramage for his wordiness and lack of consideration for the basic mind structure-- we want simplicity!!

The different depths and heights of our rollercoaster compare to the different levels in which readers of Rhetoric comprehend Ramage's work. Some, though gracious, couldn't care less or have difficulty understanding Ramage's way of writing and others take Ramage's explanations to their highest interest of intellect; while some, seemingly most, don't exist (or post) at all- boring!

As individuals riding this wavy carnival ride, some like to be intoxicated and others get sick. Some kiss the ground once the ride is over and some ride again and again. Of those of us who chose to ride, some leaping in and others being drug, we will always be able to relate back to the experience because we rode together-- conversed and made written memories.

Aww.. how cute.

Ramage Patterns

It felt good this week not having to comment on another boring chapter that he had written. I am relieved.

As for the patterns I have seen throughout the Blog comments, most of us agree that his writing, in just plain words is HORRIBLE!

As a whole, I do believe that we understand, if only, just a few points of what he was talking about. from identity to conformity beginning from definition, I think all of us grab certain points of this reading...

Now that I have posted my blog, I am going to continue my paper!

See you Thursday!

This and ADD don't mix

Having ADD and trying to read this book is darn near impossible. I'm actually thinking about taking a friend up on the offer of him reading it to me, since I can’t find it on tape. I just don't know if I want to put him through the torture of reading this, since he doesn't have to. But I might.

~Chrissy

さようなら (goodbye)

In this, his most divided chapter yet, Ramage surges forward with one foot into the murky depths of rhetorical confusion, while the other steps firmly on readability and sensibility. The more he writes, the more muddled his "message" becomes--lost in the glop that is his "medium."

Then he introduces his asides dealing with the 2003 State of the Union Address. All of a sudden his style changes from Erudite Prick to Educated Malcontent. Why? God, who knows. But while I'm almost indescribably happy that Ramage proves he is indeed human under all that brain, I'm also really pissed that he didn't just write like this in the first place. Yeah, he's obviously got a particular audience in mind while writing (probably all wearing navy ascots and pristine deck shoes), but he also must be a special shade of retarded to think they'd be the only ones reading his work. If any one thing is sure in communication, it's that your message WILL reach unintended audiences. I know that, and I'm not even half as smart as Ramage. So why on earth, outside of the distinct possibility that he's an incurable wannabe snob, would he essentially alienate 90% of his potential audiences? Is there some trick here I'm not getting? If he has the ability to write reasonably and understandably, why did he decide to write pompously and incoherently, thereby lopping off most of the last shaky leg he was standing on?

Maybe someday I'll be as smart as Ramage. But I sure as shit hope not.

So this bleak Saturday-noon I raise my glass for a toast: here's to "The Language War" being readable, digestible, and at least twice as funny as the first 101 pages of "Rhetoric: A Users Guide," or at the very least, here's to adequate libations for getting through another twisted rhetorical trip.

Minimum Wrage

Oh Chapter 3, Please be the last!

In chapter 3, Ramage claims that “when dominant belief systems attempt either to ignore alternative belief systems or to coerce them into compliance with their own, they pay a very high price for their intolerance” (70). I am not sure what price they pay, but I do understand this bad idea about cutting out all other options or twisting them to fit with your own beliefs because when you are not open to all options, you may be wrong—or at least ignorant.

I can also understand how rhetoric and persuasion are “alternative[s] to coercion” (73). because it seems as though coercion is evil. It’s saying whatever needs to be said and disregarding the facts in order to get what you want, while rhetoric and persuasion use honesty, although it does seem that persuasion can be a bit skewed sometimes.

Ramage claims that “one of the distinguishing marks of our age is the increasingly sophisticated and subtle way in which coercion may be disguised as persuasion” (74). This may be true because more and more companies are finding loop holes and ways to tell consumers what they want, even if their product may not offer it.

Ramage is absolutely right when he said “matters that were once determined by authority now must be submitted to discussion and negotiation” (71) when referring to democracy. There is an organization for just about everything and no matter what someone does it is open for argument, or discussion.

Overall, many of the methods of persuasion Ramage discusses in chapter 3 can be considered rhetorical situations. Personally, it seems that rhetoric is a jumbled way of being persuasive—OK- how about I confuse you so much that you have to go along with what I say? OR you and I practice rhetoric together and we go in circles of confusion until some clear word slips in and one of us comes to an understanding?

Well, Goodnight All- It's late and I'm tired! GOOD NEWS-- From looking at the syllabus, it seems as though this is the last of our Ramage headache! We can only hope.

I petition for a user's guide for this user's guide... Ramage needs an abridged edition!

So I've been slowly chiseling away at the Ramage text -- and I do mean slowly -- and I've finally devised a way to get through it. Not that this is easy. I have to arm myself with two highlighters, an indefinite dosage of caffeine, and an environment lacking all things that pertain to sensory stimuli, but it is possible.

The sad part: I accidentally skipped two whole pages of the reading without even realizing it... what does that say?

Anyway, I have no idea what Ramage is trying to tell me. Much to my dismay, every time I feel as though I might grasp some sound idea of what he is writing, it's too late, and he's already moved on to some other irrational topic that only he seems to understand.

