I really enjoyed reading about John Locke. Obviously, being known as the "Father of the Enlightenment Period" he really contributed to a lot of the philosophical thinkers. I enjoyed reading about his philosophy because he looks at knowledge in a new light.
"Locke's philosophy, which follows Bacon and the experimental scientists, searches for truth in the physical world and attempts to understand knowledge as a psychological phenomenon. This perspective stands opposed to the traditional doctrines of received truth, innate ideas, and the presumption that direct knowledge is available through revelation or perception."
I believe that Locke's philosophy says a lot about the depth Locke's thoughts. "We have direct knowledge only of our own ideas," which is absolutely true. Its basically the same idea that we can only control what we do and not what others do around us. By understanding this knowledge Locke does unleashes a new set of ideas and thoughts which end up make a very effective presence later in twentieth century.
His theory on Reflection was also very interesting. "Reflection is the act of relating our ideas to one another, forming mental associations, and examining the mental processes which we are aware: thinking, doubting, believing, and so on. These operations of the faculty of understanding are the source of all our knowledge. " And although, this thought has always been used, Locke finally recognizes outside of the motion of thought. I really like that Locke uses words and languages in his arguments and theories.
Even though his reading was shorter than the others, he challenged my thinking more than past rhetoricians have.
Thursday, October 30, 2014
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
Reading Response for October 23rd
I believe that if Madeleine de Scudery were alive today, we would be friends. I found her extremely fascinating with her feminist outlooks and thoughts on many issues. Although she wasn't as "polished" as many rhetoricians thought she should of been, she still believed in the woman's voice, which you don't see a lot of during the Renaissance. These novels that she produced were strong, determined and portrayed a loud voice of a proud woman. She reminds me a lot of the woman in the Titanic, Molly Brown (who is played by Kathy Bates) who speaks up for women and their rights. Again, like I said in the last blog, it is very refreshing to see a woman in the field of rhetoricians and see her getting praised for the work she has done. It seems to rare in a world that men ruled for such a long time.
I enjoyed that Madame de Rambouillet invented the "salon." I felt as though it allowed some fun because it seems so rare in those times. Things were serious and always down to business, that women never knew fun until the salon. The following passage is what makes me believe that de Scudery and me would be friends: "To enter salon society, one should be able to behave like a salon denizen and be witty, imaginative, urbane, and above all, verbally adapted in both writing and speech. (...) One must not monopolize the conversation - indeed, no faux pas was worse than insisting on one's on point of view to the exclusion of all others' - but also, one must never be at a loss for words. Madeleine de Scudery won instant acceptance in this milieu." (761)
By reading her story, Madeleine de Scudery presents a woman of strength and outright dominance and I appreciate reading about her and what she represents for women rhetoricians, past, present and future.
In the reading for ARCS, I thought that the chapter on arrangement was very interesting. I really enjoyed that the way an argument is presented can make a difference in the outcome. I also thought that Aristotle in absolutely nuts in his logic sometimes because the guy doesn't even take into consideration other's work and it is always his way or the highway. I know he is a classical thinker, so don't think I was judging the guy and claiming that his arguments are false, but my god, he is crazy. Any who, the more I read, the more I begin to comprehend Cicero was among one of the first to take rhetoric and form it into what it should be.
I enjoyed that Madame de Rambouillet invented the "salon." I felt as though it allowed some fun because it seems so rare in those times. Things were serious and always down to business, that women never knew fun until the salon. The following passage is what makes me believe that de Scudery and me would be friends: "To enter salon society, one should be able to behave like a salon denizen and be witty, imaginative, urbane, and above all, verbally adapted in both writing and speech. (...) One must not monopolize the conversation - indeed, no faux pas was worse than insisting on one's on point of view to the exclusion of all others' - but also, one must never be at a loss for words. Madeleine de Scudery won instant acceptance in this milieu." (761)
By reading her story, Madeleine de Scudery presents a woman of strength and outright dominance and I appreciate reading about her and what she represents for women rhetoricians, past, present and future.
