In the second Massumi reading, Massumi relates a story about how President Reagan, known as the Great Communicator, was seen as incomprehensible by patients with global aphasia and tonal agnosia. The aphasics couldn't understand words as they were and got meaning by following body language, while the agnosiacs couldn't catch tone or any extraverbal indicators, relying on grammatical form and semantic or logical content. Surprisingly, both groups found Reagan to be a poor speaker who failed to persuade. "To the aphasics, he was functionally illiterate in extraverbal cueing; his body language struck them as hilariously inept... The agnosiacs were outraged that the man couldn't put together a grammatical sentence or follow a logical line to its conclusion" (Massumi 40). Why then was he so effective to most others? Massumi reasons that Reagan was "affective, as opposed to emotional" (Massumi 40). Reagan's "jerks" as Massumi calls them, didn't inhibit his effectiveness; instead, they opened up the potential for greater effectiveness. In other words, the content of his speech didn't really matter but what mattered was what it was doing to us affectively.
I admit that I'm still lost on the concept of potentiality and how it made Reagan more effective despite his apparent incomprehensibility. Whenever I read "jerk" in Massumi, I imagined someone slamming the table during a speech to make a point (or wake up an audience). I can see how that would be effective but I don't fully understand Massumi's point that Reagan's "jerks" conveyed confidence.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
The Transmission of Affect
In The Transmission of Affect, Teresa Brennan "deals with the belief that the emotions and engergies of one person or group can be absorbed by or can enter directly into another". Brennan uses the example of walking into a room and feeling the atmosphere, i.e. feeling tension if two people had been arguing before you came in. I was more interested in Brennan's discussion on transmission in groups though. Brennan goes through a brief history on the topic before offering her own views on it and in later chapters, the implications of the notion of the transmission of affect ("My affect, if it comes across to you, alters your anatomical makeup for good or ill" (Brennan 74)). Brennan discusses the idea of entrainment or "the concrete mechanisms of transmission" (Brennan 68). The notion of images and sound affecting you and tying you to a crowd was somewhat familiar to me; the idea that pheromones can affect you in the same way was wholly different. It gave me a whole new outlook on the expression "smelling fear" since, apparently, you literally can smell fear.
I wish there had been more on the topic of crowd violence with specific examples. It's always seemed obvious to me that being part of a crowd lended itself some anonymity, thus allowing people to do things they normally wouldn't. I know that I often get caught up in the crowd during a sports event, whether I'm at the event live or watching it on TV with other people. Sometimes there's a weird situation where I'm caught up in the action that I'm seeing on TV while I remain oblivious to the fact that everyone else in the room is pretty bored. Situations like that support the idea that images are powerful in terms of entrainment but it also supports the idea of "feeling" the atmosphere since the only way I noticed my peers' change in mood was through an odd, somewhat intangible feeling.
I wish there had been more on the topic of crowd violence with specific examples. It's always seemed obvious to me that being part of a crowd lended itself some anonymity, thus allowing people to do things they normally wouldn't. I know that I often get caught up in the crowd during a sports event, whether I'm at the event live or watching it on TV with other people. Sometimes there's a weird situation where I'm caught up in the action that I'm seeing on TV while I remain oblivious to the fact that everyone else in the room is pretty bored. Situations like that support the idea that images are powerful in terms of entrainment but it also supports the idea of "feeling" the atmosphere since the only way I noticed my peers' change in mood was through an odd, somewhat intangible feeling.
Keeping Austin Weird
Rhetoric: it's alive! Or at least that's the sense I got after reading Edbauer's "Unframing" piece. I had always thought that "Keep Austin Weird" was just a slogan honoring Austin's unique quirkiness; I had no idea that it was envisioned as a stand against big business in Austin. I think that living in the dynamic age of the Internet has made me much more open to the idea of rhetoric as an ecology. For example, we see countless YouTube videos of people offering their own take on a current issue. It's natural then to imagine rhetoric as dynamic and changing in the public sphere, where we have to be attuned to the "processes that both comprise and extend the rhetorics" (Edbauer 19). I don't think this completely dismisses a more static model of the rhetorical situation like Bitzer talks about; rather, I think it's a great extension to the framework we have of rhetoric right now. The notion that you can understand what part of the city is good and bad were great examples of the affective experience; I know that I feel different from when I'm around campus then when I'm back home on Riverside.
