Delivering Presentations

In chapter 9 of Envision, titled “Delivering Presentations,” the authors discuss the various ways in which someone can give a verbal presentation. In order to select a presentation strategy, the authors stress the understanding of the branches of oratory, which include judicial (forensic discourse), deliberative (legislative discourse), and epideictic (ceremonial discourse). Identifying the audience and purpose of the presentation also can help to select the proper presentation strategy. Because written language and speech are different, it is important not to simply read from a paper while delivering a presentation. When presenting, it is important to carefully select what needs to be discussed in order to help keep within a time limit, organize ideas, and translate from written to spoken language. Later in the chapter, the authors discuss various ways in which to incorporate visuals into a presentation such as a PowerPoint. Non-slide techniques such as audio clips, videos, and embodied rhetoric are also discussed.

Recently, I had to give a presentation in my CAP 101 class about a space I designed based off a painting. I used some of the techniques that were described in Envision for my presentation. I had written what I planned to say in a way similar to how I speak. I also edited out unnecessary information that would make me talk myself into a corner. Because one of the people I was presenting to was a curator at the Ball State art museum, I focused my presentation mainly on how my project related to the art work. Since I had planned what I was going to say in my presentation and how I would say it; the presentation went better than I had expected. On previous presentations, I came up with what I was going to say while I was waiting for my turn; however, planning ahead and using the techniques that I learned in Envision helped me avoid what would have been a disaster of a presentation.

Visual Communication

In chapter 8 of Envision, titled “Designing Arguments,” the authors the various ways to set up an argument. Throughout chapter 8, the authors focus on using visual elements to help improve the argument trying to be made in a paper. The authors discuss how to use decorum in writing to help choose the appropriate words of a situation. According to the authors, there are three levels of style for decorum: grand style, middle style, and plain style. Grand style is ornate while plain is close to spoken English and middle style has characteristics of both grand style and plain style. How to include images in writing is also described in chapter 8. Including an image within the text can help make the images an integrated part of an argument compared to placing them on a separate page. In the latter parts of the chapter, how to design arguments for the public, photo essays, visual arguments, and websites are described.

Once again Envision somehow managed to relate to my life outside of English 103. Some of the classes for my major, architecture, rely heavily on visual elements to help express what I am trying to accomplish in a project. In CAP 101, commonly referred to as “studio,” I am required to create a board in addition to the models that I build. On our board, I attempt to communicate the ideas, concepts, and thought processes behind my model. While I am not trying to create an argument, the basic concepts behind making a board and creating a visual argument are very similar. In both situations, an idea is trying to be communicated through the use of images and text, the main difference is that one is trying to convince the audience of something and the other is not.

That Was Easy

In Chapter 7 of Envision, titled “Avoiding Plagiarism and Documenting Sources,” the authors of the book discuss what plagiarism is and how to properly cite sources used in a paper. The authors define plagiarism as “using another person’s idea as your own” and it can be intentional, unintentional, or accidental. The authors give helpful suggestions to avoid accidental or unintentional plagiarism such as keeping notes while reading through potential resources that could be used. Citing sources is also discussed and the various styles are briefly described; however, MLA Style is discussed in much more detail and many examples of various sources are shown.

Unlike Purdue Owl, which also demonstrates how to cite sources in MLA, Envision is more user friendly. Envision gives clear examples of how to cite sources and locates all of the examples in one location. Purdue Owl on the other hand, gives examples of how to cite sources, but they are buried under all of the extra in-depth information and the alternative ways to cite a source. I ran into trouble with Purdue Owl on the rhetorical analysis paper. After searching through the myriad of links in an attempt to find out how to cite a cartoon, Purdue owl gave me examples of how to cite works of art, which are not really the same thing. The next closest thing described was a figure; they gave an example of a podcast, which did not help at all. Perdue Owl stated that there was no specific MLA requirements for figures and that the basic MLA Style should be followed. They described the basic MLA Style as one-inch margins. How exactly does that help with citing a source? In Envision, under the bold letters, Comic Strip of Editorial Cartoon, a clear example is given on how to properly cite a cartoon. The confusion is not only contained to MLA Style on Purdue Owl, Chicago Manual Style is in the same way and it has to be assumed that APA and CSE are not any better. Chapter 7 of Envision was the most important part of the entire book. It gives clear, helpful, and easy to follow examples of how to properly cite sources so that you will not commit plagiarism.