In the reading for ARCS, I thought that the chapter on arrangement was very interesting. I really enjoyed that the way an argument is presented can make a difference in the outcome. I also thought that Aristotle in absolutely nuts in his logic sometimes because the guy doesn't even take into consideration other's work and it is always his way or the highway. I know he is a classical thinker, so don't think I was judging the guy and claiming that his arguments are false, but my god, he is crazy. Any who, the more I read, the more I begin to comprehend Cicero was among one of the first to take rhetoric and form it into what it should be.
Monday, October 20, 2014
Reading Response for 10/21
I felt that is was very refreshing to read about a woman involved in rhetoric. I am not some huge feminist, but I do believe in women's rights and that women should be treated equally so it was nice to hear that coming from a woman that was so heavily involved in the world of the rhetorics.
First of all, I found it very interesting that Quaker women were among the first to speak out and give an opinion. I had no idea that the Quaker women had made such an impact in the world of public social issues and social-activism. Margaret Fell made an impact on the history for women and making a trail for these women to engage in a man's world.
I do feel very grateful for Fell's presence in this world, however I am not a huge fan on the religious front. Fell used religion to help guide her through into speaking publicly. Given, at the time, it was very hard for women to speak their minds due to the role that men so heavily played in society, so I don't blame her for that. However, I am not a fan of people who try and push their religion on other. I do know that the Quaker society is a religious bunch, so that makes sense, however, it just doesn't sit well with me overall on that front.
Overall, Fell made an impact on rhetoric history so I found it refreshing to see a woman make a stand.
Thomas Wilson, also another refreshing read. Although he does spend a lot of time reiterating Aristotle and Cicero, it feels nice to read someone who was respectful, unlike Ramus from last week's reading. I found it nice that Wilson expands on these practices, questions them and also answers the questions for future readers, unlike Aristotle who just left.
In the reading it says this: 'The five-part structure is, of course, drawn from classical rhetoric, but Wilson's work goes further beyond translation and paraphrase than other rhetorics of the period do."
This was, in fact, was extremely helpful in for us as the reader's because it doesn't allow us just to interpret their information, but actually gives us an answer. In the end though, Wilson does the same thing every other rhetoric does though and reiterates the classical thinkers and turns it into his own.
First of all, I found it very interesting that Quaker women were among the first to speak out and give an opinion. I had no idea that the Quaker women had made such an impact in the world of public social issues and social-activism. Margaret Fell made an impact on the history for women and making a trail for these women to engage in a man's world.
I do feel very grateful for Fell's presence in this world, however I am not a huge fan on the religious front. Fell used religion to help guide her through into speaking publicly. Given, at the time, it was very hard for women to speak their minds due to the role that men so heavily played in society, so I don't blame her for that. However, I am not a fan of people who try and push their religion on other. I do know that the Quaker society is a religious bunch, so that makes sense, however, it just doesn't sit well with me overall on that front.
Overall, Fell made an impact on rhetoric history so I found it refreshing to see a woman make a stand.
Thomas Wilson, also another refreshing read. Although he does spend a lot of time reiterating Aristotle and Cicero, it feels nice to read someone who was respectful, unlike Ramus from last week's reading. I found it nice that Wilson expands on these practices, questions them and also answers the questions for future readers, unlike Aristotle who just left.
In the reading it says this: 'The five-part structure is, of course, drawn from classical rhetoric, but Wilson's work goes further beyond translation and paraphrase than other rhetorics of the period do."
This was, in fact, was extremely helpful in for us as the reader's because it doesn't allow us just to interpret their information, but actually gives us an answer. In the end though, Wilson does the same thing every other rhetoric does though and reiterates the classical thinkers and turns it into his own.
Thursday, October 16, 2014
Response to readings 10/16
So after reading about Peter or Petrus Ramus and Renaissance Rhetoric, one thing that stood out to me most was my grown hatred for Peter. I really disagree with the way that he work and his concepts about rhetoric. I felt as though he did not appreciate the work of the classical thinkers and honestly, I think that is really lame.