Final Project: LeBron Feeling the Heat
LeBron Feeling the Heat
Sports events, like many other forms of entertainment, are subject to swells of emotion and energy. Just as a musician belting out a particularly high note will bring an audience to its feet, so too does a baseball slugger’s home run or a quarterback’s Hail Mary pass to the end zone. For the home team, such actions often bring joy and excitement to the crowd; it is quite the opposite for fans of an away team. In that vein, any sports team visiting another arena for a match will likely be exposed to a certain amount of heckling and derision during the game, with every mistake magnified with boos and appropriate sound effects from the stadium’s particular sound system.
If your name happens to be LeBron James, the effect is startlingly more pronounced. James, the starting small forward for the Miami Heat basketball team, has experienced a level of directed hate rarely seen even in the most heated of rivalry games. In fact, when James visited the New Jersey Nets for a game on October 31, 2010, he was greeted by “an inquisition by the news media” and “loud boos from the fans” (Kaplan). James, once regarded as the National Basketball Association’s (NBA) next great player and one with the “ability to transcend the sport” (DuPree), was now one of the most reviled players in the league. James’ reputation dropped to the point where he was named the sixth most disliked sports personality by the Q Scores Company, a firm which polls the general population about their views on celebrities (Rovell).
James’ precipitous fall from grace began with what many perceived to be a lackluster performance in the 2010 Eastern Conference Finals, with his Cleveland Cavaliers facing elimination in Game 6 from the Boston Celtics. James and the Cavaliers would lose the game, and James was heavily criticized for his poor performance and seeming lack of heart. It was James’ actions in the off-season, however, that truly injured his public image. During the off-season, James held a hour-long live TV special on ESPN which he titled “The Decision,” in which he announced that he would be leaving the Cleveland Cavaliers after 7 years to join fellow NBA superstars Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh with the Miami Heat. James, who had been heavily recruited by many other teams, was roundly criticized for the way he announced his decision and also for his decision to leave Cleveland. Cavalier fans were especially hurt, as team owner Dan Gilbert publicly called James’ actions a “narcissistic, self-promotional build-up” and a “cowardly betrayal” (Gilbert). The aftermath in Cleveland was such that fans publicly burned their LeBron James jerseys and other LeBron memorabilia in the streets as fans across the nation generally sympathized with Cleveland fans.
In an effort to restore his popularity to its once great heights, James partnered with his shoe endorser Nike and released a commercial titled “LeBron Rise,” carrying the following description: “This isn't about what LeBron James has done, or hasn't done. This is about the difference between the expectations others may have of him versus the expectations he has of himself. What should he do? The answer is a question.”
The video begins with James sitting on a set surrounded by camera crew, looking solemnly at the ground. James then turns his gaze toward the viewer asking “What should I do? Should I admit that I made mistakes?” The view then switches to a shot of James as a high school student, looking longingly at a school trophy case while James continues to ask “Should I remind you that I’ve done this before? Should I give you a history lesson?” The set then changes again to James in the present, driving past Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, Ohio as his long-standing giant poster is dramatically dropped as James continues to ask “What should I do? Should I tell you how much fun we had?” The next shot shows James in an empty banquet room giving a speech for his Hall of Fame acceptance as James wonders “Should I really believe I ruined my legacy?” The ad then switches quickly through various shots of James getting his tattoos removed, of an advertisement for his new shoes, black and white shots of James on the basketball court, and James as a stereotypical Western villain. Throughout these shots, James continues to ask the viewer “What should I do? Should I have my tattoo removed? Want to see my shiny new shoes? Should I sell shoes? Should I tell you I am not a role model? What should I do? Should I tell you I’m a championship chaser, that I did it for the money, rings? Should I be who you want me to be? Should I accept my role as a villain?” James finally looks at the camera and whispers “Maybe I should just disappear?” as the view cuts off a la a television screen shutting off. The image returns to a floating head of James surrounded by floating heads of his friends and the text “blah blah blah” as James asks “Should I stop listening to my friends? They’re my friends.” James then asks “Should I try acting?” as the ad shows James in a Miami Vice parody complete with actor Don Johnson. James then asks “Should I make you laugh? Should I read you a soulful poem?” accompanied by a sequence of James delivering a poem in what appears to be a poetry slam café. James then asks the viewer “Should I just clear the decks and start over?” while he takes a bulldozer to a basketball court. The advertisement ends with James again asking “What should I do?” while quick shots from the commercial are flashed on-screen until the viewer sees one last image of James driving a basketball to the hoop, leaving the reader with one last question: “Should I be who you want me to be?” The commercial then ends with the words “JUST DO IT” imposed on a plain background followed by the Nike logo.
