Be
sure to post the four digit course section at the top of your blog
posting. There is no need to include the ENC 1101 part; Just put the
four digits of the course section. After you post the course number, you
are welcome to give your posting a title if you so choose.
This week we are making a full transition into our unit on writing constructs. The first reading by Keith Grant-Davie explores the dynamism of rhetoric. For the initial posting section, you are to create a working definition of rhetorical situation. You should use examples to support your definition and citations if you choose to reference Grant-Davie. Then, I want you to complicate your definition by exploring how Vatz, Consigney, Bitzer, and Grant-Davie would represent rhetorical situation as compared to one another. You can be creative here. If you want to create a dialogue where all four are sitting in a bar having an argument about rhetoric, that is fine. If you want to put them at a dinner party or at a sporting event, that is fine as well. What ends up happening as these four people converse about rhetoric?
_____________________________________________________________
What subject will you investigate for your construct essay? Please give a brief overview of your subject and how you plan to investigate it.
The blog posting for week six is due by Sunday, Sept. 23 before 11:59pm (Eastern Standard Time).
Your response to a peer is due before Tuesday, Sept. 25 before 11:59pm (Eastern Standard Time).
I believe that a rhetorical situation is a need to display a message that must be conveyed by someone or a group of people-the rhetor or rhetors- to persuade someone or a group of people known as an audience. There are sometimes things that can impact how an audience feels toward the message. My definition is a more simplified version of Grant-Davie's version so it uses many of his components. Grant-Davie goes into depth about the components of rhetorical situation which are exigence, discourse, rhetors, and an audience. He proposes that the exigence is the matter and motivation of the discourse, that the rhetors and the audience are of equal importance in a rhetorical situation, each of which can be plural. Grant-Davie goes into details about exigence by asking what the discourse is about, why it's needed, and what should it accomplish. The rhetors are the people or things that are responsible for the discourse and they can play various roles. The audience are the people or things who receive the discourse by means of the rhetor. The rhetor has an influence on the audience, but according to Grant-Davie the audience can have an influence on the rhetors and the roles that are played though different rhetorical situations. Sometimes a rhetor can serve as their own audience and an example is shown on page 110 where Grant-Davie talks about personal journals. The last component he talks about is constraints which are factors that can affect the achievement of rhetorical objectives as said by Davie-Grant on page 111.
ReplyDeleteNow I will go into a conversation between Vatz, Consigney, Bitzer, and Grant-Davie and their different definitions of rhetorical situation. They are sitting in a conference room.
Bitzer: My definition of rhetorical situation is where someone finds a need for some sort of change which can be effected through a message. I believe that grasping the situation is crucial to getting the response that is desired. The discourse provides a solution to the situation.
Vatz: I'm going to have to disagree with you a little Lloyd. See, I personally believe that rhetors not only provide an answer to a question, but ask the questions as well.
Bitzer: Hmm interesting.
Consigny: Sorry to butt in, but I just want to express my opinion that you both are right and wrong at the same time. The rhetor isn't the one who fully creates the situation. Richard Vatz, I believe you are right when you describe that a rhetor should be able have a strong stance on a situation that person or thing is arguing for or against. Lloyd, I agree with your point that the rhetor should be able to adapt to changes to be able to effectively cover the demands of any situation.
(Bitzer and Vatz both look at each other and think about what Consigney just said then nod in approval)
ReplyDeleteBitzer: Going into more depth of my definition, I think that exigence, an audience, and constraints combine to make up a situation where exigence is the problem, the audience is anyone that can help resolve the exigence, and constraints is anything that can hold back a decision.
Grant-Davie: Lloyd I see agree with some components about what you're saying but I think you can go further into describing exigence by asking what the discourse is, why it's needed, and what it's trying to accomplish instead of just why is needed? Furthermore, I believe that the rhetor serves to be just as important as the audience so it should be included separately not just as a category under constraints.
Vatz: (to himself) Hm, well I only include the rhetor as one who defines the situation. I should rethink that.
Grant-Davie: Lastly, you mentioned that there can be several exigences and constraints but you failed to mention that there can also be several rhetors and audiences.
Bitzer: I guess I never thought about that.
Consigny: Well I still stick to my word about rhetors need to have integrity and receptivity.
Bitzer: Now moving on to audience, I just think it's a group of people involved in a situation outside of the rhetor and discourse.
Grant-Davie: I've observed that Douglas Park has expanded a little more giving 4 meanings. They include anyone who is hearing or reading a message, your definition of an audience is included in this Bitzer, also an audience that a writer is keeping in mind, and the roles of the audience displayed by the discourse.
Vatz and Consigney: listening.
Grant-Davie: Theres one more aspect of a situation that I would like to define and that would be constraints. They include all factors of a situation not including the rhetor or audience, that cause the audience to be for or against to the message, which can therefore affect the response of the rhetor to the situation.
Bitzer: I believe that it is anyone or anything that is a part of a situation because it has the authority to hold back a decision or action that is needed to alter the problem. It's basically anything that can change an audience's mind.
Vatz: To conclude this discussion, I'll say that rhetorical situations are built up by the rhetors themselves.
Bitzer: While I believe that situations are outside of the rhetor.
Grant-Davie: Exigence, rhetor, audience and constraints are all related in my opinion.
Consigny : And the rhetor must have integrity as well as receptivity.
End of discussion.
As these four people converse about rhetoric, new ideas emerge and the definition gets expanded. Things get added on and some aspects still remain completely different from one another but they all somewhat relate in the end.
_________________________________________________________________
The subject that I will examine for my construct essay is that when writing a research paper, we can't speak in 1st or 2nd person. We were always taught to never say I, me, my, or you when writing a research paper in high school so I plan to go more into depth about this and I plan to investigate this by conducting some research and through interviews.
0037
ReplyDeleteUpon reading “Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents” by Keith Grant-Davie, I picked up a rhetorical situation to be defined as: the way a writer works, what resources he uses, and how he uses those resources. The way the author or writer writes does not mean and is not limited to putting a pen or pencil to paper or typing an essay or article. Being that it is not limited to those examples it can mean the writer’s process such as brainstorming and how he gathers his resources and information. Some writers and authors might like to go to a library and look through encyclopedias, whereras other writers might like to write off the top of their head, only going to the internet to make sure they are on the right track if they decide to mention another source. Non fiction writers usually have and use resources such as outside information. As I previously stated a writer might go to the library and look through encyclopedias, appendixes, and the reference section. I don’t see that see that as an effect way of researching because there is so much to go through to find what you are looking for in an encyclopedia and I don’t know how to use an appendix so that would not do me any justice. The reference section of a library just scares me because it’s information overload and is now old fashion to my generation. Modern writers and writers who have updated with the times may go the internet as millions, maybe billions, of people do on a daily basis. By using the internet they can search and pinpoint a specific article to help them write their own synopsis, blog, or article for the newspaper. A unique way of researching and a personal favorite is interviewing the subject itself. I think this is a technique mostly used by journalist and/or the press for news stations. Nothing can be more effective than the word directly from the horse’s mouth. When interviewing a person the writer can easily pick up on the subject’s attitude and emotions. Any of the resources I discussed, even though those are not the only types of resources a writer can use, can be used in a piece of work as a footnote or endnote. Some others don’t cite any of their resources but just mention the thought of outside information, not to the point where it needs to be cited.
