E-Portfolio

http://benjumonville.blogspot.com/

Motivational Speeches

Today after my Liberal Arts Undergraduate Elections, my friend Rob and I were talking about our old high school coaches and team captains. Rob talked about how as quarterback of his football team his favorite part wasn’t the games or the big plays but the impromptu pep up talks he and his fellow captains would give to their teammates. I responded with similar feelings about speeches and talking from the heart. I was reminded of y assistant wrestling coach who is an ex Marine and how he always said, “a true speech is never written down, it comes from the heart.”

I thought about this statement and if it applied to all the speeches I gave in high school and will continue to give in college. I decided that I kind of agree. My fondest memories of public speaking were times when I didn’t write down a formal speech and use note cards, but rather just talked.

In the YMCA Louisiana Youth Legislature, my gubernatorial campaign called kids to take action and get involved in their local communities and government. A speech with a message rooted in motivation, needs to be just that, motivational. As a spectator I am more motivated by personal conversation, emotion, and words straight from the heart as opposed to a formal speech.

Rhetoric of Technology

This week when my group and I were putting in numerous hours of work on our media project, I learned a valuable lesson.  I do not speak the language and understand the rhetoric of technology.  No one in my group really did either, but luckily one of our good friends is fluent.  When we had problems or glitches, most groups would fret and sweat, but our solution was only one phone call away. 

Our friend Mitchell Smor might as well be Steve Jobs.  He takes technological communication, computer programming, and problem solving to a new level.  It’s almost as if he is a Jedi and uses “The Force” to get the computer to say and do what he wants.  His command over the language of technology, and execution of technological rhetoric is breathtaking.  Needless, to say our LA101H project would have been a lot more hectic without Mitch.  Sally, Sandra, Liz, and myself all thank you immensely. 

As I blog about technological rhetoric I think about how far not only technology has come over the century, but also the rhetoric associated with it.  I am amazed to realize my Nana (grandmother) doesn’t know what gigabytes, Wi-Fi, and Ethernet cables are? Heck, my Nana doesn’t even have a computer or a cell phone!  This poses the question can the rhetoric of this new technological age be taught, or is it ingrained?  Would I learn it faster than my Nana?

 

Tolkien

One of my favorite memories with my father revolves around JRR Tolkien. After reading the books as a child, I was elated to see the world of Middle Earth brought to the big screen. To my enjoyment my father was just as captivated as me by the fantasy, moral themes, and battle scenes depicted in Tolkien’s tale of friendship and good versus evil. Tonight my RA and I relived these memories (you’re still number one Pops) by watching the second installment, The Two Towers, and I was reminded of why I loved the trilogy so much: rhetoric. Rhetoric is not the sole reason I love The Lord of The Rings, but it adds to the appeal of the series.

In my opinion JRR Tolkien is one of the greatest rhetors of all time. He created languages. Can you create a language? I know I can’t! I can’t even fathom the knowledge and creativity required to write an entire language. What is even better, is the languages of JRR Tolkien sound just as legitimate as English, French, or Spanish. Elven, Dwarfish, and Orc are just a few of the many cultures Tolkien brought to life through the incorporation of rhetoric, fantasy, and storytelling. Rhetoric is a very powerful weapon, and Tolkien wields this weapon with an incredible amount of skill and shows us that rhetoric can be found everywhere, even in our favorite movies.

Lobbying

Like most college kids, I benefit from the magical invention that is Netflix.  My hallmate Paul’s newest addition to his queue is one of my personal favorites Thank you For Smoking.  If you haven’t seen this movie I highly recommend it.  The reason this movie is the topic of my rhetoric and civic life blog is because of the main character: a lobbyist.

In this movie, Erin Eckhart plays tobacco lobbyist, Nick Naylor, who smiles talks and argues his way into the hearts and minds of each and every person he meets. 

Who is going to side with a sleazy grease ball who works for an industry that kills thousands of people daily? Exactly. But what is amazing is that with the power of rhetoric and argument Nick can convince anyone of anything.  As the movie depicts the day in and day out of a lobbyist for big tobacco it also paints the portrait of a father compelled to teach his son every thing he knows and to show him first hand the intricate aspects of his job.  Essentially everything he knows about rhetoric and argument. Nick tells his son to question statistics and always encourage discussion.  As his son travels with him on trips to California and witnesses the not so nice aspects of “big tobacco” he also learns the power of convincing rhetoric and the art of relentless debate.  Nick gets excited as he informs his son, “that’s the beauty of argument. If you argue correctly, you’re never wrong.”

Let’s take a look at that statement. “If you argue correctly, you’re never wrong.” 

Is that the goal of rhetoric? To never be wrong? As a stubborn person myself, I know that my parents and friends think I take that statement to heart. 

 

Aristotle defined rhetoric as “the available means of persuasion,” but can rhetoric be used as a means to justify stubbornness?  Is rhetoric used to force your opinions on others?