Stop, Collaborate and Listen... to Your Peers

Chapter 6 of Envision, titled “Organizing and Writing Research Arguments,” talks about various aspects of writing a research argument including organization, how to integrate sources, and how to write a draft. The authors explain how to use visual organizational methods such as a bubble web and a graphic flow chart and other non-visual methods such as an outline to help organize a research argument. The authors then go on to explain how to integrate sources into a research argument appropriately, rhetorically, and strategically. Integrating can be done by summarizing, paraphrasing, or by using direct quotations. Later in the chapter the authors explain how to write a draft and brought up a topic that I found particularly interesting because it not only applied to writing, but also to my major, architecture.

The authors discussed the idea of collaborating with others through peer review. Collaboration and peer review allows for a write to hear advice from other about their work on how to improve it. I recently traveled to Chicago on the CAP first year trip and had a chance to visit many wonderful places in the city. While the majority of the places that we visited were nice, others were not. The Harold Washington Library was one of “bad” places. The designers and the committee that approved the design did not take into account the people who would be using the space. The library is confusing and uncomfortable to navigate. When we visited the public atrium located on the top floor, we had to travel through a maze of escalators and elevators to arrive there. The public space is hardly used by anyone because it is so difficult to arrive there. The rest of the library is also laid out uncomfortably.

The people of Chicago have an idea of what a Chicago building looks like and when the Harold Washington Library was built, many people did not like it. With its Beaux-Art style façade, the building looks like it belongs in Paris, not Chicago. When the design was chosen, the committee chose it because they thought it looked like a library. The fist design eliminated was the people’s choice, quickly followed by the librarian’s choice. Had the committee and the designers stopped and worked with and listened to the people who would be using the library, they could have chosen a better design that would have made the building work better with its surroundings and with its users. Peer review is a tool that is more than something that we have to do when just when drafts are due. It can have a large impact in the real world which is why it is such an important tool to know and understand.

(Photo by me)

A Nice Review

Chapter 4 of Envision, titled “Planning and Proposing Research Arguments”, deals with coming up with a topic, research and prewriting techniques, and how to construct and write a research argument. Throughout chapter 4, the authors used war propaganda posters to demonstrate the different topics brought up in the chapter. I remember doing something similar in high school that also involved war propaganda posters. I used many of the techniques that were described in the chapter while forming a topic for the “Hände weg vom Ruhrgebiet!” (Hands off the Ruhr) poster from Germany between World War One and World War Two when the French occupied the Ruhr area of western Germany. I my paper, I addressed the issue of how the events after World War One lead to the conditions in Germany, which lead to World War Two. In the poster, Marianne, the national emblem of France, is shown as a bloodthirsty giant as she crouches over the industrialized region of Germany and fallen German soldiers. The artist depicted her in this way in order to generate anger towards the French for the occupation of the Ruhr.

Chapter 4 discussed the prewriting technique of graphic brainstorming. Graphic brainstorming involves making web of ideas that relate to the topic. I personally find this method distracting and confusing because it is not set up in a structured form, it is more organic and requires more thought to be put into finding where one circle leads to another instead of where an idea leads to another idea. The chapter also dealt with how to narrow a topic, planning an argument and how to pick a topic. I cannot say that I learned anything new from chapter 4; however, it was a good review and it helped me remember the various techniques that I have learned.

Source of photo: http://www.landesmuseum-oldenburg.niedersachsen.de/live/live.php?navigation_id=24429&article_id=85019&_psmand=184

Class Observations September 22, 2011

Today in class, Mrs. Evans returned the first drafts of the rhetorical analysis that were handed in on Tuesday and went over the things that we should consider when we meet for our scheduled one on one conference in the following weeks. Mrs. Evans then went on to describe how rhetoric was once the basis for education and how long ago education was not as focused on one certain field as it is today.