Richard Vatz, Scott Consigny, and Lloyd Bitzer are sitting in a skybox at a baseball. The three writers were just interviewed by Keith Grand-Davie and they invited him to stay and watch the game with them.
*First inning of the game; the Purple Knights have someone one on 1st and 2nd base with their best hitter stepping up to bat*
Bitzer: I’m glad the owner decided to put some fire under that coach and enforce the training camp.
Grant-Davie: You think the owner did that because he wasn’t happy with record the past 2 seasons and knew a change was needed?
Bitzer: Of course! He knew something about the team needed to be changed but in order to get to the team he had to go through the coach.
Vatz: That’s a typical answer from Lloyd. He always thinks that in order for change to take affect you have to go through a discourse and change something else first.
Grant-Davie: What kind of discourse?
Vatz: Such as getting a hold of the players and telling them what needs to happen and telling the coach so he can enforce the change and make sure it happens.
Bitzer: The owner’s problem was he didn’t understand the situation so he just went to yell at the players and jumped in the coach’s face.
0037 continued
ReplyDeleteGrant-Davie: So if the owner had understood the situation of the players and actually understood the game of baseball, the change would have taken affect a long time ago?
Vatz: That’s one way to put it but the coach should have asked what was wrong with the team in the first place in order to start a situation to be solved.
Consigney: I agree with Richard here because he answered the question of the owner so he just should have asked first a long time ago then it would not have been so hard to get them back on track.
Grant-Davie: Where are you going with this?
Consigney: Like Rich was hinting at, you’re effective when you ask and answer the problem but it’s no secret that the coach is a greedy slime and used to gamble in his younger days.
Bitzer: Enough with the history lesson Scott answer the boy’s question already.
Consigney: You think because you started this theory and discussion that you can rush me but I’m coming back to you. Like I was saying the coach did not have any integrity. He knew as long as the players were on the field and hit a couple of yards and ran a few feet he was getting a check. He wasn’t willing to apply an effort to the team because that would have caused him to use energy and think. That’s how I’m agreeing with Richard; he didn’t want to think enough to ask himself the question.
Bitzer: So what does that have to do with me?
Grant-Davie: I think he’s going to disagree with your point overall.
Bitzer: Oh hush kid, you just take more notes.
Consigney: I agree with you that the coach did something about the problem because the owner complained but he ONLY reacted because the owner complained.
Grant-Davie: I should have just asked to come observe you guys rather than an interview beforehand because I think you just helped me create a new article. Thank you gentlemen, it was a pleasure and honor being in your presence.
I will explore using outside help for writing a paper or essay. When I said outside I mean research and resources. Can they help or hinder one’s writing. In my process essay I began to talk about when I was an elementary school I loved writing papers that required research but now I can’t stand it. A way I would like to investigate this subject would be to interview my peers to see if our views are similar or opposite.
0037
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Grant-Davie’s article, I gained a new way of looking at communication and the factors involved with sending and receiving the message. Grant-Davie introduces rhetorical situation and leaves a very open definition. I define rhetorical situation as a situation brought about by communication for the sake of conveying a particular message to an audience for a specific reason; just as the audience changes, so does the way of communicating. I believe that Grant-Davie over-complicated his personal definition of it by trying to analyze every aspect of the rhetor, audience, exigence, and constraints. It would have been much simpler if he stated that every aspect can intertwine with the others, thereby affecting the message as a whole. His analysis was very thorough and confusing at times, but I digress.
Grant-Davie explains and gives examples for rhetors being involved in the message throughout the whole process. They give reason for why the message is needed, convey the message, and contribute to the audiences’ actions as a result of the message. The audiences, Grant-Davie explains, are made up of different groups and react to the message of the rhetor. These audiences are swayed by the rhetor and the given situation. The constraints are what influence the audience the most. The exigence and the constraints vary from message to message, and situation to situation. Each are seemingly independent; however, everything is a constant, relying factor to other aspects of the message. If there are several rhetors and audiences, then the possibility of everything becoming intertwined is increased.
To make all this more complicated, let’s take other perspectives of rhetorical situation into account. Lloyd Bitzer believes that rhetoric is a response to a given situation. The rhetors create and give a message based on what has happened and what needs to be addressed. He also believes that exigence can be created or resolved by discourse. Audience he perceives as a group that is situationally outside the rhetor and the message being conveyed. Bitzer believes that constraints help the rhetor to control the audience to perceive the message in the proper light. In contrast to Bitzer’s perspective, Richard Vatz believes that without a rhetor, there is no situation to talk about. The rhetors create the situation and the message to express to the audience. Similarly to both Bitzer and Vatz, Scott Consigny expresses the belief that rhetors should apply a standard set of ways of doing things to any situation that may occur. This will allow the response to any problem to be more simplistic. He acknowledges that rhetors control a majority of the message, but in order to convey something appropriate for the situation, the rhetors have to adapt to the situation instead of rigidly following the same routine for every situation / message.
When thinking of these individual’s perspectives and how they relate to one another, I thought of a Venn diagram – Bitzer and Vatz being the two circles, Consigny being the section where the two circles overlap, and Grant-Davie being a circle that contains the other two.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
For my construct essay, I was thinking about exploring how research papers and “formal” papers can hinder one’s writing ability. The “rules” and the limits that a paper such as that requires can force a writer into a structured mindset when writing; I believe that writing is a freeing concept and should not be barred down with structure. To do this, I plan to ask people how they feel about writing, both formally and just for fun.
0M08
ReplyDeleteI believe that the rhetorical situation is when someone is trying to convey a message to the audience. The rhetors main goal is to generate a message to the audience is a specific manner in order to deliver the message properly. Grant-Davie’s definition is similar in some ways to mine because he believes that rhetorical communication leads to the rhetorical situation. For example Grant-Davie refers to when someone says that it’s cold. It convinces the other person to act and turn up the heat without directly demanding the audience to do something. Therefore Grant-Davie is showing how conveying a message in a certain way reflects on how the audience will respond. Grant-Davie explains how people deliver exigence which is a problem or need that can be addressed by communication. He explains that the way people display exigence is in a certain manner. The examples he used show that the people aren’t trying to be too pushy or straightforward but they stating their desire. My discussion will take place between Vatz, Consigney, Bitzer, and Grant-Davie about their definitions of rhetorical situation in a park downtown.
Bitzer: I believe that rhetorical situation is when a writer sees a need to change something in order and try to get people to do something.
Grant-Davie: Well I think that rhetorical situation is when the rhetorical communication comes in to play then later leads to the rhetorical situation which is when someone understands completely the message that is trying to be conveyed before responding.
Vatz: No, rhetorical situation is just about the defining the situation. The rhetors contribute to the situation just as the audience does. The rhetors roles are usually determined beforehand and they should be aware to the fact that their identity can change depending on the situation.
