Lakoff

First off we go on Spring Break to clear our heads and I don't know about everyone else, but im still pretty much burned out!

Other then that, I would have to say that I actually understood what Lakoff was saying here! I could actually follow along with his statements!

One phrase I really liked was on page 49. "We need our frames and conventional assumptions. These form the glue that holds cultures together and allows individuals within those cultures to feel like competent members of a cohesive community" Upon reading this statement, I understood exactly was Lakoff was saying. Without our frames and conventional assumptions, we would not be competent members of a community.

Well that is all for now....I am looking forward to handing in our paper(FINALLY) and for our class discussion!!!

No time for a witty title, but I think I'm liking this Lakoff stuff.

Not only is it easier to read than Ramage, but the tangents are far less wild are much easier to follow. Simply put, I think I'm really going to enjoy reading this text/book/whatever.

I'm totally burnt out from working on my paper--which I have devoted many, many, hours to (and then some!) and probably will never feel as though my work on it is complete--but reading Lakoff was quite interesting. At times I felt as though I lost track of what she was saying, but I caught back up nicely.

Points I especially found interesting:
The entire section about the apology and even the un-apology.
The idea of "performative" expressions (I very certain I grasped the concept.)
The section about stories that make the news (which reminded me a lot of this Anna Nicole Smith/The Croc Hunter business that certain news organizations cling to like ticks.)

And other stuff, but I'm tired, and am too out of it to page through to find all the stuff I highlighted so I can remember what I read.

Still, I'm quite interested in seeing where all this conversation leads in class tomorrow.

G'nite! (because shouting "G'nite!" is traditional where I come from... well, not really. Sleep deprivation/exhaustion + doing stuff = lameness)

I'll just stop here.

First PDog, now cats . . . anyone else seeing a trend here?

Animal examples aside, I was most interested in the section about apologies in politics. When I read Lakoff’s apology list, I was taken aback a little.

South Africa: “Hey, sorry about that whole apartheid thing . . . my bad”

I couldn't help but think of all the time's I've used the phrase "sorry doesn't cut it" in my life. I've said it to my little sister after she's created "make-up soup" in the bathroom sink. I've said it to boyfriends (for too many reasons to even attempt counting).

Unless our president has made make-up soup or stayed out too late without calling, I once again say that "sorry doesn't cut it". What if President Bush, when answering for the massive death tolls in the Middle East, simply responded with "oops"? Maybe this is just a positive outlet for language manipulation. I am a consumer demanding all apologies from politicians, spokesman, and officials to sound heart-felt . . . even if it is written by someone's hired advisor. Go ahead, oh mighty politician, bribe me with fancy words and elegant clauses . . . and try not to choke on a pretzel while you're doing so.

My Head Hurts

.. That's what I said.

At least it's Spring!

the persuaders and the persuaded

Even before seeing the documentary "the Persuaders," I had already unconsciously grouped society, simply, into two parts-the persuaders and the persuaded. I knew of an industry whose breath of life existed only while the consumer had a pair of healthy lungs, breathing in desire and puffing out cash.

The advertisement industry, for me, plays upon my personality polar opposites. On the one hand, I have always been drawn to the power of words. With words, ad agencies create worlds for us that are palatable. We hear a string of words in a certain order and we salivate. The key to selling is to create a want, not a need, and today's advertisers know the exact combination to the locks on consumers' desires and wallets. On the other hand, when misused, the power of words can be lethal. Can ethics take part in "persuading," or is the fundamental core of persuasion only self-serving?

I think perhaps more frustrating than realizing we are manipulated everyday into buying a certain car, voting for a certain candidate, or adopting a certain ideal, is that there is nothing to stop the bombardment, the "clutter." There is no way to break through the clutter, all you can do is add to it, and hope that you're noticed. It's like a wall glued over with hundreds of years of newspapers, plastered one on top of the other; it's impossible to know what lies underneath the paper thin top layer.

But why do those gears grind in that direction? Why is the system set up to bury us? I don't think it was ever intended that we, as Americans, be caught in the metal crunch of the persuader machinery. I do think, however, that as human beings, we all have a tendency to regress into a survival state; it's either them or me. We manipulate others everyday, whether we choose to recognize this human characteristic or not. Of course human nature is going to govern what we do-including our business and political affairs. And unfortunately, part of human nature is to persuade others of what "I" think is right, and what "I" think should be done-my personal zeal transferred onto others. It is only human nature to manipulate for personal gain, so why, as a public community, do our feathers ruffle when light is shed behind the scenes of the advertising industry? The industry is only mirroring the functions of society. If it goes against those social norms set before it, how can it survive?