In class, Mrs. Evans presented a PowerPoint that dealt with grammar and rhetorical analysis. The PowerPoint brought up the importance of being able to communicate effectively. To quote Mrs. Evans, “Knowledge without language is not knowledge.” In other word, if you do not use proper English and have correct spelling and grammar, then everyone will assume that you are uneducated and will not listen to what you have to say. The PowerPoint went on to describe helpful tips on how to analyze rhetoric. It said that you could analyze how the author attempts to change the thoughts of the audience, how the argument is structured, how valid were the facts and statistics used, what the author left out of the argument, the underlying motives of the author, and the underlying message that the author is trying to give. The PowerPoint also described how to set up the paragraphs in the rhetorical analysis. For example, you should introduce the author, provide context, and state the author and your theses in the introduction paragraph. In the body paragraphs you should focus on the tactics that were used and explain how they work or do not work.

In the last part of class, we discussed the Jeannette Walls event that took place at Emens Auditorium on September 21, 2011. The majority of the people in class attended the event. Together we discussed some of the argument that were brought up at the event. We also discussed our opinions of the event and The Glass Castle.

Jeannette Walls

On September 21, 2011, Jeannette Walls, author of the New York Times bestselling book, The Glass Castle, came to speak at Ball State University. Since the event was put on by Freshman Connections and the audience, made up of mostly students, had already read her book, she decided to speak of some of the many life lessons she had learned through her life growing up in poverty. One of the life lessons she shared dealt with facing fears. She used the story from her book about when her and her father went chasing after an imaginary demon in the desert night. She explained that since we invent our fears, we are stronger than them and are able to overcome them.

For Jeannette Walls, her fear was the uncertainty of what would happen when people found out that she had grown up in extreme poverty. This secrete and the shame that came with it isolated her from the world. Through writing her book, she hoped that she could make others realize that they were not that different from her and others who were in situations similar to what she went through. Jeannette Walls described how a cheerleader, who had made fun of a girl similar to Walls, now had a different view of others less fortunate than her. Walls also described how a former classmate from her old school in Welch felt terrible about making fun of Walls and wanted to apologize for treating her badly. Walls did not want an apology because she said that she would have probably done the same thing to the other girl if they had been in each other’s place.

Jeannette Walls’ story can teach us a lot about ourselves. No matter what our past was like, we will be able to overcome the rough times in our lives if we just have faith in ourselves.

The Power of the Canons of Rhetoric

Chapter three of Envision, “Composing Arguments”, continues to further explain the aspects of rhetoric and how it is used in writing. In chapter three, the authors describe the canons of rhetoric, “the principles by which all writing, speaking, or visual arguments operate.” Throughout chapter three the authors use photographic example to describe how the canons of rhetoric work

The first canon described is invention, which happens when you to assemble words with the purpose of trying to persuade the audience. By phrasing words a certain way, an author or artist is able to manipulate what is going on. Figure 3.2 on page 67, which shows a group of homeless African Americans waiting in line under a billboard saying “World’s Highest Standard of Living” uses invention to its advantage by cropping out surrounding details and focusing on the billboard and the people, the photographer was not only able to document what was going on but was also able to make a great commentary about race and culture in America.

Arrangement, the second canon described, helps form what the reader’s response will be because of the way how information is arranged. Arrangement helps give the argument structure and can do so in several ways. It can be done through a block structure, cause and effect or a chronological structure. Without using some of the strategies of arrangement, an argument can fall apart and lose meaning because the ideas trying to be expressed become too confusing in the unstructured text.

Style, the third canon, is described as “how an author expresses ideas in an appropriate manner.” The book goes on to describe how a persona, an intentionally invented version of an author, can help persuade people into believing what they have to say. On CBS’s “The Doctors” each host wears either a white coat or scrubs. By doing this, they make themselves appear more like professionals and knowledgeable about what they talk about on the show. If they did not, then people would be less likely to take what they are saying seriously. Would you take medical advice from someone who had been on a reality TV show? Probably not, but because Travis Stork, who appeared on “The Bachelor”, wears clothing typically worn practicing doctors, he appears more knowledge able in what he is talking about. If he did not wear those clothes, people would be less likely to take him seriously. By carefully crafting how an argument is stet up, an author is more likely to be able to make a good argument as opposed to one that had just been thrown together. Chapter three taught valuable lessons on how to compose a good argument by using the canons of rhetoric.

