*COUNTERPUBLICS*

In this entry, I will be examining the question(s): Why/how is it a counterpublic? What is its rhetorical message? How might it be empowering? How might it be limiting?

To help me investigate these questions, I will be analyzing a youtube video which shows the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity performing one of their infamous pledge songs “Somebody tell me why.”

Omega Psi Phi is was the first predominantly African-American international fraternity that came about in 1911. Priding themselves on manhood, perseverance, and uplift, the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, also known as the Que dogs, commonly host public performances and rallies to bring awareness to the oppression that African-Americans have experienced throughout the years. This artifact exemplifies the confusion, humility, and anger the Que dogs possess towards oppression, slavery, and mistreatment of African-Americans throughout the years. “… Publics formed by marginalized peoples take on particular genres of discourse and action depending on culture, relations with the dominant public and state, and socioeconomic forces…” (Squires 112). This fraternity is a counterpublic because they are using their platform as a fraternity to bring attention publicly to a topic that is not necessarily discussed so much freely. Slavery and the mistreatment of African-Americans is a terrible part of U.S. history, and African-Americans are still mistreated to this day. They take action by dancing, stepping, writing poems, and most commonly, singing. Que dogs are relevant to the Black Lives Matter community, both willing and able to fight for what they know is right and discuss the horrids that our country has endured. In this video, the lead singer repeatedly cries the question “Why were we treated so bad?” The background singers, or ‘a capella group,’ holds stern, displeased faces while occasionally belting out blunt, gloomy tones. The rhetorical message they are expressing and showing is that African-Americans are displeased, angry, confused, and sorrowful with how they were treated in history. They don’t wish to ignore the history, as African-Americans are still commonly mistreated today, making them a counterpublic.

This artifact is very empowering because it is an African-American only group reflecting on the sorrows them and their ancestors have encountered. Throughout the video we notice lots of chanting and barking. The fraternity are referred to as Que dogs for a reason. Some believed that the reason they were referred to as ‘dogs’ was because African-Americans were treated like dogs in history; they were told where to go, what to do, and couldn’t really fight against it. However, the real reason that they are referred to as ‘dogs’ is much more uplifting. Dogs are known for their loyalty to man and guardianship of those they love most. They are determined to make changes and possess the tenacity to see them through. This is very empowering and is why we hear barking in the background, as if they are ‘dogs,’ extremely loyal to each other, protective, loving, caring, and willing to fight. The only possible way I could see this artifact being limiting is the fact that the entire audience consists of African-Americans. Everyone in this public agrees with what is being done, and the lyrics that are being shouted out. Although this organization does get a lot of attention, especially online, holding rallies and probates where the audience could contain people of all races would get the message out to a wider variety and as a result, impact more people and increase the likelihood of change.

In additional research, I analyzed a scholarly article titled “The Early American Public Sphere and the Emergence of a Black Print Counterpublic” written by Joanna Brooks. “These counterpublic networks served as venues through which excluded people might collectively assert their rights to public space and declare their common views and concerns through public” (Brooks 91). This is relevant to the artifact because the fraternity is a counterpublic who is taking advantage of the public space they are allowed to gather on and express their feelings of exclusion through song. Also within this article, Brooks explains how “Under slavery blacks were defined as private property rather than public citizens… The noncompensation of slaves for their unpaid labor further capitalized white privilege; it designated black-white relations as forever outside economies of exchange and reciprocity and instead as governed by economics of sacrifice, gift, and indebtedness” (72). This mistreatment and unfairness is exactly what organizations like the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity is referring to when they constantly question why they were treated so terribly.

In summary, the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity prides themselves on loyalty to each other, protecting each other, expressing the feelings and confusion they posses, and ultimately making change as a result of their actions. They are a counterpublic that fights for what they believe in because they know, even today, African-Americans face oppression. These empowering gatherings are strictly productive and progress-oriented. They aim to bring awareness of the mistreatment that they have faced for so many years, and seek to put it to an end with their gatherings. Their dog-mentality of never quitting and having each others backs is motivating and opens up the publics’ eyes that African-Americans aren’t going to stand around and let the past be okay, and they especially will not stand to let it continue.

References:

6212009. “ETA Omega “I wanna know”.” Youtube. Sep. 10, 2017.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBNHzUKvsmk&t=80s

Brooks, J. “The Early American Public Sphere and the Emergence of a Black Print

Counterpublic.” William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 62, no. 1, 2005, p. 67., doi:10.2307/3491622.