Aristotle, Socrates, Cicero and Quintilian (to name just a few) I believe were the basis in creating rhetoric... So I guess I have a hard time understanding why Ramus can just all of the sudden enter into the world and think his way of thinking is better than theirs? First off, he obviously based a lot of his information off of their thinking, because his idea's needed to come from somewhere.
However, don't get me wrong. I understand that Ramus comes from a more modern time than classical thinkers named above, however, I don't believe it is fair for him to attack Quintilian's work. I understand if there were certain ideas or concepts to disagree with, but to blatantly attack is unjust.
Also, on page 678, it states the following: "Having thus severely limited rhetoric's domain, Ramus is prepared to prove his chief accusation against Quintilian: that his advice on invention and arrangement is useless. Rhetoric without philosophical content cannot, of course, contribute to much to invention and arrangement, but this idea serves Ramus's purpose making it necessary to turn to dialectic (his method) for help with invention, arrangement, and also memory."
I have a hard time understanding this because I feel when using Rhetoric, being able to associate pathos, ethos, and logos should be required to prove your points. Overall, I really just did not like Ramus and his way of rhetoric. Insulting and attacking the basis of his argument seems backwards.
Monday, October 13, 2014
Final Speech
Ancient Speech:
Parts 18-21
This, however, I do feel first of all — that friendship cannot exist except among good men; nor do I go into that too deeply,15 as is done by those16 who, in discussing this point with more than usual accuracy, and it may be correctly, but with too little view to practical results, say that no one is good unless he is wise. We may grant that; but they understand wisdom to be a thing such as no mortal man has yet attained.17 I, however, am bound to look at things as they are in the experience of everyday life and not as they are in fancy or in hope. Never could I say that Gaius Fabricius, Manius Curius, and Tiberius Coruncanius, whom our ancestors adjudged to be wise, were wise by such a standard as that. p129Therefore, let the Sophists keep their unpopular18 and unintelligible word to themselves, granting only that the men just named were good men. They will not do it though; they will say that goodness can be predicated only of the "wise" man. 19 Let us then proceed "with our own dull wits," as the saying is. Those who so act and so live as to give proof of loyalty and uprightness, of fairness and generosity; who are free from all passion, caprice, and insolence, and have great strength of character — men like those just mentioned — such men let us consider good, as they were accounted good in life, and also entitled to be called by that term because, in as far as that is possible for man, they follow Nature, who is the best guide to good living.
For it seems clear to me that we were so created that between us all there exists a certain tie which strengthens with our proximity to each other. Therefore, fellow countrymen are preferred to foreigners and relatives19a to strangers, for with them Nature herself engenders friendship, but it is one that is lacking in constancy. For friendship excels relationship19b in this, that goodwill may be eliminated from relationship while from friendship it cannot; since, if you remove goodwill from friendship the very name of friendship is gone; if you remove it from relationship, the name of relationship still remains. 20 Moreover, how great the power of friendship is may most clearly be recognized from the fact that, in comparison with the infinite ties uniting the human race and fashioned by Nature herself, this thing called friendship has been so narrowed that the bonds of affection always united two persons only, or, at most, a few.