James’ ad with Nike is a somber, sometimes humorous, response to the outrage he faced after his decision to join the Miami Heat. In that vein, James and Nike attempted to redirect the flow of animosity away from James and create a new, more human image of James. Shots of James as a teenager and his driving past Quicken Loans Arena are examples of Nike attempting to portray James in a more sympathetic light, as an individual who had no bad intentions when going through his decision. James’ rhetorical question “What should I do?” itself serves as a response to the heavy burden he bears as a high profile celebrity, one that often robs celebrities of personal freedom and expression. James’ final question to the viewer at the end of “Should I be who you want me to be?” is perhaps the most powerful line delivered, evoking Muhammad Ali’s own defiant desire to be his own man in an era where racial prejudice was more prominent. The advertisement itself features little music in it, contributing to the somber tone that attempts to evoke sympathy and understanding for LeBron and his Decision.
In contrast to the more serious moments of his advertisement, James also utilizes humor to bring levity to the situation. Scenes of James acting in an episode of Miami Vice with actor Don Johnson and reciting poetry are all ridiculous scenarios for the athlete to find himself in, but here they are presented as a means of highlighting the ridiculous nature of the controversy surrounding James. At the end of the day, James is merely an athlete playing a sports game. In a world filled with issues like poverty and genocide, a man switching teams loses significance. Furthermore, humorous situations like those shown in the advertisement humanize James in a different way from the more somber approach described earlier; humor shows that James, a two-time MVP in the NBA, is not above poking fun at himself and making himself look silly. By combining humor with a more serious rhetorical narrative, James seemingly had the right material to soothe the public’s anger against him.
Unfortunately for James, the public remained as angry as ever. James’ advertisement, released in October 2010, seemingly did little to affect the public’s opinion of him as evidenced in his precipitous drop in popular according to the Q Scores Company. Cleveland Cavaliers’ fans in particular were even more scathing of James after his ad, as they “peppered him with obscene chants and booed every time he appeared on the giant TV screens beneath the scoreboard” and even produced their own video response deriding their former hero for his actions. Can we explain the ineffectiveness of James’ advertisement despite its rhetorical quality both visually and verbally?
Teresa Brennan, Sara Ahmed, and Jenny Edbauer can all help us contextualize LeBron’s plight through a variety of different theories. In her book The Transmission of Affect, Teresa Brennan deals with the belief that emotions and energies can be transmitted among people and perhaps more importantly, that there is no distinct barrier between an individual and his/her environment. This lies in contrast to the commonly held belief that individuals hold emotion and affect within a discrete barrier that is closed off from the world. As such, affect can be transmitted easily through crowds, almost like a contagion. This affect “can override an individual’s personal affective response,” thus allowing an individual to be caught up in the flow of emotion surrounding him or her (Brennan 68). In LeBron’s case, the transmission of affect is one possible contributor to the public’s rage-fueled frenzy against him. A crowded basketball stadium is the perfect scenario for an individual to “’become an automaton who has ceased to be guided by his will’” (Brennan 54). This individual, surrounded by angry fans and detractors of James, will also become an angry LeBron James hater. Indeed, the very image of an aggressive crowd can raise testosterone levels in men; more broadly, any image can set off an increase or decrease in certain hormone levels (Brennan 72). Thus, “the crowd becomes more than the sum of its parts” (Brennan 72) and anger at James reaches an unprecedented fever pitch.