Squires, C. (2001). “The Black Press and the State.” In R. Asen  and D. Brouwer (Eds.),

*What is Rhetoric to Me*

In Comm 320, Rhetorical Traditions, I learned about how rhetoric has been used and defined throughout history, and how it is used today. We learned about many philosophers, such as Plato, Socrates, and Burke, and how they viewed rhetoric. Throughout the term my idea of rhetoric has changed substantially. This essay highlights how my personal definition has adjusted from the beginning of the term, to the end.

In the beginning of the term, I viewed rhetoric as tool to only be used when trying to persuade an audience. I tied rhetoric to strictly politics and believed it was the motive, in a sense, behind what politicians would choose to say. Throughout the term, I have widened my understanding of rhetoric and came to realize that rhetoric is in everything. I think rhetoric ultimately is the ability to have an influence on another person through communication or symbols but also the ability to establish a theme within communication. Communication will always have some influence and will always have some kind of theme within the statement or message whether it is created with words, symbols, or etc. Everything has a rhetorical message, it doesn’t even have to be words. It deals with communicating a message in any way possible. I particularly enjoyed the most recent theorist, Foucault. His ideas of discursive formations are pretty applicable to everyday societal life. There are discursive practices, rules, roles, power, and knowledge found in every place of business or social environment in America, whether it be financial, academic, etc. Rhetoric is concerning to Foucault when it is deemed to be true. He uses an example of some random individual saying “It is going to rain.” This does not concern him, however, it would if a meteorologist said it, considering he has the intellectual background to support the idea that was stated. It is interesting to think about this idea, when it comes to rhetoric, because it shows that one necessarily shouldn’t just believe what they hear, especially if they are not qualified to dish out that information and deem it to be true. Another theorist that helped shaped my definition of rhetoric was Kenneth Burke. Burke talked a lot about symbols and the different meanings we attach behind them. At the beginning of the class, I didn’t associate symbols as being part of rhetoric but after learning about his philosophy, it is very relevant the impact symbols have on society as well as how much nonverbals are used in communication. Symbols and nonverbals can establish a theme within a message just like words in communication and this is a drastic difference to how I first thought about rhetoric.

My example that I used for my rhetorical act presentation was a picture that was taken last spring term from my intercultural communication class when we met wit refugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo. We met with these refugees once a week throughout the term and would have conversations with them, play games, and overall just hang out. This artifact applies to my definition of rhetoric because when the refugees first came to America there was a lot of stuff they were going to get exposed to. Like Foucault talks about, you can’t believe everything you hear and this was something they were going to have to understand after being exposed to so many new things. Also when communicating with them, I had to use nonverbals and symbols to give my message since they were very new to the English language. I completely had to change my rhetoric compared to what I would use if I was talking with a person from America. So it was very interesting to look back and apply this experience to what my new definition of rhetoric is.

In conclusion, my knowledge of rhetoric has shifted from believing it is why someone says the words that they do, to the act of presenting and communicating a message in any way with a theme and influence behind it. It is an act of persuasion but not limited to that. It ultimately showcases one’s narrative(s), and is the way one uses language and symbols to broadcast their message. This course has provided a considerable amount of information regarding rhetoric that will be very applicable to life, no matter what route an individual takes.

Burke, Kenneth, and Joseph R. Gusfield. (1989). On Symbols and Society. Univ. of Chicago Press

Foss, S. K., and Gill, A. (1987). Michel Foucault’s theory of rhetoric as epistemic. Western Journal of Communication, 51(4), 384-401.

*Dramatistic Rhetoric*

In this entry, I will be examining the question(s): How are symbols at use in this artifact in the way Burke describes the symbol-using animal? How is this particular use productive/unproductive for society?

To help me investigate these questions, I will be analyzing a a video provided by the University of Oregon that explains why their football team switched from using hand signals to pictures when calling their plays. This artifact shows how important pictures can be in our society when being used for communication. The artifact also shows that you can communicate more efficiently using pictures as opposed to words or hand signals in a certain context.