Consigney: Nonsense Bitzer and Grant-Davie. Vatz is the only one with a brain today. The rhetors should be able to play different roles; therefore the audience wouldn’t know beforehand what their role is.
Grant-Davie: Well looking at all of these factors I guess we can say that the rhetor generates the message. So the rhetorical situation can be defined as things that are related to a situation and cause the audience to do something about the situation.
Bitzer: Correct we should recognize that the rhetors are a part of the rhetorical situation
Grant-Davie: The interaction of many different rhetors should be considered.
Bitzer: The rhetor creates the situation and without the rhetor the situation doesn’t exist.
Vatz:Well looks like in some way shape, or form we our definitions of a rhetorical situation go hand in hand.
Cosingey: Well can we all agree on that
Bitzer Perhaps.
Grant Davie: So there is no right or wrong answer.
________________________________________________________________________
For my essay I will investigate the different methods in how people plan before they begin writing. I will conduct my research by asking students how they plan before writing an essay. I will get peoples opinions and different strategies.
0M08
DeleteI thought you're definition of rhetorical situation was pretty straight-forward and understanding which is good. I like how you compared it to Grant-Davie's definition and used examples to prove it. Your conversation between the different people and their definitions of rhetorical situation was very to the point and I liked how you tied it all in together towards the end. Also I think that your research about how people plan before will be very interesting to use for your conduct essay but what strategies in particular are you talking about?
I agreed with everything you said. I felt you had a firm grasp of rhetorical situations. I really liked how you watered down his long drawn out explanation in words all could understand. Also, in your conversations you demonstrated perfect examples of the four authors.
DeleteENC 0037
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Keith Grant-Davie’s, I have realized how many rhetoric situations I have been in and not even known it. A rhetorical situation is basically a situation where one person uses non-aggressive discourse to influence the way someone feels about a certain situation or topic in order to sway them to their own side or to agree with what they say. There are many different roles in a rhetoric situation. The first is a rhetor, the person that is using the discourse in his or her favor. The audience is the person or persons being swayed. The constraint is the factors that are either helping the rhetor or making it harder for the rhetor to sway the audience. A great example of rhetoric situation would be a political debate. I will now break down a political debate in order for you to see how each role effects the situation. The rhetor in the situation would be one of the candidates in the debate. Let’s say Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are having a political debate. Mitt Romney says, “Obama is going to run this country deep into the ground if he keeps handing out money to people that don’t deserve it.” Obama then responds with his tax break plan and explains how it will help many people in the country. This is a hypothetical example and is not true in any way shape or form. But the rhetors in this example would be Barack Obama and Mitt Romney because they are using their discourse to sway people onto their side. The audience would be anyone that listens or watches this political debate. There is an infinite number of constraints but I will list the most obvious. Looking through Obama’s perspective Mitt Romney would be the biggest constraint. Also the conservatives that are in the audience and don’t agree with Obama would be another constraint. Positive constraints would be maybe a stimulus plan that Obama just passed that worked and people have heard about it. Maybe he gave a tax break that worked or passed a plan that worked. From Mitt Romney’s perspective it would be the same audience but the constraints would be basically opposite of Obama’s constraints. This is a very simple way to explain a rhetoric situation. There are many more factors to a rhetoric situation. For example in order to be a good rhetor you must be able to understand the underlying problem that brought on the rhetoric situation. Once you can do this you have a better understanding on how to put things in order for it to effect your audience the most.
The first person to define a rhetoric situation was Lloyd Bitzer in 1968. In 1970, Scott Consigny and Richard Vatz both wrote separate response articles. In order to understand each persons stand on I will construct a creative, fictional narrative of them going to a bar and talking about rhetorical situations:
Lloyd Bitzer (walking in and seeing Scott Consigny, Richard Vatz, and Keith Grant-Davie sitting at the bar and walks over to join them): Hey guys! Just read Obama’s new campaign plan. Boy that guy is gonna run this country into the ground!
Richard Vatz: Hey! He’s trying! You don’t have to be so rude. His new plans will really help this country in the future.
Scott Consigny: Hey come on guys lets not argue about this again, we don’t want a repeat of you guys’ rhetoric argument because we all know where this is going.
Keith Grant-Davie: Yeah, that lasted for hours.
(continued on next post)
(Continued)
ReplyDeleteConsigny: And not to mention you guys got on top of the bar and started screaming arguments just to prove to each other that the rhetor not only asks the question but answers it.
Bitzer: THAT’S NOT TRUE! I cant believe you’re taking his side again!
Vatz (goes for high five): MY DAWWG!
Consigny (denies high- five): I wasn’t agreeing, I was just setting an example. You both know that I think you are both right.
Grant-Davie: Yeah there is no right or wrong answer. It really just depends on the rhetoric situation.
Consigny: Yeah, the art of rhetoric involves integrity, the ability to determine the factors of that may effect the rhetors and acting upon it in a way that will help you. Which is why you are half way right Richard.
Bitzer: Wow, dude. After all we’ve been through you are just gonna take his side like that. I got you bro.
Consigny: First off, don’t bro me if you don’t know me. I’ve known you for a week and plus I met you because you were drunk on the bar arguing with Lloyd about rhetoric situations and the bartender looked like he needed help to get you down so I helped and then you’ve weirdly been here every time I’m here. Why is that?
Bitzer: uh, well, you see…
Consigny: Shut up. Besides I agree with you too. I also think that a rhetoric situation involves receptivity, which is the ability the ability to recognize the conditions and demands of individual situations. (Grant-Davie, Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents, 105)
Bitzer: I guess that’s true. We shouldn’t let this tear our friendship up.
Vatz: Yeah I know. I’m sorry dude.
Grant-Davie: There we go! That’s what I like to see! NOW LETS TAKE SHOTS!
__________________________________________________________________
For my Construct essay I plan to investigate the construct of the five-paragraph essay. I will examine how this may give students writers block and yet they still use it. I will get examples of this by going through some of my old writings where I have used that format and also ask other people if they had some difficulties with writing or if it helped them write their essay or paper
Catherine Rucker
ReplyDeleteENC 0M08
I think my definition of a rhetorical situation would be when a rhetor feels the need to present an issue to create a response, or incite others to respond to the topic given. My definition is very similar to the definition given by Bitzer and Consigny. Bitzer defines a rhetorical situation as a situation where a speaker or writer sees the need to make a change in reality and uses rhetorical discourse as a means of accomplishing said task. Consigny both agrees and disagrees with Bitzer’s definition of a rhetorical situation. He believes that a rhetorical situation is created partly by the rhetor, however he also believes that rhetoric should be able to be responded to.
Scenario: The four men sit and discuss their beliefs on rhetorical situations at the local pub.
Grant-Davie: Alright. The thing is that I’m doing my own research on what a ‘rhetorical situation’ really means and how it applies to the way individuals understand the different kinds of information presented to them. But, I’m going to need your opinions on it, so….Any ideas, fellas?
Bitzer: Well… I believe that a rhetorical situation is where writers, events, and speakers see a problem which they believe can be changed and that answers and change may come about by a message or discourse.
