Daily Assignment #1.

Graff and Birkenstein see academic writing as one voice entering into an ongoing volatile conversation. Instead of existing purely for itself and in itself, the writing—the arguments and claims and points and ideas—exist because of and for the other. Only by engaging oneself and the other in this conversation does the larger dialogue expand and explore new avenues.

The rhetoric in the course description is very much in line with what Graff and Birkenstein purport. As students and citizens {and as humans existing for and with the other in mind, even if that other is yourself} we are challenged to enter into the middle of a conversation. Whether or not we know many facts about the topic is irrelevant. This will come in time and as it does we will attempt to inspire others to respond based on our employment of the exercises and assignments in the course. Using the already posited, we will construct our own arguments, predict likely objections and respond accordingly. 

Both descriptions of academic performance rely completely on the existence of an ongoing conversation and emphasize the importance of challenging one’s own claims, opinions and beliefs. Both point out that this way of interacting is at the root of how and why we actively experience the world. However, I think Dr. Bammert’s perspective is more comprehensive—acknowledging the innate quality within humans to express and interact with the other in these ways. 

Four Principles of Rhetoric as applied to Michelle Obama's Speech.

Michelle Obama's speech presents a specific worldview, which Barack Obama would fulfill by becoming the next president of the U.S. The first principal of rhetoric—advisory—is precisely this: advice to the audience to adopt a particular worldview. In this case, Obama represents and promises the fruition.

 

The second rhetorical principle—addressed—has to do with who the audience is and who the speaker perceives the audience to be. Michelle Obama uses words and phrases like "as a mom," "as a daughter" etc. The anecdotes and examples she employs are embodied in the heroes of her narratives: "blue collar workers," families hard pressed for money but instilled with the kind of desire that drives them to accomplish seemingly impossible jobs so as to provide for their children and make ends meet. She references her own family and her relationship with Obama, appealing to the personal and relatable situations of those in her audience. She spoke to Americans, voters, those concerned with their livelihood and their children's futures. Her choice of words and analogies make this obvious.

 

Her rhetoric arises out of a lack the audience experiences--be it socially, financially, etc. Her speech relies upon the assumption that there is a palpable need for change and hope felt among her audience and all of America. People are working hard and not always finding help from the government or even acknowledgement of their dire situation. There is a need to recognize this national "other" that Obama promises to see.

 

Finally, her performance was especially influential. She delivered her speech in a manner similar to that employed by Obama: gestures, voice, tone, expression. She referenced the anniversaries of two momentus events: women gaining the right to vote and MLK's speech. The images tied up with the events will call to mind already accomplished milestones of a similar sort—things to which to aspire.