Submitted April 9, 2006, 8:27 PM
Name
Write about one civic leader or figure of authority who could be viewed through the "tongues of fire" in canto 26. How is this individual's use of language troublesome? Do you feel that rhetoric has been given enough value or emphasis in your education? Why or why not?
Ray Nagin, the Mayor of New Orleans instantly comes to mind. The good mayor, as many know, has had a tough year in the press. His relatively quiet press life previous to the floods was shattered by his many comments aimed at the Bush administration and the federal government in general. Such inciting comments as "get off your a**es" were made great headlines for those seeking to sell a few newspapers. No doubt there were significant problems with the federal response to the flooding but at a time when cooperation and effective communication was needed, Mr. Nagin seemed all to eager to ignore his civic responsibility and follow a more personal agenda. What incited the most public outcry however, were his comments at a press conference on January 16th in which he stated New Orleans “will be chocolate at the end of the day. This city will be a majority African-American city. It's the way God wants it to be. You can't have it no other way.” Grammar aside, it is easy to see why his statements had the effects they did. The language is clearly biased, arguably racist, and undoubtedly inappropriate for a city mayor. His language is troublesome to me personally as the city of New Orleans needs a strong leader who can rally the citizens together and work to bring displaced people back to the city. Comments like those above destroy those efforts and complicate the already tenuous rebuilding situation. Given Canto 26, I think Dante might have a choice place reserved for someone such as this.
Personally, I feel that at the university level, rhetoric has been valued and emphasized. I will say that to a great extent, it is up to the individual student to ‘take the reins’ on this topic. It is easy to fall in line and marginalize the writing experience. However, if a student wants to, various opportunities are available, at least they have been for me. It does depend somewhat on the type of major one pursues as well. Meaning, some of the hard sciences might not offer the same type of opportunities to explore writing and rhetoric as the softer sciences. Although I have yet to meet a professor in any area of professional academia who denies the value of rhetoric. Literature, as an area of study has been marginalized. There is no doubt in my mind that the university could take steps to replace the emphasis on literature and critical thinking/writing about literature. It seems to me that most of the literature courses taught in the low to mid levels of undergraduate study are there only because they have to be. The university realizes the necessity of having some literature courses but I don’t know if they realize the value of such courses. Again, a student with a passion for literature can surely go out of his way to pursue literary opportunities on campus but it seems there is little emphasis on this very important area of study.
|
Submitted April 3, 2006, 4:26 PM
Name
Write about one civic leader or figure of authority who could be viewed through the "tongues of fire" in canto 26. How is this individual's use of language troublesome? Do you feel that rhetoric has been given enough value or emphasis in your education? Why or why not?
I can't really think of one specific person's name, but one group of individuals that sticks out in my mind are the fraudulent religious leaders. The preachers, etc. that claim to be able to heal people through God or Jesus on television have often been exposed as con artists. And even after there were investigations showing how these religious leaders pulled-off the stunt, people still believed in them!! It just shows how powerful rhetoic can be when used in combination with faith. These religious leaders are so persuasive that they have people fainting in the room because they think that they are experiencing "miracles."
As for rhetoric in my education, I feel that I have gotten quite a lot of it, but I have seen many others who haven't. A lot of my high school education focused on writing persuasive papers and speeches, and I am still getting some of that in college as a science major. I have taken a communications class as well that really focused on being a good persuasive speaker.
|
Submitted April 3, 2006, 3:57 PM
Name
Write about one civic leader or figure of authority who could be viewed through the "tongues of fire" in canto 26. How is this individual's use of language troublesome? Do you feel that rhetoric has been given enough value or emphasis in your education? Why or why not?
I am sure everyone is familiar with the infamous Stanley Milgram studies in which ordinary people were asked to administer "shock therapy" to "patients" in increasing doses at the order of authoritative figures in white lab coats. None of it was real - the electrical shocks, or the patients in pretend pain, but if it had been, the fake doctors in the white lab coats would have been in Dante's tounges of fire. The lesson of the Milgram experiments, (one of them) is that it is not only the smooth, persuasive words, but also how they are said. If you put on a safari hat at the zoo and say, "Gather around folks, the tour starts in 5 minutes!" people are going to follow and listen to you, regardless of your real knowledge of the subject. We naturally respond to athority in our lives. This is not to say we should shun all authority (anarchy) or should shrink from taking authoritative stances when neccessary (irresponsible) but we do need to be cautious when we take on leadership roles. The antidote for careless or selfish use of power/rhetoric is caring more for the followers/audience than for your own personal gain.