Vatz: I disagree, Bitz. I think that rhetors create rhetorical situations, not discover them. Moreover, rhetors both ask the question and they answer it.
Bitzer: Nonsense! It would be better to think of the situation as a solution to a problem, or an answer to a question. What’s the point in asking a question you already have an answer to? Rhetorical discourse is created as a response to a situation. It’s the same as how a solution comes into existence when a problem is presented.
Vatz: Don’t presume to discredit my opinions just because they do not readily agree with yours, Lloyd. It’s clear to me that you aren’t able to understand my point of view completely, but I’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t mark it down to “nonsense”.
Consigny: Yea, Bitz. That was kind of uncalled for.
Bitzer: Humph…
Consigny: However, I don’t think either of you are completely right or completely wrong. I think that a rhetorical situation is partly created by the rhetor.
Vatz: What do you mean?
Consigny: I mean that I agree with your statement that rhetoric should involve applying standard strategies to any kind of situation, but I also agree with Bitzer. They should be able to respond to the conditions of each individual.
Grant-Davie: So what I’m getting here is that a rhetorical situation is influenced by factors that cause the audience to respond a certain way.
Bitzer: I guess you could put it that way.
Vatz: Our explanations sound a lot more sophisticated though…
_________________________________________________________
For my construct essay, I plan to investigate the five paragraph essay. I know it’s something that I’ve struggled with, and I would like to gain many perspectives on it from fellow students as well as teachers I’ve had in high school. I’ll most likely conduct research in the library and over the internet to try and find out why this structure is so important in the development of young writers.
0037
ReplyDeleteRhetorical situation is when a text is restrained by it position due to the audience, discourse, rhetors, exigence, and constraints. Audiences are the people who receive the context from any proposition. For example, the audiences from a commercial are the potential customers who watch the commercial. A discourse is when a context is trying to convey its audience to do something. From the commercial example, the commercial discourse would be that the audience needs to buy their products. Rhetors are the people who generate the text in rhetorical situation. Exigence is the need to resolve the discourse. Constraints are the limits in text due to background, history, events, and even the rhetors themselves. Constraints can be negative or positive. A negative constraint disables a text and positive constraint enhances a text. For example, I want to build a new community by deforestation but there is a near extinct animal in the forest. The near extinct animal and deforestation is my negative constraint. While my positive constraint can be there’s an over population in the town we are living in.
Now my dialogue with Vatz, Consigney, Bitzer, and Grant-Davie. The background of the story is in Little Field. The place where you wait to go to heaven or hell when you die, like limbo in a way. Time and places are all mush together. The four souls happened to be floating next to each other.
Bitzer: Hey Vatz and Consigney. You guys remember me?
Vatz: It’s Bitzer right?
Consigney: Oh yea, how did we meet again?
Grant-Davie: Hey guys I’m Keith. I live after your time, you guys know each other through the discussion about rhetorical situations, I used to do a study about you guys theory of rhetorical situations.
Vatz: No, I’m pretty sure Bitzer slept with my sister.
Consigney: No Vatz, that was Mr. Bitter.
Vatz: Oh yea, that’s right.
Grant-Davie: This is so interesting that we all meet here in this place, Bitzer can you explain to me what your prose was on the rhetorical situation?
Bitzer: Yea sure. Rhetorical situation is when the context in which speakers or writers creates rhetorical discourse.
Vatz: I agree.
ReplyDeleteConsigney: Yup.
Bitzer (cont.): Things such as events, objects, relationship, social status, and other things can create constraints and forces a rhetorical situation on a rhetor.
Vatz: No way, I think it’s just the rhetors who create rhetorical situations. I mean, they can ignore their constraints if they want to. Like, if there was an event that influenced my writing, I can just totally ignore it. If I was to answer to that event, then that means I must ask the question to the event too. So it’s all about the rhetors.
Grant-Davie: What do you think Consigny?
Consigny: I think they both have very interesting points. But I don’t think its black and white though. The answer is gray. A rhetor would present a rhetorical situation but he should be able to have flexibility to argues the constraints. He should also have “integrity” which is the ability to face any rhetorical situation, it may be ignoring it like Vatz said but he also need to know when to argue too. So both of you are right in a way.
Vatz: That is a good point. Sometimes a point is unavoidable and must address.
Bitzer: Yea, and sometimes you cannot address all the points.
Grant-Davie: Hm, what about when a text grows with the number of rhetors? Like there’s an argument between two friends right? And then their friends get involved. Would that be because of the rhetors adding on the situation? And Bitzer theory about the events doesn’t matter as much?
Consigny: Well, I don’t think so. Because the argument must be dictated by the events of whatever they were arguing to be bigger than the circle they were already in. So like, if we were talking about politics, the argument might later on involve other people. It would be because of the argument topic and not solely because of the rhetors. Ya know? But if we were just arguing about which is better, a cat or a dog, more than likely the argument will die between us because of the topic.
Grant-Davie: Wow, that’s very interesting. This is such a complex thinking. What is that light?
In a split second, the four souls were transported to who knows where.
I’m going to investigate why writers summarize a small writing in their conclusion, such as five paragraph essays. I don’t see a reason why there is a need to summarize a small piece of prompt. I see others are still summarizing their writing when their writing is only five or six paragraph long. I’m going to ask everyone in my group if they write a conclusion. If so, what is in their conclusion and why do they have to include what they have.
Blake Anderson 0119
ReplyDeleteA rhetorical situation is defined in my words as an exigence that is in need of or created by a solution, statement, or question. These questions, statements, or solutions are influenced by the exigence, or problem, its self; this also works in vice versa where the exigence may be generated from a statement, solution or question. The method in which the rhetor presents his ideas and emotions is subjective to the audience that he is presenting them too, and the constraints, or problems whether they are a person, place, or thing that causes the exigence. In other terms, a rhetorical situation, as stated by Scott Consigny, is an art that must consist of integrity to create standards that are appropriate to an audience and receptivity, or what I like to call “adaptiveness”, to respond to a situations demands and conditions. The general idea of integrity coincides with the definition of a rhetorical situation created by Lloyd Bitzer. Bitzer suggests that the tone, terminology and overall atmosphere of a speaker creates changes or creates biased opinions and feeling of the subject that he is speaking of. The same pertains to receptivity and the definitions of Blitzer’s challenger, Richard Vatz. Richard believes that an already pre-existing situation models the response of the rhetor, which is entirely opposite than Bitzer.
Just as all four men have their opinion, I have mine. My thoughts of rhetorical situations incorporates parts of all of their definitions into one. Problems, events or just an everyday experience, the exigence, may result in the input from an individual, the rhetor. This input could be influenced by who the rhetor is speaking to, the audience, and what may have caused the exigence or what may result from it, the constraints. For instance, if I, the rhetor in this situation, talk about mathematics and how to solve a problem with my intelligent best friend, I could easily talk in any manner I wish and speak about any type of mathematical concept. I can do this because my friend will not care how I phrase something and he will most likely understand the concepts that I speak of because he is intelligent. On the other hand if I had the same experience with a fourth grader, I would not use the same behaviors because they most likely will not understand mathematical theories such as Calculus or Geometry and they would result in being confused and they would offer me no help.