Sara Ahmed’s “Affective Economies” adds another layer to the heated emotions surrounding LeBron and his ill-fated “Decision.” Ahmed proposes in “Affective Economies” that “affect does not reside in an object or sign, but is an effect of the circulation between objects and signs” (Ahmed 122). That is, emotions are not contained within a subject like LeBron James but are circulated among multiple subjects. Ahmed specifically mentions the emotion of hate, noting that “hate does not reside in a given subject or object. Hate is economic; it circulates between signifiers in relationships of difference and displacement” (Ahmed 119). In this scenario, James is not the sole subject of hate; instead, he is part of a larger narrative in which he aligns “different figures or objects of hate” (Ahmed 119). James is then the unifying subject in which concepts such as betrayal, cowardice, and disloyalty are figuratively “stuck” to James. Consequently, James’ decision to leave his former team did not positively make anger or hate reside within him but it did bind the public against him. The difficulty for LeBron then becomes “unsticking” himself from the words “coward” and “disloyal,” just as it is difficult for “the bodies who
“could be terrorists” are the ones who might “look Muslim.” (Ahmed 132). Indeed, Ahmed notes that “The work done by metonymy means that it can remake links… even when arguments are made that seem to unmake those links” (Ahmed 132). In the case of LeBron’s advertisement, images like LeBron sitting in a set similar to the one in which he announced his decision to leave Cleveland and the dramatic drop of his poster become painful reminders of James’ seeming betrayal. As a result, the affect of hate continues to be circulated around LeBron, unaffected by any of the humor or serious appeals made by LeBron in his advertisement.
Jenny Edbauer’s “Unframing Models of Public Distribution: From Rhetorical Situation to Rhetorical Ecologies” provides another unique outlook on the failure of LeBron to repair his public image through his advertisement. In her article, Edbauer argues that “rhetorical situations operate within a network of lived practical consciousness or structures of feeling” (Edbauer 5). In contrast to traditional models of the rhetorical situation as a rather static framework focused on audience, exigence, and constraints, Edbauer suggests that rhetorical situations are more organic and ecological in nature. Edbauer’s proposal of a shift from rhetorical situation to rhetorical ecologies uses the popular “Keep Austin Weird” slogan as an example of public rhetoric changing according to its situation; in the case of “Keep Austin Weird”, from a stand against big business to a broader badge of honor for a city. Edbauer observed that the “Keep Austin Weird” rhetoric changed to suit different audiences, even spawning popular counter-slogans like “Make Austin Normal,” thus illustrating that “counter-rhetorics directly respond to and resist the original exigence” (Edbauer 19). Nike’s “LeBron Rise” also spawned two prominent counter-ads, which served to undermine James’ attempt to restore his image by challenging James’ original message. The first of these counter-ads was made by a group of Cleveland Cavaliers fans, in which they offered scathing and unsympathetic responses to James’ rhetorical questions in his advertisement. The second counter-ad was created by Tom Hinueber, a 21-year-old college student at UNLV, by splicing footage of “LeBron Rise” with an earlier commercial done by basketball legend Michael Jordan in 2008 titled “Maybe.” Hineuber’s edit, titled “Maybe You Should Rise,” saw Jordan respond to LeBron’s questions within the context of his own legacy, telling James “Maybe I destroyed the game. Or maybe, you’re just making excuses.” Both counter-ads are examples of Edbauer’s ecology of rhetoric, in which LeBron’s advertisement was shaped by different rhetors with a different exigence. I posit that these counter-ads, which received significant attention themselves, reinforced an affect of hate toward James by rhetorically emphasizing his shortcomings through the fans themselves and through the words of a legendary sporting figure.
