Bitzer and Edbauer present two theoretical ways to interpret
writing. In summation, Bitzer discusses the importance of the various elements
of the context in which rhetoric is taking place in order for persuasion to
take place; Edbauer introduces the idea of a “rhetorical ecology,” similar to a
biological ecology where rhetoric is used as a verb, and he also discusses the
importance of shifting elements in the ecology/situation.
The piece of writing that I will use to discuss more
in-depth these two points of view is the following article:
It is entitled, “Stanford Rapist Brock Turner Might Be Out
of Jail Already but Those Protesting His Case Are Just Getting Started: Meet
two women leading protests against Turner, Judge Aaron Persky, and rape
culture.” I found the article from Cosmopolitan Magazine’s Snapchat story,
which is a guilty pleasure of mine and something that I mindlessly peruse each
morning, since it updates every day. Cosmo is notorious for its mindless and
over the top, superficial articles, but this one, which is an interview with
two women protesting the Brock Turner case, is more serious and in-depth. The
two women discuss their experience protesting rape culture with fellow
activists.
Bitzer would view this interview and the women’s discourse
as a result of situation/context. They are being interviewed, so they will
include in their responses as much detail as possible, not only for the sake of
readers’ understanding, but also for the sake of their organizations, GRLCVLT
and Fvck Rape Culture. So, a large part of their situation is both a PR
opportunity and an opportunity to get the word out about their cause.
Additionally, the exigence, or thing waiting to be done, according to Bitzer,
is the continuing presence of that which they are protesting and the lack of
knowledge that the public holds on rape culture. The audience is Cosmo readers,
who are vastly female, which influences the women’s discourse.
According to Edbauer, this analysis is true but superficial.
Edbauer would view the deeper “ecological” network in which the women are being
interviewed. They are getting the word out about their feminist cause, which
means that their language/discourse is characteristically striving toward
change. This interview inherently acknowledges the ability for audience and
environment to change. Especially given that this is a piece of writing
published on the internet, the audience is ambiguous; it could be anybody
perusing Snapchat or Cosmo. This is the type of “public rhetoric” that Edbauer
discussed in her article. Audience and exigence, according to Edbauer, cannot
be isolated here because of the constantly changing interactions.
No comments:
Post a Comment