ReplyDeleteMy opinions also consist of a situation being molded as insignificant or a major problem, just by the way that one speaks of it. This is extremely prevalent in politics. Some may argue that the legalization of drugs is a cornerstone in American society and to many it is a huge issue, due to the way that some politicians speak of it and how often they speak of it. Even if there were a World War, which in my opinion would be a number one priority in politics and would overshadow legalizations of drugs, many would still focus on that idea just because of the mannerisms and atmosphere that surrounds it.
ReplyDeleteOverall my ideas correlate closest to Grant-Davie and Scott Consignly’s, but I have also heard Bitzer and Vatz’s opinions and I will always have their ideals lingering in the back on my mind when I have experiences related to rhetorical situations.
(Bitzer the Lioness, Vatz the Tiger, and Cosigny the Liger are all taking a stroll in the African Sarah.)
ReplyDeleteVatz the Tiger: “Hey guys look! There is a herd of antelope on the other side of that ridge, because of this prime opportunity we must go hunting!”
Bitzer the Lioness: “You are silly; we have been hunting which is why we have come to this opportunity in which the antelope are so close to us. Do you not remember tracking them for the past hour?”
Cosigny the Liger: “You both are ridiculous, we are hunters are we must feed. I could care less what the explanation of the antelope is as long as we reach the solution”
In the meantime, Grant-Davie the common household feline is lounging around at home minding his own business, not caring what other think of him, playing with yarn and getting fed food from his owners without working for it.
Bitzer and Vatz have opposite opinions which are why they are separate species of felines. Their statements also coordinate with their opposite opinions. Cosigny, who has an opinion that can relate to both of his feline friends, is a combination of their species. While Grant-Davie who has his own opinion is in an entirely separate situation but because of the opinions being of the same subject, he is also in the feline family.
For my construct essay I will focus on the overall idea of a common, socially accepted format of writing. Basically, why is there a preferred format of writing of society and education, such as the five paragraph essay, instead of a personal preference. I will go about this research using personal experiences and those of friends and colleagues. I find this to be an appropriate topic because of the relevance of it in my life.
I really enjoyed reading your dialogue!It was definitely different than most of the ones I have read. I liked how you actually explained what your dialogue meant since it was so short. I also like your construct essay idea. Mine is similar to yours. I am looking at the different components that make up the 5 paragraph essay. I hope i'm able to read yours! A question i have is, In your opinion, what is a socially acceptable essay form? We are taught so many different ones, so are you just going to base it off of all of them?
DeleteBrittan Petty
ReplyDelete1101-OM08
After reading Grant-Davies “Rhetorical Situations and their Constituents,” I believe that a rhetorical situation is: the circumstance for which the rhetor writes, which can include, but is not limited too, the audience, what message he wishes to convey, and what has already been said about the subject. I believe my definition is closely related to Grant-Davies, but a much simpler one. Since it is the same definition, but simplified, it uses the same components. Grant-Davies definition consist of four components: exigence, rhetors, audience, and constraints. Exigence is the matter and motivation of the discourse and Grant-Davie proposes three questions about the discourse: what is the discourse about, why is it needed, and what should it accomplish? (P 106, Davie). Audience is those people, both real and imagined, with whom Rhetors negotiate through discourse to achieve the rhetorical objectives (P 109). Simply put, the audience is anyone who hears or reads the discourse or who is intended to read or hear the discourse. There can be one audience, which is the intended audience, but more often than not, there are multiple audience. Rhetors are simply the the authors of the discourse. Grant-Davie suggest that there can be multiple audiences and they may also play more than one role at once. For example, on page 109, Grant-Davie shows an example of how an umpire is also a police chief. He is given fewer problems with local residents because they know this fact. Constraints are the limitations and opportunities for what can be said to sway the audience back and forth. There are both positive and negative constraints. Positive constraints are assets and negative constraints that hinder are liabilities. (P 111)
I will now go into a conversation between Grant-Davie, Vatz, Bitzer, and Consigny. They are sitting in an empty coffee shop at about 11 PM.
Grant-Davie: This place is so empty and bare.
Blitzer: The coffee is perfect!You would think that the owner would spruce this place up a bit. Then he would get more customers!
Vatz: You and your discourse Blitzer.
oMo8
DeleteYour definition is very similar to the one provided by Grant-Davie, certainly more cogent. However, there was one difference between your definition and Grant-Davie's. That is Grant-Davie's provided for the possibility of multiple rhetors, while yours is singular. I think with that slight modification and it would serve as a very good definition for rhetorical situation. As for your conversation, I particularly like the point that you have Consigny make. The metaphor of what kind of customers the proprietor would like is very clever.
cont
ReplyDeleteGrant-Davie: What is discourse here Vatz?
Vatz: The emptyness! Since the owner has quite a few regulars, then the coffee isn't the problem. It's obviously the way the place looks that turns the customers away.
Grant-Davie: So you're saying that by changing the place up, the audience will change as well?
Vatz: Exactly. Glad to see someone catching on.
Grant-Davie: The audience that he is trying to reach may be different that what you are expecting. Maybe he wants regulars or he may like the way the place looks.
Consigny: All of you are both right and wrong. Maybe he should ask the customers what they like and in turn we should ask what kind of customers he is looking for. He may or may not want the young population. He may want older people since they tend to be quiet.
Grant-Davie: Interesting point. I think everyone is right, and also wrong. The rhetor needs to consider his audience and what the exigence is and change his discourse in order to gain more customers.
Blitzer: I agree with you.
Scence ends with them chatting about the latest Wall Street Journal.
The subject I will be examining for the construct essay is the components and structure of the five paragraph essay. In elementary school, we were taught that every good essay is written in a five paragraph essay format. Within in the format there had to be a hook, or catchy introduction, a thesis statement with three main points, a concluding paragraph that restates your thesis with supporting details, and an ending that leaves your reader thinking. I plan to conduct this research through interviews with former teachers and peers and I also plan to browse the internet.
0037
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Grant-Davie’s article about rhetoric, I have learned about rhetorical situations. He considered the definitions and characteristics of the other others before him, as well as gives his own definition. I define a rhetorical situation as one in which communication is taking place in order to acquire something, while the situation is influenced by all members partaking, it changes as it develops. The main characteristics that influence the situation are the Exigence, rhetors, audiences, and constraints. These four things embody the constituents of a rhetorical situation as developed by Grant Davie. Grant-Davie, in more detail, discusses that all characters in a rhetorical situation impact its effect; he begins that exigence is a multi-question answer, encompassing “What it is about,” “Why it is needed,” and “What it should accomplish.” He then moves that the rhetor exists before the message is delivered as well as during it. Grant-Davie’s perception of audience is broadened by Douglas Park’s, that there may be multiple audiences, he also believes that the audience influences the rhetor and their discourse. The situation changes as it develops due to constraints, which Grant-Davies believes to be anything besides the rhetor or audience that may influence the audience’s impact of the discourse, these constraints will change the rhetor’s discourse due to the adaptation that must take place to effectively convey the message. The other authors who have a large role in this discussion are Vatz, Bitzer, and Consigney.