As for rhetoric in my own education, I am a COMM major so I had to take a whole class on rhetoric and it pops up from time to time in my other comm classes. I found in my rhetoric class that the professor paid close attention to how rhetoric is used to persuade and manipulate but shied away from the moral components of how rhetoric ought to be used. Sometimes I wish we, myself included, had a little more of Dante's courage in laying out our moral obligations.
|
Submitted April 3, 2006, 3:23 PM
Name
Write about one civic leader or figure of authority who could be viewed through the "tongues of fire" in canto 26. How is this individual's use of language troublesome? Do you feel that rhetoric has been given enough value or emphasis in your education? Why or why not?
I am thinking along the lines of Pat Robertson. Certified Lunatic. As founder of the Christian Coalition, one would only imagine that his goal in life would be to help others, be a role model and create a better world. Unfortunately, he wants to be a role model for select individuals - pretty much white men - and his "better world" consists of only born-again Christians. His most recent outcry to assassinate Hugo Chavez (yeah, that'll solve the world's problems) is just an example of how small-minded he is. His take on NOW (National Organization for Women)/feminism is this: "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy captalism and become lesbians." This man reaches millions of homes every week! That kind of moral imposition is dangerous. He has a flaming tongue of fire. Somebody please put it out.
As for rhetoric being given enough value in my education, well, that is something I feel affects each of us individually. We have the ability to place as much (or as little) value on it as we deem necessary.
|
Submitted April 3, 2006, 2:20 PM
Name
Write about one civic leader or figure of authority who could be viewed through the "tongues of fire" in canto 26. How is this individual's use of language troublesome? Do you feel that rhetoric has been given enough value or emphasis in your education? Why or why not?
To be more general and try not to be political I am going to say a teacher. Teacher's have an incredible responsibility in molding the thoughts of younger individuals. They in fact can "guide" and manipulate the students to however they would want to. Their language can change individual's opinions, goals, etc.
I absolutely think that rhetoric has not been given enough emphasis in our education. We do not study HOW to use language effectively and persuasively, we just study the language itself. Though we go over some stories that may in fact be powerful pieces, we are not taught how to do it ourselves. In the english courses it is all about reading and writing about what we read, not about becoming powerful authors ourselves. (In my experience at least)
|
Submitted April 3, 2006, 1:58 PM
Name
Write about one civic leader or figure of authority who could be viewed through the "tongues of fire" in canto 26. How is this individual's use of language troublesome? Do you feel that rhetoric has been given enough value or emphasis in your education? Why or why not?
Besides, from the obvious example of President Bush, I would have to say Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. The congressional representative chose not to abide by the security laws that congress put into action for the protection of citizens and the nation’s representatives after 9/11. She did not have the proper identification in order to be admitted into the congress building so the guard did not let her through. She got upset and hit the guard with her cell phone. After the guard wanted to press charges, the congresswoman made public speeches on television accusing the guard of racial profiling. The issue of security and proper identification has know been skewed into an issue about racial profiling. I hope that in the future our representatives will make a better effort to follow the security rules that they helped enforce. I can take a lesson from this in that I should except my faults graciously and repent for them, rather than causing the debate of a whole other issue.
|
Submitted March 28, 2006, 4:35 PM
Name
Write about one civic leader or figure of authority who could be viewed through the "tongues of fire" in canto 26. How is this individual's use of language troublesome? Do you feel that rhetoric has been given enough value or emphasis in your education? Why or why not?
In today's world perhaps the most notorious civic figure using language would be George W. Bush himself. The president of the US seeks to convince the people of his country to support him and his political policy. The war in Iraq has dragged on for several years and while one dictator has been removed from power, there is now the possiblity of the country being taken over by radical Islamists. In each of his speeches Bush makes a point to tell us that we must continue this war for democracy and that each day our troops spend there brings the place closer to his political ideal. However, while he spouts of these words, other, more troubling news briefs contradict him. Every day there is news of more suicide bombings and renagade attacks designed to get rid of the troops stationed. In the process of these attacks innocent people are injured and killed. And this entire process just sparks more hatred and retaliation. The question arises when do we as a nation realize that we have failed to follow the proper course of releasing these people from Saddam and let them decide their own government and lives. As outsiders we do not have a complete understanding of the poeple and their thoughts and it would be better to back off now and see where the cards fall. To think of a popular phrase, there are too many cooks stirring the pot and only problems can arise from this.
As a college student, the art of rhetoric seems wholly abandoned. Most of my classes emphasize the art of writing but not the art of speaking. As people today, most of us spend our time speaking in the vernacular and so there is no reason to learn how to speak grandly or in front of others. And when it comes to speaking grandly, most of us do it in the context of our work and so by that point we are well versed in our material and need only explain it suitably.
|
|
© 1996–2009, Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media. (Copyright Notice)
|