Can you be wrong if you argue correctly?  Can you ‘win’ and argument but still be wrong? 

PS: I highly recommend the movie. 

Wiz Wit

For those of you from the Philly area you probably have visited or perhaps even frequent either Geno’s Steaks or Pat’s Steaks.

I am blogging about cheesesteaks because yes, there is rhetoric associated with cheesesteaks. You can usually tell who the tourists are (and not by the cameras around their necks or fannypacks around their waists), but by the way they order their cheesesteaks. I’m not a native of Philly, but when I visit I strive to appear to be a local. I know how to order. But, it appears my parents, (who probably actually were wearing fannypacks) don’t know how to order. I explained to my parents there is no need to say, “I’ll have a cheesesteak please,” “I’d like cheese wiz,” or “can I have onions?” Geno and Pat and their local co-workers know you’re ordering a cheesesteak, there is no need for you to say so. And as for saying you want onions? A simple “wit” will suffice. These world famous landmarks in The City of Brotherly Love have a language of their own and have a low tolerance for those who don’t speak it. The culture, rhetoric, and language of the Philly Cheesesteak is almost as important as the steak itself.

So using my knowledge of cheesesteak rhetoric I took it upon myself and ordered “three wiz wit” for my parents and me. Thankfully, rhetoric saved me from embarrassment.

Dominos

If you read The New York Times or keep up with any major news source, you are well aware of the widespread North African unrest, strife, and revolution.

When I think about the North African unrest I draw a parallel between a scene in V For Vendetta and the domino effect of revolution in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. In this particular scene V sets up a massive domino line and tips the outlying domino and watches as they all fall.

How does “The Domino Effect” affect current politics? The Kennedy administration used this title to describe the spread of communism is Eastern Asia in the countries of Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam. Is what’s happening in Africa a domino effect as well?

Did Tunisia realize that their stand against injustice would spark a revolution across almost half a continent?

What was different about the North African conflicts was that social networking was used as the medium of revolution. Social networks and the rhetoric of the free media pushed over that outlying domino. Tunisian and Egyptian youth Tweeting and Facebooking about the events taking place in their own country sparked movements in the hearts and minds of citizens of other African countries and inspired people to join the greater movement.

Ad Analysis

Throughout this week we have been analyzing advertisements and commercials and determining what rhetorical devices are essential to the particular advertisements or campaigns we analyzed. We have seen many different commercials with many different motives.

This idea of motives got me thinking. What are the motives of advertisers? What is the motive of the company behind the advertisement?

I feel that all too often people read too far into advertisements, scrutinizing the company’s production, message, and motives of the particular advertisement. Advertisements are there to advertise. Why must we feel the need to make sure they are politically correct? Why do we feel the need to point out every mistake, hidden innuendo, or small detail of an advertisement?

The success of the advertisement is judged on how well the product is advertised, not how well the consumer knows the ins and outs of the advertisement itself. I’m not saying we should not be critical consumers, but I feel sometimes we dive too deeply into the world analysis and place too much emphasis on what we know about the reasons behind something than appreciating that something for what it is.

His Story

What is or what “defines” history?

In my American History class junior year, our teacher asked us this question on the first day of class, and also on the last. She challenged us to ask ourselves why we personally and societally determined certain things, people, events, and information as historical. Is history up to personal and societal interpretation? Is it about strict factual information or is it “his story?” If so, who is he?

I shudder to think that a quote from Adolf Hitler backs up my point, but when I was reading Mein Kampf for my “History of Nazism and Fascism” class I came across a quote stressing the confusion over what history really is:

“Few teachers understand that the aim of studying history can never be to learn historical dates and events by heart and recite them by note; that what matters is not whether the child knows exactly when this or that battle was fought, when a general was born, or even when a monarch (usually a very insignificant one) came into the crown of his forefathers…To ‘learn’ history means to seek and find the forces which are the causes leading to those effects which we subsequently perceive as historical events.”

Hitler’s definition is not a concrete example of what history is, and I don’t think a tyrannical anti-Semite would be the best source for a definition of history. But what is important is that we realize the importance of interpretation and rhetoric in history. The line “which we subsequently perceive as historical events” is extremely powerful because it acknowledges perceptions as a crucial part of history. Factual information, decisive battles, and non-biased facts all attribute to the creation and documentation of history, but I feel the beauty of history is lost in those dates, numbers, details, which we all seem to remember.

We often forget to textually and contextually analyze the events that led to this “history.” It is crucial we understand the perceptions, biases, and opinions of the people in these events and the people who document them. We have to ask who is the “his” in “his story?”

Would the stories of “Jim Crow South” be the same stories if they were told by a person of color verses a white southerner? Would an impoverished protester and President Mubarack view the current unrest and revolution in Egypt similarly?

It is crucial that we understand the importance of perception, context, and societal interpretation when studying history. Through critical analysis of the people, places, and events in our past we can better understand what we personally and socially define as history, and make efforts to change it in the future.