(cont.)
ReplyDeleteWhile at a convention on Rhetoric, the four authors find themselves sitting at the same table, discussing their own opinions on such situations:
Vatz: This man on stage is all wrong, rhetorical situations do not exist without Rhetors! They are who realize the exigence and proceed to create a discourse about it. Without the rhetor there would be no one to address the problem!
Grant-Davie: Yes, I agree. The rhetor is just as much a part of the situation before the message is made as during it. The rhetor must be there for the idea to be discovered and the discourse created.
Bitzer: No, no, no. You two are completely wrong. Surely, after the speech is made the rhetor becomes a constituent to it, however before the speech is made the rhetor does not exist. The speech must be made to dignify someone as the rhetor! Also, there may only be one rhetor and a single audience, the discourse will only reach the people that it’s intended to.
Vatz: Bitzer, how could you believe that? The rhetors not only answer the question, but they ask it. They are the ones who address the exigence at hand while offering their solutions.
Consigney: You three are both right and wrong, surely the rhetor exists before the situation unfolds, however they are only partly responsible for creating it. These rhetors can create a sense of Ethos in their audience though. Only through integrity and receptivity will they create Ethos, it is established not given to.
Grant-Davie: I agree, the audience plays a large role towards the rhetor; the audience impacts the rhetors situation through their purpose and characteristics. The rhetor must adapt their discourse to effectively create a rhetorical situation answering the exigence at hand.
Bitzer: This may be true to some extent, the audience can be a constraint at some times to the rhetor. However, constraints can be harnessed by the rhetor to better prove their point and more effectively support their discourse. As well, this audience must consist of real people existing in the situation outside of the rhetor and their discourse.
Grant-Davie: Bitzer, you fool, there can surely be more than one rhetor and audience. There can be multiple audiences in the sheer manner that, there is the audience that you are trying to address and the audience that is invoked by the rhetor’s discourse. Why must the audience consist of real people when the rhetor may have an audience that only exists in their mind? Your perception of an audience is too narrow-minded, you must address all possible views that the rhetor experiences through their discourse. Even during their message must the rhetor adapt, creating new roles for themself to address their audience. I believe you to be mistaken to consider a constraint more of an aid, they clearly handicap the rhetor in ways that they must change their discourse to address or avoid them. A historical constraint, based on a recent event, could cause a rhetor to have to address a negative point towards their speech or avoid it entirely, creating a bad face for them. We may disagree on many characteristics and components of rhetorical situations, but I believe we can agree that many of these characteristics interlace and the deeper you analyze the situation the more common they are.
For my construct I will be investigating the avoidance of collaboration while writing papers. Throughout our educational system, collaboration while writing papers is generally considered “cheating.” This applies a negative connotation to it, while in the workplace it is generally applicable and allowed. I will examine the approach of schools and their reasoning behind this sort of preparation for life after school.
0037
ReplyDeleteI agree with Vatz in the sense that rhetorical situations occur based on the words that are being spoken by the rhetors. Instead, of the rhetoric that is created through situation as Bitzer sees it. My definition of a rhetorical situation would be: when there is a command and that command is not the direct purpose for the command. Keith Grant-Davie displays this idea on page 101, “for example, sitting in your kitchen with a friend who says, ‘Boy, I’m really cold.’” This demonstrates a rhetorical situation because the intention of his statement was not to make himself sound like a girl. His intention was indirect to communicate that he wished it to be warmer. This is reinforced with Vatz’s thoughts, on page 105, that “situations do not exist without rhetors, and that rhetors create rather than discover rhetorical situations.”
One day Bitzer, Consigny, Vatz, and Grant-Davie walk into a bar. They sit down and the bartender says, “Welcome gentlemen, we have the most refreshing beer!”
Bitzer: I’ll have one your best selling beers!
Vatz: Wow that bartender totally lured you in with a rhetorical situation.
Consigny: Yeah he did!
Bitzer: What are you talking about?
Vatz: Bro, he effectively got you to buy that beer without directly telling you to…
Bitzer: Are you joking? That’s not a rhetorical situation at all.
Consigny: I mean he is partially correct.
Grant-Davie: You’re on your own with this one Bitzer.
Bitzer: Seriously!? A rhetorical situation is when there is a need for change and as we can all recall there was, in fact, no need for change.
Consigny: I slightly agree with that, I think I’m going to be on the fence for this issue.
Vatz: Of course you are, you’re always indecisive. But Bitzer, no. His statement suggested that he wants you to buy beer. Therefore he used an excellent form of a rhetorical situation to persuade you in buying his beer.
Consigny: Well put Vatz. However, considering the receptivity Bitzer would also be correct in this sense.
Grant-Daive: Are you guysss ssstill talkin bout that rhetoriale hoopla sstill?
Bitzer: dammit Keith not again.
Grant-Daive: I wuv you…all of youu
Vatz: of course you do…
____________________________________________________________
For my construct essay I will inspect the idea that every essay must start with a ‘catchy’ introduction. I will examine what makes an introduction to be considered ‘catchy’. To find out if this is a reoccurring theme I will also ask a few of my friends how they have been taught through their involvement in English.
0119
ReplyDeletePart 1
From reading Keith Grant-Davie’s essay on rhetorical situations and the viewpoints of Vatz, Consigney, and Bitzer, I would define a rhetorical situation as a situation that is formed when there is motivation to get an audience to do something. A rhetorical situation can be further explained by five components: The discourse, the rhetor, the exigence, the audience, and the constraints. The discourse is the communication between the rhetor and the intended audience. The rhetors are the people behind the discourse. The exigence, the way Grant-Davie puts it, is “the matter and motivation of the discourse” (106). When discussing exigence, Grant-Davie proposes questions such as “What is the discourse about?” (106) “Why is the discourse needed?” (107) and “What is the discourse trying to accomplish?” (108) The answers to these questions help analyze what the exigence of the rhetor is when addressing the audience. The audience can be described as “people, real or imagined, with whom rhetors negotiate through discourse to achieve the rhetorical objectives” (109). In other words, Grant-Davie explains that rhetors use discourse to get what they want. However, there are often constraints on what the discourse includes or how it is delivered. I like the way Grant-Davie explains constraints, saying that there can be “positive constraints” (111) that help a rhetor’s case and “negative constraints” (111) that impede it.