Granted, the man's a walking dictionary. He's already given me half the words I need for my vocab journal list for Copy & Line Editing. But Ramage's use of his immense vocabulary is like putting a rocket engine on a soap box car; it screams disaster.

Not to mention Ramage is living in a world of his own (possibly one where he is the stuff legends are made of). Focus is so hard to find that I almost wish he would have just given me the definition of rhetoric in fifty words or less. I know it would have cut down on my reading/hair pulling time, and I definitely would appreciate not having to struggle to read through this muddy mess of a book.

In spite of this, I am now determined to read this book cover to cover. I'm not exactly thrilled about the thought, but I'm up for the challenge.

Let's just hope the ink doesn't smear from all the tears I'll be shedding in the process. This is one painful read.

Recently in my Modern African Poetry & Drama class, the topics of the problem of language and post-colonialism in Africa came up. After colonialism ended, African poets and writers were given the option to return to their indigenous language instead of writing in the "new language", or the English language of their oppressors. When one Nigerian writer was asked why he chose to continue writing in English instead of his indigenous language, he responded that he had mastered English, and with his skills he would "replenish, energize, and revitalize the new language with (his) skills."
I was reminded of this concept when I read Ramage's CH 3. Much like his Jack Benny example of the blurry line between coercion and persuasion, African writers were once forced by their oppressors to use the English language. The blurry line comes into view when that author uses rhetoric to flip the coercion into persuasion after the dissolve of colonialism. Ramage's idea of rhetoric as relativistic reminded me of this idea, too. Ramage says, "Relativism holds that it is impossible to "converse" across belief systems...that it's futile to try." I equated relativism with coercion, the force of it being much like the quote "Definition begins conformity." The choice, much like rhetoric, of this writer to continue writing in the language which was forced upon him acted as the "achieve(ment) of identification across differences of class, race, gender, nationality...(etc) or any other way we have devised to divide ourselves up categorically." Using something formerly suppressive and violent, viewed as a loss of identity, he transformed the coercion into a part of his identity and acted as a means of bringing his art to an international audience.

Keeping the faith, not jumping ship

This much is clear--Ramage isn't going to let up with his relentless testing of our collective patience. I guess I'm okay with that. The more I read, the more intellectual/jerk-ish I feel. My mind can easily picture some Harvard undergrad scratching raw the skin under his eyes because he's got to get an A on his next paper, but this Ramage fellow refuses to just spell it out. Not that I understand any of this better than anyone else, but reading on a "learned" level does tend to pump the ego (besides, we all know Kutztown ain't no Harvard).

All the griping and bitching aside, I do follow what the man's trying to say. Identity is an endlessly complex thing which, to further complicate the matter, grows and changes with every additional second you're alive. Maybe frilly words piled on top of one another in impossibly complex sentences is the only way to describe such a beast. But I doubt it. Ramage, though, through all his intellectual windbagging, sticks to a fairly simple paradigm for making his arguments. To wit: point and example. His examples are easily the clearest part of his writing because they usually deal with concrete, tangible things. I'll come back to this in a second. His real problem is how he goes about making his points. They're buried. A diamond under a stack of mattresses. To find this gem--which in the end you know will be unbelievably anti-climactic--you've got to have an almost masochistic zeal to dig through the refuse of Ramage's mind. Years of high-pressure schooling and intense thought about how rhetoric relates to the real world have culminated in this single diamond. A truly fine and noble piece of work. Problem is, our man then goes ahead and garnishes it with the Titanic (impressive to look at, but basically useless junk).

Selah.

But his examples, on the other hand, are the real flesh of his writing (I promise I won't harp on just his writing...what he actually says is pretty good stuff, too), though they aren't without their wonks either. Harley Davidsons and Rocky and Bullwinkle. Frankly, I thought his whole Dykes on Bikes/corporate biker rant was hilarious. Right on the money, but goddamn hilarious. I got the distinct impression that he knew more about Moose and Skvirel than he did about motorcycles, though.

As for what he has to say about identity, yeah, he seems to have a fairly firm grasp of it. I can't say I ever came across a spot where I disagreed with what he was presenting. He has obviously put a huge amount of effort and thought into constructing a sentient argument with no major holes of logic, lapses in continuity or breaks in feel-good groovy vibe. So when I read it and follow what he's suggesting perfectly, I have no problem surrendering the fact that he might actually be right. Besides, I'm in no position to argue with him. I don't care enough to put up a real fight.

Minimum Wrage

Ramage 3

Hello everyone, once again. Well we are on chapter three and I think maybe it is getting slightly easier to read Ramage but as I have stated in class, I hope i am understanding what he is trying to stay. First he talks about his dog in chapter 2 and now he is talking about Death Of a Salesman and Gandhi. Then he proceeds to talk about President Bush's state of the union speech.

I would have to say a part that pulled me into the reading (which I might add does not happen often) is on page 83. "The first element of any rhetorical situation is the rhetorical act itself, which is usually, but not always, a verbal construct of some sort. The act can be further broken down unto the act's message and its medium." When Ramage talked about this particular point I understood and saw that the true message of President Bush [as Ramage states] that it was the president's desire to win popular support for the Iraq war. Thus, my understanding of what he ment by the act's message and medium.