p131 6 For friendship is nothing else than an accord in all things, human and divine, conjoined with mutual goodwill and affection, and I am inclined to think that, with the exception of wisdom, no better thing has been given to man by the immortal gods. Some prefer riches, some good health, some power, some public honours, and many even prefer sensual pleasures. This last is the highest aim of brutes; the others are fleeting and unstable things and dependent less upon human foresight than upon the fickleness of fortune. Again, there are those who place the "chief good" in virtue and that is really a noble view; but this very virtue is the parent and preserver of friendship and without virtue friendship cannot exist at all. 21 To proceed then, let us interpret the word "virtue" by the familiar usage of our everyday life and speech, and not in pompous phrase apply to it the precise standards which certain philosophers use; and let us include in the number of good men those who are so considered — men like Paulus, Cato, Gallus, Scipio, and Philus — who satisfy the ordinary standard of life; but let us pass by such men as are nowhere to be found at all.20
My Imitatio:
First of all, let me start off saying that this is a real issue. Obesity does not exist just among the United States, it exists everywhere and it can happen to anyone. It can be an addiction, and it can take over someone’s wellbeing. It surrounds us and yet we are too okay with it. We see and experience it all around us, but do nothing about it. So let us make a change. Let those McDonald and Taco Bell fast food chains think you are unpopular because you won’t choose to eat there anymore. Their food is filled with preservatives and saturated fats and you much rather consume home grown greens and vitamins. However, don’t get me wrong, they will still try to persuade you to buy their food. With commercials on every channel of TV and the convenience that they offer, they will fight for you and will try to win you back. But, we are stronger than that. So let me proceed “with the unpopular choice” by saying this: Those who act and live to prove that they are head strong and determined, willing to fight for a healthy lifestyle, and are free from caring what other people think, are the people we should listen too. The people who fight for the feeling of confidence in themselves, feeling beautiful and feeling determined to never give up a lifestyle they know is right. These people are the ones that have the best guide to good living. The ones that strive to live a healthy life.
“For it seems to clear to me that we were created that between us all there exists a certain tie which strengthens with our proximity to each other.” (Cicero) Therefore, my fellow students, we should prefer living an active and healthy lifestyle together. Because our generation is what excels the norm. We surpass the older generations and create higher standards for younger ones. We are considered to be the “failed” generation; the one’s who depend too heavily on technology to survive. Well, so what if we do this? We should take these things that supposedly ruined us and let it help create us instead. Help us become a better and more advanced society than the standard our parents left behind. So let us take this advantage we have and make it grow. By combining the ties that we all share, we can strengthen and develop healthy lifestyles.
For a healthy and active lifestyle is nothing else than just a habit. I am inclined to think that we are given a body to live in, so why not take the best care of it that we can so it can keep giving back to us? For us to excel and conquer and live to our fullest potentials. If we are weighed down by unnecessary fat, our body will not function at it’s best, cheating us from years of life, those years of adventure. Some prefer money, some prefer material items, some prefer food. But preferring a healthy lifestyle is what will get you past the rest of those preferences and into the ones that count, the good ones. Without a body to rely on, you won’t be able to get that six figure salary or that car you always dreamed of. So let us reflect on our everyday habits and lifestyle. Let us realize the balance of exercise, diet and being happy that comes along with choosing this lifestyle and let us realize that this body you are living in now, is the only one that you have. There are no second chances, just blessings and good health.
So the next time you pass McDonald’s or Taco Bell, consider if that is the best way you can live a healthy lifestyle. Will your body thank you once you have eaten it? Your tastes bud might, but your brain will not.
"Laelius on Friendship Parts 18-21." Laelius De Amicitia by Cicero. 17 Nov. 2013. Web. 12 Sept. 2014. <http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cicero/Laelius_de_Amicitia/text*.html>.
Reflection to Imitatio:
Reflection to Imitatio’s
Throughout the last four to five weeks, Professor Condon kept reminding us about this Imitatio speech. In my head I kept thinking, “Oh, this won’t be that bad. It’s just taking a speech and translating it into something different. Simple enough, no problem.” I found a speech by Cicero on friendship, which in Latin translates to Laelius de Amicitia. After about an hour of research and thought that the speech was ideal for my Imitatio, I read through the stanzas until I settled on stanzas 18-21. From that point on, I didn’t think much of it, falsely imagining I have this Imitatio in the bag. The weeks went by until about Thursday the eighteenth when we went over the prompt in class. My initial thought about the project being easy, dramatically shifted into “I am extremely confused” and the stress of the project became extreme.