To clarify, I will provide an example of a rhetorical situation and its components. In the case of a Coca-Cola commercial, Coca-Cola executives, the advertising representatives, and even actors in the commercial are considered the rhetors. The discourse is ultimately “Buy Coca-Cola,” but can be broken down into smaller arguments. For example, if a celebrity is in the commercial, the discourse would also be “Buy Coca-Cola because this famous person drinks it too! Don’t you want to be like them?” Or, if a competitor’s soda is portrayed to be inadequate compared to Coca-Cola, the discourse would also be “That brand’s soda sucks! Buy Coca-Cola, because it’s much better!” The exigence of the rhetors, the ones behind Coco-Cola and the commercial, would be the need to sell their product, the need to make money, the need to pay for the cost of advertisement, and so on. The audience consists of the people watching TV and viewing the commercial. The rhetor’s intended audience would reflect the channel the commercial is on and the timing of it. The constraints on Coca-Cola’s discourse would include positive ones, such as the already developed popularity of Coca-Cola. Their name is already out there and those who see the commercial have most likely heard of Coca-Cola before. This works in their favor; the fact that they have already established a positive reputation for themselves. A negative constraint, however, could deal with some report that cutting out soda would help a lot of people with their health, leading to weight loss, better dental health, etc. If a member of Coca-Cola’s audience sees the commercial but also recently heard about the benefits of not drinking soda, the commercial will not encourage them to buy the product, but rather will remind them that the product is not healthy and that they shouldn’t buy it. These two examples of constraints show that they are not necessarily always negative, in spite of the word having a negative connotation.
If Vatz, Consigny, Bitzer, and Grant Davie were chatting at a café (because that’s what all the intelligent folk do, right?) and were to get on the topic of rhetorical situation, it would go a little something like this (and for clarity’s sake, they will refer to each other with their last names):
ReplyDeleteBitzer: So I wouldn’t have ever expected my discussion on rhetorical situation to evoke so much response.
Vatz: Well, I felt I had much I could add.
Consigny: As did I.
Grant-Davie: And then I had to come along and compile every concept all three of you touched on! Haha.
Bitzer: In what ways do you guys think I was lacking in my discussion?
Vatz: Same here, and what ways do you agree or disagree with my ideas?
Consigny: Yeah, I’m also curious about what you can add to our ideas.
Grant-Davie: Well, first of all, Bitzer, you insisted that understanding the situation is important because it determines the form of rhetorical work that will respond to it. You claim that the rhetor’s response is controlled by the situation.
Bitzer: Yes, I believe the situation is in control of the rhetor.
Vatz: And then I challenged Bitzer’s argument, explaining that situations do not exist without rhetors. In other words, rhetors create the rhetorical situations, rather than discover them.
Consigny: And I took a little of each of those arguments. The rhetorical situation is only partly created by the rhetor. I think a rhetor can apply some standard strategies to any situation, supporting you, Vatz, but I also believe that rhetors have the ability to respond to the demands of individual situations, supporting you, Bitzer.
Grant-Davie: From the three of your definitions, I created a definition myself: rhetorical situations are a set of related factors whose interaction creates and controls a discourse. I’ve got ideas from all three of you in there. And then, in my essay, I began to discuss the different parts of a rhetorical situation.
Bitzer: The exigence, audience, and constraints?
Grant-Davie: Yes, only I argued that we need to include the rhetors because they are as important to rhetorical situation as the audience. Also, I indicted that any of these components can be plural. There can be multiple rhetors, exigences, audiences, and constraints.
Bitzer: I did indicate that there can be multiple exigences and constraints, but I guess I ignored that there can be multiple rhetors. And I’m not sure if I would consider rhetors as important as audience, as I believe demands of situations control rhetors, but from Vatz’s point of view, it makes sense.
Vatz: I only pointed out that the rhetor helps define the situation, but isn’t a constituent of a rhetorical situation.
Grant-Davie: I think the roles of rhetors are somewhat predetermined, but open to definition and change. Rhetor’s identities change based on the rhetorical situation, and I believe they are an important constituent of a rhetorical situation.
Sorry, 0119 and this is Part 2
Delete0119
ReplyDeletePart 3
Bitzer: How would a rhetor’s identity change?
Grant-Davie: Audience can influence the identity of the rhetor. For instance, if the audience’s opinions of the rhetor are formed based on some of the rhetor’s past actions, the rhetor may change his identity a bit to appeal to his audience more. He wouldn’t want to audience to make the connection with some past action they view as negative.
Bitzer: So, what about audience? I describe audience as a group of real people within a situation that the rhetor is trying to reach.
Grant-Davie: I believe your definition can be expanded to include imagined people and include the fact that the rhetor is trying to achieve a goal.
Vatz: How can an audience have imagined people?
Consigny: Yeah, how are you trying to reach imaginary people?
Grant-Davie: Audiences that may form because of the discourse and audiences that the rhetor does not know much about can be these “imagined” audiences. A rhetor can only imagine what kind of people may become his or her audience once he has put his discourse out there. New people may hear his message and become part of his “real” audience.
Vatz: That makes a lot of sense. You have to consider what people will listen to your message even if they weren’t in your “real” audience.
Bitzer: I like your argument, Grant-Davies. Now what about constraints? I describe them as aids to the rhetor that can be outside factors or factors that are personal to the rhetor, such as his/her personality.
Grant-Davie: I do like that you recognize a constraint as a positive thing, but I believe some can be negative, and I have categorized them as “positive constraints” and “negative constraints.” Positive constraints aid the rhetor, as you have said, but negative constraints take away from the discourse, such as an audience having a negative opinion about the rhetor, which could make the discourse seem less valuable.
Bitzer: I like your expansion on the definitions and the fact that you point out there can be multiple rhetors. Or audiences, even.
Vatz: I’m glad you agree that rhetors create the rhetorical situation, and not the other way around.
Consigny: You combined our ideas about rhetors, audiences, and constraints in a way that seems to cover all possibilities that can arise. Not much has been left undefined…I commend you for that.
Grant-Davies: Thank you, we can continue this discussion soon if you’d like, but at the moment, I think I need more coffee if we’re going to go deeper into this.
Bitzer: Agreed.
And then they all get more coffee and tea and wear monocles because that’s what fancy intelligent people do.
----------------------------------------------------------------
As the four of them conversed about rhetoric, they realized Vatz and Consigny built on or argued against Bitzer’s ideas, and Grant-Davies combined and refined their definitions into single comprehensible ones that covered most concepts. Grant-Davies allows Bitzer’s, Vatz’s, Consigny’s, and his own ideas to build a big picture on rhetoric situation.
----------------------------------------------------------------
For my construct essay, I plan on investigating the five paragraph essay and the standard planning process that goes along with it. I will interview friends and classmates about how they were taught to write an essay when they were younger, and how the standardized essay varied as they got older.
From reading Grant-Davie this week I have decided that Rhetorical Situations are situations where the rhetors are trying to convey a message to the audience as to why their argument is better. Rhetors want to make a case that intimates the others’ view to see their side as correct. While Grant-Davie uses more complex idea coupled with exigence and discourse. Exigence and discourse are important to his argument as they are the cause and the reaction of the argument. Grant-Davie over analyzed every aspect of his thesis so a novice reader like myself had to go over his usage of exigence and discourse. His argument on exgience and discourse could have been condensed into a few sentences rather than his deluge of argument—he asks what is discourse and why and what it aimed at accomplish. He uses the example of someone being cold and subtly demanding that his host turn up the heat, page 101. I liked how he used such a regular example as it allowed me to be in touch with his argument. Over all I felt his argument was too lengthy and complicated for such an easy idea. Rhetorical Situations are in our everyday life and isn’t an idea that is hard to grasp. If he had explained it in the simplest of terms it wouldn’t have been muddled with morphed jargon. From reading Grant-Davie I have come to the conclusion that Vatz has a more valid argument than the others. A rhetorical situation is based off of the root word of rhetors so by default rhetorical situations have to be modeled after rhetors. Just as a rhetorical question doesn’t beg to be answered, a rhetorical situation can only be created by the rhetors who make it into a situation.