See you in class!

P-Doggy Who? Doggy What? Doggy Dawg.

OK so I think I can almost see what he's talking about. Yes, you are a product of your environment growing up and some parts of your "identity" can not be changed, and yes, people adopt "personas" such as the middle-aged corporate CEO driving a Harley and wearing a do-rag. However, how seriously can I be taking his arguments when he flat out says that he has one-sided arguments with his dog. Its a freakin dog! A dog named Penny that he refers to as P-dog and bases an entire section of a chapter to in trying to compare human "behavior" to a dogs in-bred activities. Um last time I checked humans don't go around sniffing eachother's butts, and it's not because it is considered bad behavior, its because we just don't freakin do it! Humans own dogs, dogs do not own humans, and the most conversation I have ever had with my pup, Capitan Mocha Snowshoes, is "Oh how I wuvy wuvy wuv you, my little Mocha Baby!" I never asked her the meaning of life, and you know why? Its simple really, because she is a freaking dog! I totally followed him through that entire chapter until he lost my respect at P-dog, and really Nate, I agree, I hope P-dog does take a piss on him.

As for Chapter 3, I'll direct you to the comment by Pooh-Will, that it took them 2 1/2 hours to read 31 pages, um yeah, took me 2 to get through 30, the 31'st probably would have taken that extra half an hour. I am totally lost, like it's not even funny, I think this guy just likes to hear his own voice. I even have a voice for him in my head, like that "I am arogant, ho ho ho..." type of voice, its hard to even take this seriously. Does any one take it seriously? Save us Obi-won-Mahoney, you're our only hope!

So whats going on . . .

Im finally able to post. So now I guess I should introduce myself. My name is Brandi and Im a secondary education major. I like to read and write. However please dont ask me what because I no longer know. After I started attending KU I stopped reading and writing for fun. So now I nap in my sparetime. Oh and I think I should mention that Im addicted to shopping. So there you go.

Now as for Ramage, I hate him!!! I can honestly say that I wish he would just tell me already whether I should like his work or not. It would save me so much time. He gets my attention and then he loses me.

Chapter 2- When you brought in Shakespeare I was totally with you. I really understood the points you were making. Then Ramage you decided to go off on one of your tangents about the old man and "gist". Okay, whatever you say Ramage! Whatever you say!

Chapter 3- Legal Arguments?!? Willy Loman!?!? Im gonna leave it at that. Now the whole farmland issues and not being able to inherit, I got you. But then you go off and talk about farm life. I dont care, honestly I don't.
The points in this book are good but the way its written sucks. But I am happy to say that before it took me 2 1/2 hrs to read 31 pages and now I can do it in 1 hr. (Yes Ramage you are that boring!)

So this is Ramage

I believe I had a bit of an unfair advantage coming into the enlightenment of reading Ramage. I added this class after the rest of you got started and was well prepared for the long-winded intensity of the first chapter (which went surprisingly well, by the way). There were several components of this chapter that I agreed with, a few I did not and many I questioned the relevance of. Ramage seems to have good (though sometimes pompous) intentions, it's in his follow through were things begin to crumble. He may have thought that separating Rhetorical People and Serious People as he did would aid his points but I found that it primarily placed Rhetorical People above the less imaginative, average-thinking, no fun Serious People. This was my biggest qualm. Also notably detracting from the chapter was his reduntant stating of obvious points and use of big, showy words.
There were some informative notes, however, I particularly enjoyed the statement about Rhetorical People "smudging boundaries and mixing and matching incongruous pairings just to see what one thing looks like in terms of another." I also enjoyed the connection with the slow food movement as I am a cook and thoroughly enjoy the intricacies and components of cooking well.

Looking toward the identity issues discussed in Chapter 2, I found this segment of the book much more readable and applicable to everyday life. As a 21 year old, I can specifically relate to the notion Ramage mentions of finding oneself, the true self that may not be entirely evident. After having read both Plato's and Freud's views on identity, which Ramage references, it was interesting to read Ramages take on the different components of identity. I particularly enjoyed his take on consumer readymade identities, especially considering how materialistic our culture is and how so much of a person's identity in America is based on what they own. The concept of identity being so language driven was also interesting. It brought to mind dinner parties or social events where you meet someone new and form a perception of who they are based on the small talk you both have shared. I suppose P-dog is a good example of unconstructed identity, but I think the use of a dog as this subject would've seemed a little less desparate if it weren't Ramage's own.

So my name is Manasseh Franklin for those of you who don't know. I'm a junoir prowriting major/international studies minor. I recently took a semester off to do the finding oneself bit and I did so by driving across the country, camping for two months while working in the back country of national parks and then road tripping for a little while. But now I'm back in Kutztown, with you folks, getting to know Ramage. I enjoy college but not it's constricting nature, there needs to be more freedom to float, and more time in the mountains. I'll get back there again when my days here are finished.