Rhetoric and the Power of Persuasion

Chapter Two of “Envision” describes the different parts of rhetoric: logos, pathos and ethos. Much of chapter two focuses on how companies use logos, pathos and ethos in their advertisements in order to persuade potential customers to buy their product. According to the authors, writers use logos to “construct an essay around facts and reason” and “an argument based on logos will favor the use of logic, statistical evidence and proven facts”. When the audience reads something, they are more likely to agree with it if it is supported by facts as opposed to something that is not. When I read this, I realized that I do this with nearly everything from articles to merchandise that I buy at the store; if it does not have some kind of fact to back it up, I will not buy it. Chapter two also brought up the idea that writers use false logos to get people to believe what they are saying. It’s the foundation that advertisement is built on and nearly every company is guilty of using false logos to get people to think a certain way. Even now, as I type this blog post, I experience how false logos can alter someone’s view on a topic or product. As I sat down to type, I opened a bottle of Ice Mountain and took a drink. It did not taste right and I attributed the taste to the fact that it was “natural spring water” and not purified water like Aquafina. The Ice Mountain water did not taste as clean as Aquafina water did. I had believed that Aquafina was somehow better because it had been purified. Writers can also use it when the true facts go against the point that they are trying to persuade people into believing.

Chapter two also describes how pathos, a technique that “writers use as a tool of persuasion to establish and intimate connection with the audience by soliciting powerful emotions.” By using pathos, authors and companies are able to use the audience’s emotions to get them to think a certain way about a topic. Because emotions have such a large impact on the way we think about various topics, pathos is the most powerful of the three parts of rhetoric. If an author can get the audience worked up enough about a topic, they will throw logic out the window and have an opinion based solely off of emotions. The “Gathering Storm” television ad (see link below) produced by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) is the perfect example of how an author or organization can use pathos to persuade people to thinking a certain way without offering any logical facts. Nowhere in the ad did NOM offer any real facts about how same-sex marriage would ruin society; most of what the people in the ad was an opinion or a complete lie. In the ad, one woman says that her “freedom will be taken away.” What freedom is she talking about? Nothing about Proposition 8 would have affected her in anyway. It would have offered the freedoms that she is so worried about to everyone. NOM played on the public’s lack of understanding and fears to get them to vote yes on Proposition 8, which took away same-sex couples’ right to marry. When used in the wrong way pathos (also logos and ethos) can be a tool of hate, which is why it is important to understand how it works. Chapter two went on to explain ethos which “works as a rhetorical strategy by establishing the goodwill or credibility of the writer and speaker.

By understanding how logos, pathos and ethos work, we as the audience will be able to tell what the author is trying to get us to think. We will not be convinced by scare tactics and false information, instead we will be able to step back and evaluate the message being presented to use and form a logic based opinion about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp76ly2_NoI

So That’s What It Means.

Chapter one of “Envision” explains what rhetoric is and how the audience can interpret it. Before reading Chapter One, I had always thought rhetoric was something that political candidates and law makers tried to spread and that it was confined to the political talk shows of Fox News and MSNBC. Through the reading I discovered rhetoric is all around me and is in nearly everything I see. From advertisements to clothes, television shows and nearly all forms of text, rhetoric is inescapable, which is why being able to interpret it is so vital to my understanding of the world around me. According to Alfano and O’Brien, rhetoric is “how they aim at persuading particular audiences through the careful choices made by the writer in composing the text”. When I read this, it was light bulb turning on quickly followed by that same light bulb burning out type of situation. I had always known what rhetoric was, I just did not know that it was called rhetoric; however, while I knew what it was, I did not really know how to analyze it that well.

The beginning of Chapter One started off somewhat dry as the authors explained what rhetoric was and the various strategies for analyzing it, however, as I continued to read I became more and more interested in the text. It made me think about my own writing and what message others would get from it. I had never really thought that much about others while writing. While something I write may seem logical to me, others may see it in a completely different way. The situation involving Doug Marlette and the cartoon of the truck bomb driving Arab man emphasizes the importance of being able to analyze texts and know what the author is trying to say. Rhetoric is a complex relationship between the writer and the audience and it is important for both the author and the audience to understand rhetoric. If everyone simply took things for face value without really thinking about what they are viewing the world would be an awful place.