Once I read Cicero’s few stanza’s on friendship about 100 times, I finally thought that I should sit down and write the speech. I am very passionate about living a very active and healthy lifestyle, so I knew that choosing that topic would be very easy due to it being so present in my every day life. One of the most difficult aspects I found in this project was literally just getting started. I spent more than just a few minutes staring at my computer screen, wondering how I should go about dissecting this speech written by a man of rhetoric. Cicero, being a man of philosophy, law and politics, as well as an orator, was best known for the pieces of literature that he produced over the years. By trying to understand and learn how his writing style was structured, the idea of trying to create and mimic his strategies behind his friendship speech was very difficult. I felt as though my topic of Imitatio did not match up as well I had hoped. I considered trying to look for another speech that would be more consistent with the idea of my speech. I searched for awhile, striking out on every speech I came across. (Looking for rhetoric speeches is harder than I imagined.) So finally, after procrastinating for as long as I did, I just decided to write it.
While composing my Imitatio, I attempted to parallel with Cicero’s speech. For example in the second stanza of my speech I addressed my “fellow students” like Cicero addressed his “fellow countrymen.” However, the longer I tested that theory, the harder it became. I continued to try to use very similar wording and structure that he did, however, with the way things were translated into English it did not come out making sense. Understanding what he was trying to say made sense, however, word choice among sentence structure did not, so that made creating my speech difficult.
During Cicero’s speech, he tried to go back and forth to state both sides of the argument, as well as give credit to the one’s surrounding him in society. That was hard to execute well due to a couple of different reasons. One, I don’t believe that my topic worked well with the structure that Cicero used. The contemporary issue that I used could be considered internal, meaning that this is an independent issue and you cannot reel others into what you consume and how much you exercise. His speech on friendship considered many outsiders and became dependent on others to talk about in his speech. Furthermore, I believe that the difference in writing skill also played a part. Cicero again, was a professional at public speaking and writing, so trying to match up with his skill level seemed tough right out of the gate. However, as soon I got over the hump of following Cicero’s speech pattern, creating my speech easily spilled out all over the page. I was able to become consistent enough with Cicero, evening taking quotes from his speech and adding them into my mine.
After doing the assignment and now reflecting upon it, there are a few things that I learned from the ancient rhetoric. I am happy I live in the days we do now, because we are able to express ourselves more freely than they were able to. Cicero was looked upon as being a man of high value and high profession, so he had a harder time stating his opinion if it was not already pre-approved by other politicians in that system. The majority of his writing had a political undertone, so Cicero always had to make a choice in his argument and stick too it. Also, grammatically speaking, the difference in sentence structure and context is huge! I found that many sentences of Cicero’s were long and very drawn out. If speaking in public, that would be extremely hard to talk that long without a slight pause. I found it hard to keep writing sentences without the urge to use some sort of punctuation.
In the end, once I was able to get over the difficulty of initially starting the process, I enjoyed writing about an issue that I cared about. Studying and dissecting Cicero’s speech on friendship taught me about the structure and context of the ancient rhetorics. The lack of structure from the assignment created a challenge for all of us, which was actually something I enjoyed once the process was over. I enjoyed hearing the differences in speeches among each student and what speech those chose to mock. Overall, it was a hard assignment, but taught many things about the ancient rhetorics and turned out very rewarding in the end.
Parts 18-21
This, however, I do feel first of all — that friendship cannot exist except among good men; nor do I go into that too deeply,15 as is done by those16 who, in discussing this point with more than usual accuracy, and it may be correctly, but with too little view to practical results, say that no one is good unless he is wise. We may grant that; but they understand wisdom to be a thing such as no mortal man has yet attained.17 I, however, am bound to look at things as they are in the experience of everyday life and not as they are in fancy or in hope. Never could I say that Gaius Fabricius, Manius Curius, and Tiberius Coruncanius, whom our ancestors adjudged to be wise, were wise by such a standard as that. p129Therefore, let the Sophists keep their unpopular18 and unintelligible word to themselves, granting only that the men just named were good men. They will not do it though; they will say that goodness can be predicated only of the "wise" man. 19 Let us then proceed "with our own dull wits," as the saying is. Those who so act and so live as to give proof of loyalty and uprightness, of fairness and generosity; who are free from all passion, caprice, and insolence, and have great strength of character — men like those just mentioned — such men let us consider good, as they were accounted good in life, and also entitled to be called by that term because, in as far as that is possible for man, they follow Nature, who is the best guide to good living.