Harley Guys and whole foods

In Chapter 2 of Ramage, he presents the idea of a multidimensional identity. Ramage divides it into three parts: the given, the readymade, and the constructed. The readymade was my favorite of the multidimensional identity elements, with the example of the consumer readymade "Harley Guys." We've all seen them, one of my first spotting's would be down on Nassau Street in Princeton, NJ. That orange and black jacket was no Princeton University apparel, it was a Harley Guy. I can almost guarantee after he whizzed by me (his "devil-may-care" attitude obviously being the cause for his failure to yield to pedestrians) that he parallel parked his "hog" in front of Panera for a caesar salad or a panini. I think Ramage was dead-on in using this example for the consumer readymade dimension of identity. The Skeletor model turning girls into obsessive calorie counters is overused and getting bland. When Ramage describes the readymade as "on offer through the workplace...marketplace...cultural space.." I'm reminded of the growing organic food trend. it used to be that organic food could only be found in farmers' markets and small stores like Second Nature. However, with the rise of large supermarkets like Whole Foods and Wild Oats, it has become more mainstream. Even Weis has organic produce and a "natural foods" aisle. When consumers are told to "Go Organic" or "Go Natural", it appeals to their consumer readymade identity. It is an offer of an identity they can choose to accept or reject. It is an expensive and hopefully healthier identity to accept, but it isn't given. In the case of P-Dog, it is an Act to become a Harley Guy or an organic, natural foods consumer. I found Ramage's idea of the multidimensional identity fresh, I was a little tired of hearing about Freud and his all-about-sex theories. This idea is modern and is not gender biased like some identity theories. I found it an interesting update to the theories of old.

P.S. I'm hesitant to comment on the example of P-Dog because I'm sure the majority of the class loathed it; but, I thought it was great, haha. Maybe because I'm a dog-owner, but most likely because its late and I'm exhausted. Goodnight!

Ramage-It!

My face is melting. I already did my intro so here comes the assult of words I have against this damn book. After 5 minutes of reading it I felt as though I had my head in a pot of boiling water, and by the time I finished the first chapter I had discovered 3 grey hairs and 5 new wrinkles on my face! I'm 21 people! I'm way too young for this shizznat! Gathering from the posts and from our class discussion on Thursday, pretty much everyone feels the same. So I have come up with a wonderful idea, I say, we have a Bonfire/Kegger (21 to drink) where we stand around, drinking beer, laughing and roasting hot dogs over the burning disaster that is "A Users Guide to Rhetoric" anyone with me? I mean, this isn't a personal attack on Ramage himself, not really, but maybe next time he will write a less wordy, less pompous-ass sort of book. Just a suggestion. And maybe this semester no one will e-mail him to "check out our blog!" ...oops.

Blahh

I guess I should introduce myself considering I have yet to post on here. My name's Mary Kate and no I don't have a sister named Ashley. I'm a Professional Writing major. I'm 19. I spend way too much time watching movies and being online. I am full of useless information mainly concerning celebrity gossip. I hate talking on the phone, I wish I could play an instrument, I like all kinds of music although I am not a big fan of country. I love to write, obviously and would love to write for a magazine someday. Let's see what else...I hate spiders. I think that about sums it up.

Now about Ramage-I just read Lorrie's post and it was actually exactly what I was going to say. I had to turn off any distraction in my room, sit in complete silence and lock my door so no one would interrupt me just to read the first page. It took me at least an hour and I'm generally a fast reader. I cannot concentrate, this book makes me want to fall asleep. I'm getting frustrated with myself as well for not being able to understand this like I think I should. I also agree with what Lorrie said about Ramage constantly quoting other's work. It doesn't make him sound more intelligent, it just means he's good at researching and could not think of his own words to put in there.
I do think that what Ramage had to say with people inferring your personality or intelligence based on your vocation, I think that is something people do. He definetely had some interesting points in the chapter, if only he could stop drowning his words in unnecessary vocabulary.

*sigh*

I'm sitting here trying so very hard to overcome my allergy to reading(when it comes to homework, that is). Sadly, Ramage is not making this any easier. I was honestly and truly hoping this chapter would be easier to swallow, and that I would somehow develop this deep love and appreciation for the book and all it has to offer. Unfortunately, I'm still sitting here trying to force my eyes to read the words.
I think that when he constantly quotes works that are NOT his own, he's discrediting the fact that he's "oh-so-intelligent." Granted, I'm not saying that hes unintelligent, by any means. I just think that by ramming all these quotes and exerpts down our throats along with his practically incomprehensible vocab, he's only encouraging our eyes to glaze over faster.
Unfortunately, I absolutely hate this book and don't really understand it. I'm frustrated with the book and with myself for not being able to concentrate on it long enough to grasp the ideas that Ramage is trying to show us.
*Sigh* I guess that's all for now.