“In being a link between us and the nonverbal, words are by the same token a screen separating us from the verbal and the nonverbal” (Burke 1989). Symbols are very impactful on giving particular objects meaning and they also allow us to relate certain experiences back to physical objects. Communication has become a very important part of our everyday lives. We use it to survive and relay messages between one another to express ourselves about how we feel, what we want, what we need, etc. Without communication, we as human beings would struggle to interact with each other. We as humans often grow up looking at pictures of various things and then follow that with learning the language of our culture. We also are able to see the moment we are born before we are actually able to say actual words. I chose this artifact that shows the Oregon Ducks football team using pictures to call their football plays. It is very common to use hand signals in the game of football at all levels such as high school, college, and even the NFL. I can attest to this because after playing at Augustana for four years, I had to learn hand signals from two defensive coordinators and it can get very confusing. I personally think that use of pictures would have been much easier to understand. Oregon had a fear of opponents catching on to their hand signals so they switched to pictures on big posters to call their plays. The posters contained four different images that meant different things to different players. With that being said many players expressed their opinions, saying the pictures were easier to understand than hand signals and also was easier to process. This allowed Oregon to call more plays in a game because the efficiency was so much improved. I believe this all relates to us being able to see before we can speak. We gain more experience by seeing the world around us because we can do it from the very start of our life. We cannot speak from the very beginning of our life which is why I think in the context of a football when you only have 30-40 seconds to get the play in, pictures are the most efficient way to do it. This all relates back to Burke referring the difference between symbols of man and animal. We as humans can understand symbols but we cannot communicate symbols with animals. In the context of this situation, Oregon is man and their opponent is the animal. This correlation relates to Burke’s example because Oregon’s players know the meaning of their pictures but their opponent is like the bird because they aren’t able to understand what the symbols mean nor what they stand for.

This artifact shows that using pictures for communication can be a very powerful tool. One thing to note is that football plays are not very simple. In a written play there are responsibilities for 11 different people and this can be a lot to jumble into words or hand signals. Pictures can be put to a very productive use for society. Not everyone is able to speak and hear like the majority of people are on this earth. Pictures allow people to communicate effectively especially if they have disability. The artifact of the Oregon Ducks using pictures to communicate with their players doesn’t suggest you must have a disability to communicate using pictures but rather it shows how effective pictures can be during simple or complex communication. The downfall that comes along with using pictures is that you need to be able to see and not every has the ability to see on this earth and that would make this style of communication to be unproductive to those people.

In additional research, I analyzed a scholarly article titled “Representation, Symbol, and Semiosis: Signs of a Scholarly Collaboration”. The article talks about how meanings change over time with symbols and objects. It also talks about symbols can relate different meanings to people of different cultures. One important aspect the article focused on was how symbolic meanings can be shared with different types of people or even different amounts of people. Parmentier states, “Symbolic codes are socially shared and historically transmitted, and every attempt to dislocate them from their sociohistorical grounding is a methodological derailment” (Parmentier 3). This is important to understand because I think it shows how the meaning of symbols or objects can change over time. I think it also expresses how different groups of people may know certain symbols to represent different meanings. For example, the Oregon football team can use the same poster year after year but change what the meaning of each picture actually means. This would relate to how former players might see the posters when they are watching the game being played and realize the pictures don’t mean what they meant for that former player. The quote also relates to Oregon’s opponent trying to determine what their pictures means as it would be a drastic waste of time which could be a “methodological derailment” to the opposing team.

In summary, symbols are a huge part of the history that surrounds us and it is part of the history of what made us who we are. Symbols have been around for thousands of years and yet they are still apart of our everyday communication. The artifact shows use of symbols in a different way than what most people are used to. This is important to understand because it shows that symbols aren’t just used when having a basic conversation. They can be used to relay messages in different situations and it also shows that you don’t have to use words to communicate effectively. Overall, the artifact shows how effective symbolism can be for communication. Not only can symbols increase the speed of your communication by getting the message relayed quicker but it gives the ability to establish different meanings for people in different cultures.

References:

Burke, Kenneth, and Joseph R. Gusfield. (1989). On Symbols and Society. Univ. of Chicago Press.

ESPN. (2018, September 29). ESPN “Oregon Ducks Play Calling with Pictures.” Retrieved April 16, 2019, www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0eXg4GUui4.

Parmentier, Richard J. (2015).  “Representation, Symbol, and Semiosis: Signs of a Scholarly Collaboration.” (pp. 3-5) The University of Chicago Press Journals, Brandeis University, www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/680470.

*Rhetoric as Narrative*

In this entry, I will be examining the question(s): What narratives are important to me or U.S culture or a certain group of people? What truths does it promote? What truths does it limit or ignore? What are the advantages or disadvantages of this narrative?

To help me investigate these questions, I will be analyzing a press conference with Penn State football coach James Franklin after they lost to Ohio State this past year by one point. This press conferences forms a narrative based of loss to Ohio State to work harder after failure as opposed to quitting and accepting defeat. James Franklin uses rhetoric to create a narrative that is very motivational for the success of his football team moving forward. This press conferences highlights the things his program is going to do differently moving forward to help allow the program go from great to elite. 