For it seems clear to me that we were so created that between us all there exists a certain tie which strengthens with our proximity to each other. Therefore, fellow countrymen are preferred to foreigners and relatives19a to strangers, for with them Nature herself engenders friendship, but it is one that is lacking in constancy. For friendship excels relationship19b in this, that goodwill may be eliminated from relationship while from friendship it cannot; since, if you remove goodwill from friendship the very name of friendship is gone; if you remove it from relationship, the name of relationship still remains. 20 Moreover, how great the power of friendship is may most clearly be recognized from the fact that, in comparison with the infinite ties uniting the human race and fashioned by Nature herself, this thing called friendship has been so narrowed that the bonds of affection always united two persons only, or, at most, a few.
p131 6 For friendship is nothing else than an accord in all things, human and divine, conjoined with mutual goodwill and affection, and I am inclined to think that, with the exception of wisdom, no better thing has been given to man by the immortal gods. Some prefer riches, some good health, some power, some public honours, and many even prefer sensual pleasures. This last is the highest aim of brutes; the others are fleeting and unstable things and dependent less upon human foresight than upon the fickleness of fortune. Again, there are those who place the "chief good" in virtue and that is really a noble view; but this very virtue is the parent and preserver of friendship and without virtue friendship cannot exist at all. 21 To proceed then, let us interpret the word "virtue" by the familiar usage of our everyday life and speech, and not in pompous phrase apply to it the precise standards which certain philosophers use; and let us include in the number of good men those who are so considered — men like Paulus, Cato, Gallus, Scipio, and Philus — who satisfy the ordinary standard of life; but let us pass by such men as are nowhere to be found at all.20
My Imitatio:
First of all, let me start off saying that this is a real issue. Obesity does not exist just among the United States, it exists everywhere and it can happen to anyone. It can be an addiction, and it can take over someone’s wellbeing. It surrounds us and yet we are too okay with it. We see and experience it all around us, but do nothing about it. So let us make a change. Let those McDonald and Taco Bell fast food chains think you are unpopular because you won’t choose to eat there anymore. Their food is filled with preservatives and saturated fats and you much rather consume home grown greens and vitamins. However, don’t get me wrong, they will still try to persuade you to buy their food. With commercials on every channel of TV and the convenience that they offer, they will fight for you and will try to win you back. But, we are stronger than that. So let me proceed “with the unpopular choice” by saying this: Those who act and live to prove that they are head strong and determined, willing to fight for a healthy lifestyle, and are free from caring what other people think, are the people we should listen too. The people who fight for the feeling of confidence in themselves, feeling beautiful and feeling determined to never give up a lifestyle they know is right. These people are the ones that have the best guide to good living. The ones that strive to live a healthy life.
“For it seems to clear to me that we were created that between us all there exists a certain tie which strengthens with our proximity to each other.” (Cicero) Therefore, my fellow students, we should prefer living an active and healthy lifestyle together. Because our generation is what excels the norm. We surpass the older generations and create higher standards for younger ones. We are considered to be the “failed” generation; the one’s who depend too heavily on technology to survive. Well, so what if we do this? We should take these things that supposedly ruined us and let it help create us instead. Help us become a better and more advanced society than the standard our parents left behind. So let us take this advantage we have and make it grow. By combining the ties that we all share, we can strengthen and develop healthy lifestyles.