Chapter 2 :Ramage

Here we go again with a monotonous stream of words pouring out onto the pages.This chapter, by no surprise, has once again made my tired and at best confused and frustrated. It is not that I do not understand what Ramage is trying to say it is the way he tries to convey it.
I do understand that there is associations between language and identities, but i get lost in Ramage's drawn out vocabulary.
"One can do little or virtually nothing about one's identity" (43) This, i think, is a very true statement. As i read this line, flashes of movies were playing in my head and i realized that just like actors try to invent themselves into new character's for new films, their first or most publicly known movie or TV show character stays with them through their careers. For example, taking the character Rachel from FRIENDS, it is hard to watch Jennifer Aniston play any other roll then spoiled and stuck up Rachel Greene. Or to watch Tom Cruise in a murder roll when he is clearly still MAVERICK from Top Gun to many people, or Julia Robert's be known as anyone else but "Pretty Women"
This much applies to identity in my eyes because No matter what i do or how i try to reinvent myself, my true "identity" does not change. People see me in a certain way and no matter what i try to do to change that or how i choose to reinvent myself, it will not change how people see me and my identity. People are multidemnsional and that distinguishes ones identity and can not be changed.
I Particularly liked that line in the book and wish all the lines he wrote were as noninvasive!
See you in class!

Forget the Mailman, P-Dog: bite Ramage instead.

Apparently, Ramage’s perspective on animals is different than mine.

It is interesting to me that Ramage associates behavior as the Act/Motion hybrid his pet, P-Dog, possesses, and then concludes a paragraph later that P-dog is unable to Act. Is it not safe to assume that since behavior is conceived of both actions and motion, any being that exhibits signs of behavior must be capable of action as well? Furthermore, in chapter one, Ramage admits that “there is no such thing as pure Act. Every Act retains elements of Motion. No act is totally free, no purpose is entirely my own, no product of an Act is entirely new.” Ramage has contradicted his own definitions in less than fifty pages. If, Act and Motion are never really free of each other, and P-Dog’s behavior is a mix of the two, P-Dog can surely act.

Ramage says that when P-Dog “does not do what she has been trained or bred to do, we may choose to call what she has done misbehavior . . .” If P-Dog’s misbehavior is not prompted by training or breeding, it is voluntary. No one tells P-Dog to eat her owner's new pair of shoes; she acts on her own. Maybe Ramage has never owned a dog that had separation anxiety: one that drags garbage through the house because they were upset at being left alone. Clearly, P-Dog must be extremely obedient, or Ramage doesn’t pay enough attention to his pet.

“Dogs are better than humans because they know but do not tell."

- Emily Dickinson

Another point Ramage brings up is that P-Dog cannot have an identity because she does not have a language. I’m assuming that either the dog is mute, or Ramage is deaf. Just because a dog does not speak the same language as humans does not mean they don’t communicate. Dogs bark when necessary. Some bark just to make noise. Consequently, certain people do the same. Is P-Dog really without an identity? Does P-Dog secretly worry that she might be a flamingo?

Ramage is writing about rhetoric – not on the psyche of dogs. So, unless somewhere in the back of his book there is a list of credentials proving he’s an expert on animal psychiatry, I’m not buying it. Maybe Ramage should stick to food and baseball references, and leave the damn dog alone.

Ramage chapter 2

Like many others said in the class last week, I found myself glazing over most of the reading due to the wordiness of the whole thing. However, I also find myself being drawn back to it by certain standout points that really made me think. Chapter 2 was much the same as Chapter 1 in that manner. I found it interesting where he discusses how people tend to define themselves. Mostly, people define themselves by certain traits they believe they posess, but rhetoricians view someone's life as a work in progress. There really are no words that are really fitting to define someone's life because you would only be able to define a portion of it, because only a portion of it has been lived.
Along with this idea, I found it interesting how Ramage pointed out how people often can tell (or think they can tell) alot about someone else by their vocation. It is often assumed that someone who is a doctor is automatically very intelligent, but why would you want to think anything different of someone who is going to possibly perform an operation on you. Would it make any difference if that doctor was the top of his/her graduating class or just scraped by? They have the degree, they have the title. As mentioned a little later on in the Chapter, if you can't figure enough out about a person by their job, you could also look toward the type of car that they drive.

exactly his point

Rhetoric...is it art? Is it nonsense? Is it even worth studying? Ramage pulls questions like these out from our core, the part that demands a definition for who we are, what we are, and what we're not. The part of a human being that is always en route to another solution, to another discovery, to another road block. It is constantly searching. Which is, in part, why I believe so many people dismiss Ramage's wordy and "pretentious" rhetoric jargon. What is rhetoric? I don't know, and at the very least Ramage thinks he knows. Maybe his sole purpose with this book was to make the reader angry at his lack of understanding and meeting our needs. Yes, the passages ramble on and on...Yes, the introduction was 30 pages and manages to raise more questions than answers...but maybe that's the point of this book, and maybe that's the point of rhetoric. Words are usually more or less failable. Plain and simple, language fails. There may be such a thing as the perfect word choice, but words themselves may never fully explain human emotion, interaction and reaction. Is that rhetoric? I don't know, but I think remaining open while experiencing this book allows for more than just frusterated ranting at Ramage's word choices and metaphores. Like I said, Maybe the only purpose hidden inside these 211 pages is to make the reader think, and ask questions. Maybe, all Ramage wants to do is piss off a bunch of college students while he sits in a corner with his other prick philosophy buddies and sips a latte, quietly laughing into the foam. No, Ramage is not all that coherent, and sometimes his attempts at clarity only act as another vessel of confusion, but you have to admit, he makes you think.