What can be said for LeBron James’ future? Theorists like Teresa Brennan, Sara Ahmed, and Jenny Edbauer provide us with many useful frameworks for examining James’ current predicament with his once adoring public. Brennan’s theory on the transmission of affect offers a compelling explanation for the unusual animosity displayed against James at games, showing that the frenzy of hatred toward a subject can be and oftentimes is extremely contagious. Ahmed’s theory of affective economies demonstrates the difficulty in breaking the circulation of certain affects because of the fact that affects do not positively reside in a subject or object, a dilemma for James and his public attempt to redirect the anger currently pushed on him. And Edbauer’s model of rhetoric as an ecology helps explain the existence of counter-ads made by third-parties, which in turn refocus hostility toward James. The lessons here can just as easily be applied to an actor or a politician wishing to remake a public image or shape a new one.
In the end, LeBron James may simply have to ride this current hatred out and hope that the public’s memory is a short one. Other superstar athletes like Kobe Bryant and Ben Roethlisberger have recovered from sexual assault scandals to return to a state of public adoration. While advertisements like “LeBron Rise” may not be effective in changing public perception, a championship ring just might do the trick. Until then, James will just have to deal with the heat in Miami.
Works Cited
Ahmed, Sara. “Affective Economies.” Social Text 22.2 (2004):117-139. Web. 4 May 2011.
Brennan, Teresa. The Transmission of Affect. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2004. Print.
DuPree, David. “King James’ next conquest.” USA Today. 21 Apr. 2006. Web. 4 May 2011.
Edbauer, Jenny. “Unframing Models of Public Distribution: From Rhetorical Situation to Rhetorical Ecologies.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 35.4 (2005):5-23. Web. 4 May 2011.
Gilbert, Dan. “Open Letter to Fans from Cavaliers Majority Owner Dan Gilbert.” Web. 4 May
2011.
Kaplan, Thomas. “James Faces Jeering, but Little Competition.” The New York Times. 31 Oct.
2010. Web. 4 May 2011.
Rovell, Darren. “LeBron's Q Score Takes Huge Hit.” CNBC. 14 Sept. 2010. Web. 4 May 2011.
Wieden+Kennedy. “LeBron Rise.” Nike. 2010.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Visual Argument Revision
Revision notes: I changed the title of my Prezi to more accurately match my analysis. I also tweaked my claim and goals within my analysis.
In my presentation titled “The End of a Dream,” I make the claim that the American Dream is a delicate and fragile goal in today’s world. Most of us are familiar with the concept of the American Dream and we all strive to reach that promised land of success and prosperity. However, many Americans are also critical of those who have seemingly failed to achieve the American Dream, claiming that those individuals are simply lazy and unmotivated. In doing so, we often scorn and deride those who ask for help in reaching their goals. My presentation aims to remind us that the American Dream is a fragile concept that is often shattered despite our best efforts.
My first image is of a group of young college graduates smiling triumphantly after what one would assume is their graduation ceremony. For many Americans, graduating from college is the first step towards becoming a true adult and finding a career that will sustain you for the rest of your life. As college students, most of us identify strongly with the goal of graduating and finding a job, thus eliciting some emotions of eagerness, hope, and happiness. The following image is of a young couple surveying the classic American home complete with green grass and a white fence. For many Americans, home ownership has been symbolic of the American Dream, the surest sign that one has made it in life. These two images together are designed to remind the viewer of the common goals that we all share in our pursuit of the American Dream, evoking a sense of fondness, content, pride, and optimism.
The next series of images are more somber as they depict a kind of fall from grace. The third image is a black and white photo of a man clutching his head in seeming grief as the stock listings loom before him. This image is representative of the financial crisis that we are all familiar with and more specifically, the first step that led professionals like the ones depicted in the second image toward the end of their dreams. The next image is a photo of a child crying as her parents argue in the background, an image that probably became more common as families across America began to feel the stress and pressure from the crisis. These two images inspire not only anger at the financial crisis but sadness and sympathy for those who suffered as a result of the financial collapse. The fifth image is of a young woman looking despondently at a past due bill notice. This is another image that likely became more common as people lost their jobs and livelihoods, thus preventing them from meeting their financial obligations. The sixth image is a cartoon of a man evicted from his home, another image all too common as part of the housing collapse. The fifth and sixth images both evoke sadness and pity in the viewer as they can sympathize with the trials that many Americans were forced to face as a result of the financial crisis. The seventh image shows a long line of people standing in front of a Californian Employment Development Department while the final image depicts a homeless man holding a cardboard sign stating "Will code HTML for food." In conjunction with the previous images, these two photos show that not only do the ranks of the homeless include those who held reputable jobs but that they are still human beings who continue to look for work but simply cannot find any. As a result, the viewer feels not only sadness and pity, but also shame as they realize that many of these homeless were once people well on their way to achieving their personal American Dream.