“Narratives can be stories, characters, themes, or plots that describe events” (Palczewski, Ice, Fritch 2012). Narratives are referential. Stories can be told in different manners because everyone interprets or experiences a situation in a different way. They indicate values and ideology and engage interest throughout. I chose this artifact involving Penn State because of the current state of their football program. Which revolves around the american success narrative that the harder you work the more success you can obtain. In this press conference with James Franklin, Penn State is suffering a tough loss to Ohio State. Penn State was leading by a margin the entire game and ending up coming one point short to Ohio State for the second year in a row. In the press conference, Franklin talks about the football program going from average to great and from great to elite. He talks about the strides the team has made to become great but he then focuses on how such little details make up the difference between great and elite. The truths that this narrative shows is that after defeat it is a social norm to not give up and work even harder. Franklin talks about how much harder the entire program is going to work to bridge the gap between great and elite. He talks about all the little details such as going to class are what is going to make the difference. Some truths this narrative limits are the fact that just because you say you are going to do something doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. This revolves around the idea that just because we work harder doesn’t mean we are promised anything more because of it. So for the purpose of this artifact, Penn State is not promised to go from great to elite just because James Franklin says they are going to outwork everyone else by the little things. In “Rhetoric in civic life”, it states, “Narratives are interesting and enjoyable, even when they are about painful events,” (Palczewski 126). I think this relates directly to this interview because although Penn State was suffering a very hard loss, the interview was very enjoyable to watch and provided an important message of how very small details over the course of a game or even life are what make the difference between winning/losing or even success vs. failure.

This narrative shows more advantages than disadvantages because of the theme that is prevalent throughout the press conference. It shows the norm of expectations for powerful programs like Penn State. It shows that after losses by one point in back to back years is not an excuse to give up and stop working hard. The coach shows how the situation is going to motivate him and his entire program to do better in every aspect of life, which includes all the things players and coaches do off the football field. A message like this is setting a high standard for not only Penn State athletics but everyone they compete against. As an athletic program, this interview sends the message of match up with our standards or we will outperform you. Some people could have blamed the entire game on poor weather, bad officiating, or many other factors. Franklin shows the impact of integrity and it’s very important to always own up to what you do and not blame others for the outcome of your decisions.

In additional research, I analyzed a scholarly article titled “Narratives Hold Open the Future”. This article elaborates on how narratives play a tremendous role in our individual lives and can mold our personalities. They do this by bringing listeners into the memory with the storyteller, causing us to empathize with their dilemma that has brought them to the future they now are at (Halpern S25). This article goes on to talk about narrative ethics, narratives within friendships, and the importance of communication and how hearing different narratives can change our thinking or motivation. Halpern states that “Narratives can help people see that our individual potential can be widened if we have others who can listen to us with open minds and help us form our stories” (S27). This holds well with the press conference that I analyzed because it focuses on how the impact of losing by one point to Ohio State is going to strongly make the Penn State football team want to be that much better. It focuses on how the narrative that what their coach is saying in the press conference is going to translate back to being better in every aspect of life so it ultimately bridges the gap between great and elite. Their story is losing to Ohio State two years in a row and it creates a sense for each individual to be that much better. Each teammate is going to be responsible for making the person beside them as good as they are willing to be. This press conference also connected with me on a deeper level because I saw on the bus ride home following one of our losses to Millikin University in which our case we lost back to back years by one point in each game. So I was able to relate to this narrative very strongly and it motivated me to be better in all aspects of life on and off the football field.

In summary, narratives and narrative ethics are important to individuals and how they go about achieving their success. Narratives can be a useful way for us to express emotions after certain situations and also a way for us to move forward in life. This interview presents the narrative of moving forward in life with hard work. It demonstrates the reward that success can bring and how hard it can be to achieve. It also shows that all the hard work in the world can still leave you to come up a point short. But instead of blaming other people and quitting, this narrative embraces the idea that suffering from defeat is not an excuse to quit but rather use it as motivation to be successful moving forward.

References:

ESPN. (2018, September 29). ESPN “James Franklin sounds off over loss to     Ohio State”. Retrieved March 22, 2018, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6zBzZSitDc

Halpern, J. (2014). Narratives Hold Open the Future. Hastings Center Report, 44(pp. S25-S27).

Palczewski, C. H., Ice, R., Fritch, J. (2012). Narratives. In Rhetoric in Civic Life (pp. 117-146). State College, PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.