Ok, so still haven't beaten down this whole procrastination thing (this is my first post), maybe I should get that looked at. My name is Heather, I'm a junior professional writing major, with a minor in literature. My favorite drink is anything in which I can't taste the alcohol in it, I especially enjoy a malabu bay breeze, yummmmm. Hopefully, if I can meet the right people and make the right connections, I'll be a published author. Of what? I'm not sure, probably short stories and a novel or two. It would be so totally tubular (I was watching an old 80's movie last night with a very young Nicholas Cage, and every other word was "totally tubular." I love the 80's, and often trick myself into believing that I am a child of that era instead of the boring 90's, because I spent 5 good years of my life in that decade. Anyway, so I decided to bring back totally tubular. Use it.) Let me start again, it would be so totally tubular to be lucky enough to live off what I write, and I know that few people get to that level, but someone has to be paid the big bucks to write, right? Why not me? Oh and ps- if it's going to be this cold, it should snow! Whoever is responsible in that department should get the ball rolling here, at least make these gray skies worth it!

Allow Me To Re-introduce myself...

I would say my name is Hov, but Jay-z already stole my thunder. If that wasn't already an indication to some of musical tastes, for those who might not know, I'm a big fan of hip-hop. But, that's only the tip of the iceberg cause my tastes could be likened to that of a kaleidoscope with many different facets, making one big beautiful picture. With that said, I'll give you a peek into who's music I dig: Jimi Hendrix, Prince ( two of my favorite guitarists, and who have the most influence on my guitar playing) Nas, The Beatles, Miles Davis, 2Pac, B.B. King,Led Zeppelin, NWA, Bob Marley,Three Six Mafia, Mos Def, Nirvana,James Brown, Black Sabbath,Red Hot Chili Peppers, Sade...ok i guess thats enough range..plus im tired of listing, I could go on forever considreing i have 6500 songs on my ITunes playlist. Well since, I spoke on my guitar playing, I started teaching myself guitar roughly year ago from today and I love it. I took a different approach to it, but Im confident my plan will yield the results I want. Aside from music I enjoy writing, which would explain my choice of the prof. writing major, even though punctuation is my biggest pitfall (hold that thought if theres any in this posting) Movies are one of my fav past times. Comedies rank high pretty high with me.laughter is good for the soul. I'm a big Eddie Murphy and Richard Pryor fan even tho their stand-up, stands alone(no pun intended). I also dig Johnny Depp, Denzel and Jack Nicholoson movies. Don Cheadle's pretty good too. I also like to catch NBA (Sixers and Nuggets), NFL (49ers, we'll be back to our glory days soon, still 5 rings tho)and MLB games.I'm a firm believer that people are judged by there character. Im also a firm believer that anyting is possible if u put enough faith into yourself as well as whatever higher being u believe in, if u believe in one. I'm a big day dreamer lol .Something i'm guilty of doing a lot in class and ontop of being really introverted, it doesnt lead to much willing class participation. But i'm full of ideas and thoughts and ive been told im pretty insightful. As far as participationg on the discussion on Rhetoric and Ramage, I can't at the time due to some financial issues. As far as I can see, from reading everyone's posts, I'm think im kinda glad I didnt have to be tortured. And i'm also writing this at almost 2 am which hints at me being a big procrastinator...maybe i should go to sleep b4 i incriminate myself some more.

Hey everyone!!! Just dropping in to say hello! My name is Hayley, and I am a Junior Sec Ed, Eng major. I love to read , but not when I am told what to read. I love to learn new things as long as it is interesting and not boring. I am from PA, and have been my entire life. I can not wait to get out of college and take life head on.
As for the reading what was assigned, I will have to agree with many of the students that Ramage is very painful to read!!!! I would also have to say that what I wrote in class, ::what is rhetoric :: did not coincide with what Ramage had to say! But as painful as this may be to read for all of us, im sure there will be light at the end of the tunnel.
See you all tomorrow!

Introducing a very tired Perry Piekarski.

Well, due to very unfortunate circumstances (and by circumstances, I mean half.com and UPS being slllooooooowwww with delivering EVERYTHING), my Ramage Rhetoric book has not arrived yet, despite its being shipped last week. Sigh... what a way to kick off the new semester, missing the first class for starters, and now not having the text essential to the course.

I probably shouldn't be a writing major, but there aren't many other options here at Kutztown that interest me. I do love to write, however, so it's not a lost cause. I also enjoy music and play guitar, but I couldn't read a measure of sheet music if my life depended on it. I'd delight in (that's a Microsoft Word thesaurus reference right there) learning other instruments, but music is an expensive hobby. I also love the arts, video games, collecting animals (I have more pets than I need), raving and ranting, being an arrogant wisenheimer (heh... wisenheimer), being irresponsible with my finances, replacing commas with ellipses, time travel, cartoons, and many other things that I could bore you by listing.

I'm tired... hence the dull tone of voice in which I am writing this, or at least the tone in which I intend upon this being read. As soon as I get the text, I'll be reading that and leaving my comments. Expect that in the very soon to not so far from now.

