Fundamental Tension: My God, I'm a Cultural Readymade!

OK, so I am including reactions to chapters one and two in the same post, which might result in it being unbearably long, I apologize. Upon reading the first section of Ramage's text, I was struck by how obtuse the man's writing seemed. I wanted a definition, and upon reflection I suppose that that yearning is symptomatic of what I'm sure Ramage would refer to as "literalist"(20) thinking. From what I gathered, Rhetoric seems to be a celebration of the ambiguity of thought. By detracting rhetoric through the voice of the "Anti Rhetorical Spokesperson", Ramage actually succeeds in describing what Rhetoric is through listing the many things which it is not, which I'll admit seemed a bit paradoxical and pretentious until I stopped and thought about it. Ramages' device or persona utilizes some sarcasm and playful teasing (especially when referring to "Serious" people) as a rhetorical device. Strangely enough, once I began to relax I was able navigate Ramage's map of wordplay.

Now, from the reading, what I ascertain a rhetorical device to be is a purveyor of meaning; a delivery system for the essence of a text, or position, or thesis through an acceptance and explanation of every binary within it. By ackowledging the fact that rhetoric is indirect, Ramage reminded me that language is an art rather than a science; the absorption and internalization of words, phrases and meaning led me to pontificate upon other words, phrases and images his language called to mind while simultaneously directing me reader towards a line of thought congruent with the manner the tone of the text seeks to evoke. I see the definition of
"rhetoric" in shades of meaning more than a simple definition.

I liked the inclusion of Roethke's poetic line within this text-the wake/sleep binary is often hazy at times (like right now, for me). The dreamlike task of reflecting upon what I read, watch, or hear involves a "smudging of boundaries" between conscious and unconscious thought. As an English major, I analyze a ridiculous amount of texts, but the best thoughts or theses I've come up with involved both an instinctive reaction (unconscious) to a piece and a careful analysis or close reading. Also, when I'm writing a paper and really "on" I often forget that I'm writing a paper, or even that I'm writing, and everything feels "slowed down"(29).

I really liked Ramage's ideas on the notion of identity, possibly because at heart I am a bit of a narcissist. I never thought of identity of being an eternal struggle between the "essence" of a being versus it's substance--a "set of traits" versus one unifiable meaning. The inclusion of the Shakespeare sonnet illustrates that connotations can denote: the parts of a whole describe more than a simple figure; through language, a whole new figure than the one described--a tree can be both a man and a tree, and that man can be both young and old, melancholy and joyful, dead and alive, "compellingly complex", as Ramge puts it. And this is all done through language!

The idea of consumption and identity intrigues me as well. I oftentimes think of myself as a combination of things that I own--Camel Cigarettes, Radiohead CD's, a 1997 Chevrolet Lumina, anti-depressants, collections of old Batman comics--there is a reason behind each item that I own, and sometimes I think that the things I own define me more than I actively choose to define myself. I paid a tattoo artist 50 dollars for a permanent picture on my back--a drawing which serves as a symbol for my favorite band, so I am, in effect, a walking Radiohead billboard. So, in a sense my identity is conveyed through an unspoken language conveyed entirely by symbols. My God, I'm a cultural readymade! The twenty-something! The angsty college student! The Bohemian Hipster! I am a target market!