Appeal to Authority

During class this week we talked about advertisements and the methods used by companies to get consumers to buy their products.  As I reflected on the appeals to ethos, logos, and pathos I recall studying about logical fallacies in high school. 


I studied many fallacies varying from “begging the question” to “slippery slope.” The fallacy that rings strongest in my head is appeal to authority.  Using ethos, a company, rhetor, or person will appeal to an “authority” figure that supports the product they are selling or the argument they are making.  The most common example is “#1 doctor recommended.”  This appeal is attempting to convince the consumer, reader, or audience that someone who possesses expertise in a field supports this product.  The reader must understand that just because the box says “#1 doctor recommended” does not guarantee the success of the product or the strength of the product. As an informed audience it is our job to make sure that we understand these crucial uses of rhetoric, logical fallacies and appeals to ethos that surround us.

         
One of my favorite appeals is when a celebrity supports a product.  It isn’t enough to see commercial actors say Proactiv clears all their acne, in order to truly see how magical the acne medicine is we need to hear how it changed Katy Perry’s life.

         
I caught a recent episode of Saturday Night Live and was amazed at how this clip exemplified the use of celebrities to promote products, charities, and even crisis hotlines…
Celebrity Crisis Hotline

"Baracky Road" to Innovation

So today (yesterday morning) I had the honor of being asked to volunteer at President Obama’s speech at Rec Hall.  What’s even cooler was the fact that I was on the third row from the front and also met JoePa; needless to say, it was worth missing LA 101H (no offense Robin). But I digress…

         

Being somewhat of a political enthusiast and a strong democrat I jumped on this opportunity to volunteer and hear The President’s address.  I was excited to see what Obama had to say about energy innovation, Penn State, and “Winning the Future.”  He spoke of numerous locations across the country where energy efficiency was being incorporated in both the business and domestic realms.  He cited many examples of Universities and educational institutes leading the charge against waste and toward sustainability.  I was elated to know I attend a University on the forefront of innovation and technology.

         

What I noticed about the President’s speech was the many rhetorical devices he used throughout his speech to incite, inspire, and entertain the numerous Penn State students and faculty in attendance. 

         

When the president first arrived at the podium he made a joke reference to meeting “someone he didn’t know but had heard of.”  Of course the audience reacted positively when the punch-line being Joe Paterno was delivered.  And throughout his speech Obama made several pro-PSU remarks referencing Joe Paterno’s 400 wins and a history of excellence.  These carefully placed remarks are explicit examples of the power of rhetoric influencing and winning over an audience.   

An audio clip of my personal take on NPR's "This I Believe."

Promises

As I watched the Daily Show with Jon Stewart I was not surprised to see the topic of conversation and the butt of the jokes was President Barack Obama’s State of The Union. This years State of the Union was filled with pledges and statements of intent to change education in America, and lower the number of unemployed and under employed. But Jon Stewart recognized two main facets of modern State of the Unions that many people overlook: empty promises, and partisan rebuttals.


Stewart satirized the speech by titling the segment of his show concerning the address “State of the Union 2011: Night of too Many Promises.” He recognized and scrutinized the fact that many modern politicians claim to do all these wonderful things for the country, but due to the bureaucratic and partisan natures of American government little ever gets done. Politicians use persuasive and powerful rhetoric to pledge to America that their ideas will make a difference in society. Now, having ideas and taking action is what leaders are supposed to do, but making lofty promises is not a good use of political rhetoric.


Also in today’s society neither side, whether it is the Democrats or the GOP, can deliver any sort of address without a rebuttal by the opposing side or party. Last year, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal led the charge with his powerful republican response to President Obama’s State of the Union. This year, Jon Stewart poked fun at the numerous response made by various Representatives and politicians.


Understanding rhetoric and how it is used in the political world is a very useful tool to voters and non-voters alike. The American public should learn the necessary tools and language so that they can decipher political messages individually, without the help of a comedian.

Implorement

I opened up my laptop to check my mail, Gmail, and blog when Google Chrome sent me a wonderful reminder of the power of rhetoric in civic life by displaying a picture of President Kennedy as the Google theme. January 20, 1960 President John Fitzgerald Kennedy delivered one of the most powerful and remembered inaugural addresses in American history.

On this fifty-year anniversary, I am reminded of the amazing capabilities of rhetoric to unite, incite, and spark a nation in times of need. President Kennedy recognized man’s ability to help one another and solve many of the problems of the world stating that, “man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe.”

He assures the American people that their government will do everything in their power to ensure the liberties, freedoms, and rights of all people nationally and globally. But, what makes this speech so powerful is President Kennedy implores the American public to do everything in their power to individually make a difference. Using careful word choice and his delivery he inspires each and every citizen to become civically engaged. President Kennedy emphasizes the importance of individual civic leadership by delivering this command: “And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.”

Rhetoric has always been a part of our countries history, and this reflection on an extremely influential speech shines light on just how big of a role rhetoric plays in citizenship, government, and civic engagement.