Just when you think you're starting to understand something and really like it..bam. You get a post like minimumwrage's that is witty and well-thought out and you feel like you've missed something! No disrespect to the previous post, kudos in fact.
I'll go with my gut and still say I liked the Ramage reading. His use of elitist vocabulary was a little much at times; but, I did find myself laughing at him. Example: comparing rhetoric to a slow cooker. There are no negotiations in using a slow cooker, my friends. Sure, you can cook a million things with it, but that appliance owns you!
I guess after a semester of Literary Criticism reading folks like Derrida, Ramage can seem like a relief. His approach was interesting and caught me off guard. To begin the first chapter of a book entitled Rhetoric with four reasons on why rhetoric is the manipulative, fast-talking device that made QVC and Home Shopping Network what it is today, made me stop and say, "Well then why did you write a whole book about it, Ramage?" Obviously, this question was answered with a plethora of other points and strategies I enjoyed.
My favorite section of the Ramage reading was the mention of existentialism. He begins by grouping "multiculturalism" under the existential philosophy. (Yea, this is where the giggles began. ) I had never heard that before. Multiculturalism is always presented as a positive idea, with words like acceptance,unity, and incorporation following soon after on its coat-tails. However, Ramage presents multiculturalism in regard to rhetoric almost singularly and solitarily by grouping it with existentialism. "Every individual is free to pursue their own course according to the particulars of the situation. What was right for one person yesterday...is not necessarily right for this person today..." To me, that says "You're on your own. You don't owe anyone anything. What you do or say will effect noone but yourself." Later, he brings up existentialism again in regard to rhetoric when he writes about how many authors' characters begin to develop a mind of their own, or "seemingly write their own dialogue." "So it is with "the way" Roethke is talking about. Every one of my freely made choices in life...brings in its wake limitations, responsibilities, and commitments that bear heavily on future options. But the environment that limits my choices is also a place I've had a hand in creating. Am I 'finding' my way or am I going where I 'have' to go?"
Is rhetoric just a series of never ending questions and strategies that leave us feeling dizzy? Or is it more like a filter or sorts that will bring us to the right truth for the right circumstance? I don't know, if I did, I guess I'd be one of those Serious People.

Anyway, I'm Lauren. I'm from central New Jersey and I'm a junior sec edu major here at KU. I like black and white photography, reading, running, poetry, veg-cooking, movies, and classic rock. That's my dog, Riley. He's one of those Rhetorical folks, too. I don't know too many Serious People.

the Bones

My name is Nate and I'm just here to do the job. Everyone pushes their own ideas.

It's around 17 degrees outside and here in my room on Noble Street I'm drinking a gin and tonic with three cubes floating in it. Actually, it's my second. Maybe that says something about who I am. Maybe not.

Two summers ago I get fed-up with the slash-and-burn mentality that being a business major keeps you in, so I went against every survival instinct my body could muster and switched to Pro Writing. Now my future income will likely be a quarter of what it could have been, and if I can manage to keep the heat on during the winter months, I should be happy with this choice until I die. Maybe that says something about who I am. Maybe not.

Interestingly, I have a similar interest in the relationship between literature and democracy as Mahoney. But instead of studying it, I've always been content taking it for granted. Libraries are where revolutions are born. Education is freedom. Religion is the opiate of the masses, etc. It's always been clear enough that if a country is educated it will think for itself. And if it thinks for itself, it won't tolerate oppressive rule. I like taking that for granted. Maybe that says something about who I am. Maybe not.

I don't know what my favorite food, color, song or movie is, but I have opinions about everything. Maybe that says something. Maybe not.

In the past six months I've taught myself to play the guitar because it makes me feel smarter and more useful. Also, I've heard women like guys who play guitar. Maybe that says something. Maybe not.

I want desperately to be a journalist. Desperately. I believe there is no better way to change the world than informing the people who live in it. I don't give a shit whether print newspapers die off completely and the Internet takes over or if they make a huge comeback somehow and regain their prominence of old. What matters to me is what mattered to Horatio Alger. And that does say something about who I am. I'm just here to do the job.


By the way, check out my blog and leave comments. It's good for the soul.

the Rhetorical question

What a pompous jackass. Ramage--and I hate to resort to name calling--we get it. You're smart. To bury us in your own steamy piles of rhetoric was both unfair and unnecessary, pal. We're your eager students and the first thing you offer is a 30-page block so dense it would make Conrad queasy? Right.

This is why I think what I do:

First, the constant Greek philosophy reminders. Anyone who references Socrates and Aristotle for anything is either a hack or an insufferable bore. Period. Yes, the history of rhetoric is closely linked with deep thoughts and olive branches, but the effect on us, your audience, of repetitively dragging these be-sandled thinkers into the intro is that you immediately turn us off from anything else you might say. We're disengaged from the get-go. And that's no way to start a book, pal.

Second, quoting poetry. It's risky, but can be reasonable if done right. You did not do it right. Mahoney looked up your beloved Roethke's "The Waking," and found that you misquoted him, which makes me believe you bent his words to fit your ideas. That's just bad ju-ju. The man--however full of himself--was an artist. Intellectuals don't get to change an artist's work, just bitch about and interpret it. Also, you only quote one guy and only one of his poems. If you're going to write a long-winded and altogether lame intro that people will be forced to read, at least put out some creative effort, Mr. Rhetoric. Furthermore, like referencing the ancient philosophers, quoting poetry really gives you a pompous air that immediately turns people off. Way to go.