For a healthy and active lifestyle is nothing else than just a habit. I am inclined to think that we are given a body to live in, so why not take the best care of it that we can so it can keep giving back to us? For us to excel and conquer and live to our fullest potentials. If we are weighed down by unnecessary fat, our body will not function at it’s best, cheating us from years of life, those years of adventure. Some prefer money, some prefer material items, some prefer food. But preferring a healthy lifestyle is what will get you past the rest of those preferences and into the ones that count, the good ones. Without a body to rely on, you won’t be able to get that six figure salary or that car you always dreamed of. So let us reflect on our everyday habits and lifestyle. Let us realize the balance of exercise, diet and being happy that comes along with choosing this lifestyle and let us realize that this body you are living in now, is the only one that you have. There are no second chances, just blessings and good health.
So the next time you pass McDonald’s or Taco Bell, consider if that is the best way you can live a healthy lifestyle. Will your body thank you once you have eaten it? Your tastes bud might, but your brain will not.
"Laelius on Friendship Parts 18-21." Laelius De Amicitia by Cicero. 17 Nov. 2013. Web. 12 Sept. 2014. <http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cicero/Laelius_de_Amicitia/text*.html>.
Reflection to Imitatio:
Reflection to Imitatio’s
Throughout the last four to five weeks, Professor Condon kept reminding us about this Imitatio speech. In my head I kept thinking, “Oh, this won’t be that bad. It’s just taking a speech and translating it into something different. Simple enough, no problem.” I found a speech by Cicero on friendship, which in Latin translates to Laelius de Amicitia. After about an hour of research and thought that the speech was ideal for my Imitatio, I read through the stanzas until I settled on stanzas 18-21. From that point on, I didn’t think much of it, falsely imagining I have this Imitatio in the bag. The weeks went by until about Thursday the eighteenth when we went over the prompt in class. My initial thought about the project being easy, dramatically shifted into “I am extremely confused” and the stress of the project became extreme.
Once I read Cicero’s few stanza’s on friendship about 100 times, I finally thought that I should sit down and write the speech. I am very passionate about living a very active and healthy lifestyle, so I knew that choosing that topic would be very easy due to it being so present in my every day life. One of the most difficult aspects I found in this project was literally just getting started. I spent more than just a few minutes staring at my computer screen, wondering how I should go about dissecting this speech written by a man of rhetoric. Cicero, being a man of philosophy, law and politics, as well as an orator, was best known for the pieces of literature that he produced over the years. By trying to understand and learn how his writing style was structured, the idea of trying to create and mimic his strategies behind his friendship speech was very difficult. I felt as though my topic of Imitatio did not match up as well I had hoped. I considered trying to look for another speech that would be more consistent with the idea of my speech. I searched for awhile, striking out on every speech I came across. (Looking for rhetoric speeches is harder than I imagined.) So finally, after procrastinating for as long as I did, I just decided to write it.
While composing my Imitatio, I attempted to parallel with Cicero’s speech. For example in the second stanza of my speech I addressed my “fellow students” like Cicero addressed his “fellow countrymen.” However, the longer I tested that theory, the harder it became. I continued to try to use very similar wording and structure that he did, however, with the way things were translated into English it did not come out making sense. Understanding what he was trying to say made sense, however, word choice among sentence structure did not, so that made creating my speech difficult.
During Cicero’s speech, he tried to go back and forth to state both sides of the argument, as well as give credit to the one’s surrounding him in society. That was hard to execute well due to a couple of different reasons. One, I don’t believe that my topic worked well with the structure that Cicero used. The contemporary issue that I used could be considered internal, meaning that this is an independent issue and you cannot reel others into what you consume and how much you exercise. His speech on friendship considered many outsiders and became dependent on others to talk about in his speech. Furthermore, I believe that the difference in writing skill also played a part. Cicero again, was a professional at public speaking and writing, so trying to match up with his skill level seemed tough right out of the gate. However, as soon I got over the hump of following Cicero’s speech pattern, creating my speech easily spilled out all over the page. I was able to become consistent enough with Cicero, evening taking quotes from his speech and adding them into my mine.