I'm sorry I stepped on your cat

First, an observation- Lakoff enjoys using parenthesis. It slightly annoys me because usually a reader ignores parenthesis because the information is second and usually not all that important; however, Lakeoff puts useful information in them and I feel like I’m taking a break from the real reading every time I stop to read the crap in the parenthesis, even though it’s not really crap. Sorry for my rant. Yes, sorry :-)

Anyway, yet again we dive into a seemingly simple subject and dissect it. This time, however, I enjoy the topic and so I’m interested in hearing what people who have studied language think of it and how they analyze it. As a writing major, language is important to me, but so far it seems that Lakoff is analyzing words and the potential meanings, which is language, yes, but to me language is so much more universal. Language is what we create to project meaning, to understand, and to communicate.

There are so many cultures that use language differently, not only the obvious totally different language, but the way that they communicate (different manors and acceptable ways of saying things). And as far as language vs. reality, like I said, language is sooo broad—it contains truth and fiction and it’s like comparing deserts to pumpkin pie. You can say fiction is my favorite language, but saying language is a problem because it’s not all truth doesn’t make much sense. I suppose I’ll just have to try and think of language a little differently/more narrow for now so I’m not constantly disagreeing with the book—it won’t be too hard. :-)

It’s late and I’m kind of tired and still wound from break, but I think I make some sense, right?

p.s. I heart emoticons!

Information Overload

This paper is a swamp and I can't seem to distinguish one paragraph from the next. Do you know how it is when you just have so much to say it's like a big cloud above your head and each individual concept is mixing and blending and overlapping the others so it's just one blob and try as you might, you can not diffuse the parts into managable shapes? I've a blob so far, oh yeah, going places fast.

I hope everyone else is fairing better than I. (And that they enjoyed the mini blizzard, cheers to winter for one last kick)

Course Calendar Update

Here's an updated course calendar for the week after spring break:

Tuesday 3/20:

• Workshop. This will be the final workshop of for the second paper.

Thursday 3/22:

• Paper #2 Due.
• Read: Lakoff, The Language War, "Introduction" & "Language: The Power We Love to Hate," pp. 1-41

I will give you a fully updated calendar after break.

what it must have been like

I have a great uncle who lives in Albany, NY. He spent his whole life in that state, except for when he was in the army or vacationing with his wife to Greece, France, Spain, Italy, Russia, Japan, China, and probably a dozen others I'm not aware of. Uncle Phil is an artist, too. He paints Buddhas and Hindu gods--the ones with 100 arms and hats that look like tinfoil traffic cones. Back in the 50's he lived in Greenwich Village. That right, he was in the vortex of the beat generation. He frequented the same coffee bars as Kerouac and Ginsberg and Corso, and was good friends with a lesser-known wino author named Donald Newlove, who mentioned Phil by name in one of his books. I write a letter to Phil at least once a month because he lives alone now that his wife died. I'm fascinated by his life. And I often think, I wish I knew Phil when he was young, traipsing around the Village before it was perverted by money, drunk as a skunk, painting for love and money and living life with the firey souls of the time.

When my grandfather died two years ago I had similar thoughts about him. I wished I had known him when he was in the Navy during WWII. He worked in the basement of the Pentagon re-writing radio codes every time a plane was shot down in enemy territory. He went to Stuyvesant High School in New York in the 30's, and delivered ice from the back of a horse-drawn cart in the evenings. During college he bought a few taxis and ran a cab service in the city. He liked to drink gin and tonics, and smoked avidly. In fact, my grandmother tells us stories about how he'd walk into the shower with a lit cigarette, then walk out a few minutes later with the same cigarette, still lit. In his later years he became good friends with Abe Poland, who owned the Washington Capitols, and would frequently watch the games from Abe's skybox.

My reverence for these two men is about as deep as reverence can be. And I sincerely wish I had been around when they were young. Frankly, I think we would have hit it off famously.

Similarly, I wish I'd been around when "propaganda" wasn't a dirty word. There was about 10 years after Bernays started talking about it, and before the Nazi's shanghaied it, that propaganda was actually a good thing. It was like the strong-armed brother of PR, which itself was in its fledgling years, as well. But to be able to go around so shamelessly promoting something, essentially manipulating public opinion so it sways in your favor... Man, that must have been something. Almost a shame we missed it.

Oh, wait...

Minimum Wrage