Next, your stampeding vocab. Whoa, look out everybody, here comes Ramage's gigantic brain. Don't let it crush you. Yeah, like I said, we get it.

And last (but just for here), anyone who writes the word expert in quotes is not to be trusted. Sorry, pal. By doing so, you're implying that YOU are an expert, but doctors, lawyers, philosophers, professors, scientists and anyone else who spent a crap-load of money to "buy" their diploma(s) is somehow cut-rate and less worthy than thou. Well, just because you wrote a book about an abstract idea which has subtly governed most of human civilization with a shadowy hand doesn't mean by any stretch that you have the right to criticize. All your understanding of rhetoric does is put you in the company of some of the greatest manipulators in history. Rasputin was pretty persuasive, eh?

* *

So on a side note to Mahoney, I just want to express my sincere hope that the rest of the info in this book is either written in a completely different style (one that makes reading 30 pages in under two hours possible), or is going to be infinitely useful in making us all very rich someday.

Hey Guys. My name's Lorrie and I'm 19. I'm a Secondary Ed English major and I can't wait until I'm done with college and in the classroom. I love to read but seem to be allergic to assigned reading..it's a problem sometimes. I was born in New Jersey, but moved to good ole' PA when I was 11 and I've become an all out country bumpkin, if you will. I like country music, and my good friends back home drive tractors and wear flannel. It takes 20 minutes to get ANYWHERE and I absolutely love it.
My friends describe me as corny. I wish on little things like fallen eyelashes and when the clock says 11:11..it doesn't matter to me that they don't work. I can find the fun in almost any situation and I'm rarely boring to be around. I'm a hopeless romantic, I love fireworks, and stargazing is one of my favorite past times. My favorite color is pink, I hate butterflies, and I'm terrified of the dark. I LOVE SNOW.
Gosh..I'm boring. I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes.. "I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of stars makes me dream." -Vincent Van Gogh

Cheers!

So yeah, totally can't believe I figured out how to do this thing. You all may remember me from Tuesday's 9:30 class as the one who crashed the class 1/2 an hour late...oops, went to the wrong room, damn you Lytle! For those who do not know me, my name is Maria, I am a senior Professional Writing major, and I love it. I'm *crosses fingers* graduating in May, and interning at the Weekender in Wilkes-Barre this semsester as an Editorial Intern! It's friggen awsome!

So if I seem to be dragging ass 1/2 way through the semester it's because I'd been driving back and forth to my hometown Wilkes-Barre twice a week, woo hoo!

Aloha

I still haven't decided what is worse: introducing yourself on the first day of class, scrambling for something to ad lib, or sitting down and trying to come up with a blog introduction that's snazzy enough to convince people your life isn't mundane.

Or, we could end up doing both.

I'm Jenn. I just turned 21 about a month ago, and I'm a junior majoring in professional writing. I grew up in Lebanon county, in a town in that (usually) no one has ever heard of. Where I'm from, it's not unusual to see just as many horse & buggies on the road as cars, and cows outnumber us 5-to-1. My family is extremely Pennsylvania-Dutch . . . so to relatives I'm known as "Chenny."

I'm online more than I should be. I read the comic, Cyanide & Happiness , almost every day. I collect penguin stuff. I have one cat, named Isis.

Hi

Hi all, I'm Christine. What can I tell you about myself... while for starters I am a little nuts, but in a good way. I love pro-wrestling. My favorite wrestler is Kane. I have a couple of websites. The most complete one is A WE Fan Page. It is all about the wrestlers of the WWE. Things there since I've been in college have tended to be a bit out of date.

I'm 21 and still get offered children's menus. I have a sister (she is married and the have to girls). And I have a dog, Harry. He is a German shepard terrier.

And I am a professional writing major.

Probably more than you need to know!

"Life is too important to be taken seriously."

Oscar Wilde

When you're introducing yourself to a class of strangers, it's difficult to figure out what information about your personality and lifestyle would be considered pertinent. Then again, it's possible that my overly analytic self is the only person who bears the feeling of pressure in this scenario. I suppose that's reveals something about my personality, I'm constantly second guessing myself and reading too far into the world that surrounds me. But enough with the self-conducted psychoanalysis. ;)

I'm Heather. I'm a 19 year old English/Secondary Education major who is hoping to become certified in ESL. I'm considering the possibility of adopting a writing minor of some form, but judging from my tendency to procrastinate, I'm not sure if that'd be the best idea in the world.

I'm from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and I won't let you forget it.



My hometown is extremely important to me. I mean, it has everything that I value the most. My family is there and without my family I'd be lost. I'm not kidding when I say I have the best family in the world.

My friends are extremely important to me too. They're all a part of my family and I'm really not kidding when I say that. When I'm at KU, my friends come over to my house and hang out with my parents and siblings. I love the relationship I have with them and I wouldn't trade them for the world.

Things that I love:

• My family and friends
• Neato Burrito (If you ever go to Harrisburg, this is the only restaurant you ever need to visit. Ever.)
• Food (I eat like the fattest of fat kids.)
• Music (I've attended over 300 concerts/shows and own over 500 CDs)
• Reading
• Art
• Travel
• My dog