After doing the assignment and now reflecting upon it, there are a few things that I learned from the ancient rhetoric. I am happy I live in the days we do now, because we are able to express ourselves more freely than they were able to. Cicero was looked upon as being a man of high value and high profession, so he had a harder time stating his opinion if it was not already pre-approved by other politicians in that system. The majority of his writing had a political undertone, so Cicero always had to make a choice in his argument and stick too it. Also, grammatically speaking, the difference in sentence structure and context is huge! I found that many sentences of Cicero’s were long and very drawn out. If speaking in public, that would be extremely hard to talk that long without a slight pause. I found it hard to keep writing sentences without the urge to use some sort of punctuation.
In the end, once I was able to get over the difficulty of initially starting the process, I enjoyed writing about an issue that I cared about. Studying and dissecting Cicero’s speech on friendship taught me about the structure and context of the ancient rhetorics. The lack of structure from the assignment created a challenge for all of us, which was actually something I enjoyed once the process was over. I enjoyed hearing the differences in speeches among each student and what speech those chose to mock. Overall, it was a hard assignment, but taught many things about the ancient rhetorics and turned out very rewarding in the end.
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Response to Ong and Wolf - 10/8/2014
I found these readings by Ong and Wolf to be quite interesting. However, I felt like these were super hard to read. It took me quite awhile to really comprehend and digest just really was being said. Among the complex ideas and theories, the context was just deep and I felt like I would miss a lot being said if I didn't reread the majority of it. So personally, I think I might just talk my reaction to the readings instead of talking about the readings themselves, because I think I would end up chopping up a lot of it and not understanding what exactly was being said.
First off, like I said before wow. Those were really hard to comprehend. However, I found it very very cool the connections between orality and linguistics. I always knew that speak and words and writing and novels all connect, but when you think about it, they are what intertwine and weave with each other. You can't really have one without the other.
I hate to nerd out here, but in HBO's Game of Thrones, in those medieval times, there is a character in the third and fourth season named Davos Seaworth. He is the king's hand so he does majority of the talking for the king. The reason why I am connecting this to the readings is due to the fact that he is illiterate. He speaks and presents himself and the king very professionally and well mannered, yet he cannot read or write notes for the kings. So after reading this handouts, I kept thinking of him. Because it says in Wolf's readings on the very first line that humans were never born to read. We just invented it. Which of course, alters the course of how our brain functions.
But after reading these, then also reflecting back on our speeches, like Professor Condon said in class, many rhetoric's would make it up on the spot and not rely on parchments for a guide. So it is very interesting to the growth and chronological order than words and speech have taken over the years. I wonder if we have hindered ourselves from doing something great if we taught ourselves not to read? Or did we save ourselves from dying out and not know how to survive?
First off, like I said before wow. Those were really hard to comprehend. However, I found it very very cool the connections between orality and linguistics. I always knew that speak and words and writing and novels all connect, but when you think about it, they are what intertwine and weave with each other. You can't really have one without the other.
I hate to nerd out here, but in HBO's Game of Thrones, in those medieval times, there is a character in the third and fourth season named Davos Seaworth. He is the king's hand so he does majority of the talking for the king. The reason why I am connecting this to the readings is due to the fact that he is illiterate. He speaks and presents himself and the king very professionally and well mannered, yet he cannot read or write notes for the kings. So after reading this handouts, I kept thinking of him. Because it says in Wolf's readings on the very first line that humans were never born to read. We just invented it. Which of course, alters the course of how our brain functions.
But after reading these, then also reflecting back on our speeches, like Professor Condon said in class, many rhetoric's would make it up on the spot and not rely on parchments for a guide. So it is very interesting to the growth and chronological order than words and speech have taken over the years. I wonder if we have hindered ourselves from doing something great if we taught ourselves not to read? Or did we save ourselves from dying out and not know how to survive?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)