Together these images are designed to make the viewer feel sadness and shame with the intent of making them rethink their views on how secure and attainable the American Dream is today. The sadness felt by the audience at the plight of regular people who become homeless combined with the shame felt as the viewer realizes he or she has unfairly demonized human beings who may just have been victims of circumstance translates those emotions to a new belief: the American Dream is no longer something that one can secure through hard work and perseverance, but is now a far more fragile goal that is more vulnerable to outside influences. With this in mind, I hope the viewer can rethink their concept of the American Dream and of how they view people who seemingly cannot or will not pursue that goal.
Photo Credits:
First image: http://www.cs.wayne.edu/~suj/Retention/index.htm 4/4/11
Second image: http://austinpubliclibraryblog.blogspot.com/2009/03/rethinking-american-dream.html 3/30/11
Third image: http://www.world-crisis.net/ 3/30/11
Fourth image: http://nwso.net/2010/05/20/co-parenting-skills/ 3/30/11
Fifth image: http://blog.gocollege.com/the-college-students-guide-to-personal-finance/ 4/4/11
Sixth image: http://www.foreclosuredataonline.com/blog/foreclosure-crisis/foreclosure-crisis-the-booming-foreclosure-crisis/ 3/30/11
Seventh image: http://www.the-iss.com/2010/05/alternate_careers_for_when_the_1.php/ 4/4/11
Thursday, April 14, 2011
A Perfect World Without Rhetoric
Lloyd Bitzer presents a theory of situation in his piece "The Rhetorical Situation." I personally found this to be a nice change of pace from the material presented in Edbauer-Rice, Massumi, Brennan, etc. Bitzer writes that "It seems clear that rhetoric is situational" (3) which I agree for the most part. That is, I agree that "Rhetorical discourse is called into existence by situation" (9); Bitzer uses Kennedy's assassination as an example of the situation generating specific types of rhetorical discourse that included an explanation of the events, reassurance that the transfer of government would be orderly, etc. I think overall Bitzer presents a nice theory of rhetorical situation, although it is perhaps a little one-dimensional and it certainly doesn't involve the way we've discussed how affect surrounds us.
Instead, I want to focus in a bit on something Bitzer says near the end of his piece that "In the best of all possible worlds, there would be communication perhaps, but no rhetoric — since exigences would not arise" (13). I have to disagree strongly with this sentiment. It seems to me that communication inherently involves exigence even with Bitzer's definition of exigence as "imperfection marked by urgency" (6). Bitzer's supposed best world sounds, as Professor Davis mentioned in class, a hell. Perhaps I am being too nitpicky on a single sentence but it just seems difficult for me to conceive of any world as being better without rhetoric; I suppose things might be clearer and more direct but I'm sure that life would also be infinitely more dry and boring.
Instead, I want to focus in a bit on something Bitzer says near the end of his piece that "In the best of all possible worlds, there would be communication perhaps, but no rhetoric — since exigences would not arise" (13). I have to disagree strongly with this sentiment. It seems to me that communication inherently involves exigence even with Bitzer's definition of exigence as "imperfection marked by urgency" (6). Bitzer's supposed best world sounds, as Professor Davis mentioned in class, a hell. Perhaps I am being too nitpicky on a single sentence but it just seems difficult for me to conceive of any world as being better without rhetoric; I suppose things might be clearer and more direct but I'm sure that life would also be infinitely more dry and boring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)