ReplyDelete______________________________________
For my construct essay I plan to write about what makes a worthwhile essay. From elementary school we’ve been taught the five paragraph essay coupled with a snazzy opening paragraph. But I want to know what makes the entire thing mesh together and will a snazzy paragraph balance out a so-so paper.
__________________________________________
Blitzer, Vatz, Consigny all go to the club for a wild night of boozing it up and finding the ladies.
Vat: Man, I really do like all this young and attractive ladies up in hurr; I wonder if we should go and get one of them to come and talk to us?
Blitzer: Nah, dude. We came her for the ladies to come to us. If they really like us then they will come to us. Honestly, we are the prized possessions and they are not.
Consigny: Well guys, les’ be hon’est, I don’t really care how we bring home the ladies tonight just as long as I don’t go empty handed.
Grant-Davie: Man, those guys are looking for a wild time when all I have to do is ask my wife for a nice cold beer. Gosh, I sure do like thinking and minding my own business in the safety of my home.
I found your definition of a rhetorical situation interesting, like others it mentions a party trying to convince another party but doesn't mention the message being a subtle one. I also like how you explained which definition that you found the most right. Your debate between the four minds was definitely interesting as well. I really like how you used a situation that is easily relatable and something most people can comprehend.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete0037
ReplyDeleteI believe a rhetorical situation is when a rhetor trys to convey a message to you without actually telling you to do something. My definition agrees with Keith Grant-Davie, he explains how Kobe Bryant and Sprite tell you to drink sprite. They don’t straight out tell you to buy and drink sprite, but they say to “obey your thirst.” By saying obey your thirst they are trying to imply that your thirst wants you to buy sprite; that your taste buds want the sprite, they aren’t out right telling you to buy their product. Another example that Grant-Davie’s used was when he told about you and your friend sitting in a room together and your friend saying “boy, it’s cold in here.” This is a rhetorical situation because your friend is commanding you to turn the heat up without actually telling you to do it. Your friend is the rhetor and he is trying to convey a message that you should get up and turn the heat up, but he isn’t directly telling you to “get off your ass and turn the AC down, it’s freezing in here!”
One night Bitzer, Vatz, Consigny, and Keith Grant-Davie go gambling in Las Vegas. After picking up their chips they go over to the table to start a game of blackjack. All four of them lose all of their chips to the other player at the table. The only guy they don’t know tells them that they shouldn’t give up that easily.
The Other Guy: “it’s all luck” he says, "go pick up some more chips! I’m telling you, your day is about to turn around.”
Keith Grant Davie: Hey, this seems like a rhetorical situation to me! The Other Guy is just trying to convince us to get more chips; he knows that we aren’t very good.
Vatz/Consigny: Yeah I agree, he’s trying to take our money.
Bitzer: No, he just wants us to have a good time; he is in no way a rhetor.
Consigny: He is totally trying to make us get more chips so he can have a better time! For all we know he’s a professional poker player.
Bitzer: You guys are wrong; The Other Guy didn’t create a rhetorical situation! That’s impossible.
Vats: I disagree, Rhetors create rhetorical situations; they don’t discover them!
Consigny: I think both of you are right in a way. I mean the rhetorical situation is created partially by the rhetor. Bitzer you should be able to change and respond to the situation. Both you and the rhetor create the situation.
Keith Grant-Davie: You’re saying that there isn’t just one factor that influences a rhetorical situation, That the audience and the rhetor create the rhetorical situation.
Consigny: Exactly, The rhetor doesn’t create the situation; it is created by many factors. The rhetorical situation changes based on the reaction from the audience and how the rhetor presents the statement/question.
Vatz: You guys are just making it too complicated; I’m not going to say that all these factors create a rhetorical situation. That’s way too complicated than I want to analyze it.
Keith Grant-Davie: So you’re basically admitting that you’re wrong?
Vatz: -No Response-
……
…….
……...
Vatz: Whatever, I’m leaving. There’s no way I’m losing my money.
Consigney/Davie: Yeah, we’re leaving too. We don’t want to go broke in one night.
Bitzer: You guys are crazy, I’m getting rich tonight! --leaves to buy chips—
My construct essay will definitely be examining how the format that I write in can limit, but also help what the reader is trying to say. My format for most of my essay is using five paragraphs with and introduction and conclusion paragraph. My construct essay will analyze how this format can cause writers block and how it might cause writers to become anxious when planning or starting to write.
0037
ReplyDeleteGrant-Davie’s explanation and definition of a rhetorical situation is open to one’s own interpretation. From what I could extrapolate from this article was a rhetorical situation arises when it intends for an action to take place for a specific reason. These situations occur in everyday conversation without much thought or appreciation for what is happening. For example in the text Grant-Davie’s points out when someone says it’s cold in here. He or she is inferring for the other person to do something and in this case they hope for the other person to turn up the heat.
Now each of these writers; Vatz, Consigney, Bitzer, as well as Grant-Davies all seem to disagree slightly on what a rhetorical situation really is. If they were to have a conversation on this topic I have a feeling it would go somewhat like this.
G.D. - Hey everybody I just gathered everyone here today to do some research on what you think a rhetorical situation is.
V- Ok well ill start out by saying rhetors are the most important part of any of these situations, they ask the question and answer it!
B- I would have to disagree with that statement, why would you want that to happen? How come you would want to answer your own question and not instead shape the situation with rhetorical discourse?
G.D. - what is a rhetorical discourse?
B- Rhetorical discourse is a combination of things but it is what is used to shape the overall situation with language or communication.
G.D. – So you believe that is the most important thing?
B- Yup I do
V- ok well I never really thought of it like that but still without these rhetors there would be no situation at all to alter!
G.D. - so you’re saying that without these rhetors none of this would be possible?
V- Correct
C- ok I haven’t said much but I feel I can contribute to this conversation. I do agree with both of you to an extent. Yes the situation should be should be shaped yet still leave room for interpretation but the situation should be open to a response.
G.D. – ok thanks guys for your time!
My essay will be on the 5 paragraph essay writing style taught in almost all Florida schools. I will look to see how this affects ones creativity and overall writing style and if it hinders them in the present. I will ask around with class mates and see what they say about it
0119
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Keith Grant-Davie's article, "Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents", I feel as though I have a much stronger grasp on the subject of rhetorical situations. I, personally, would define a rhetorical situation as one where the writer, the rhetor, uses his or her resources to convey an exigence to his or her audience. An example of this would be Subway sandwich commercials. For one thing, they want you to recognize their slogan “$5 Footlong” and hope that that’s a low enough price to make you want to buy their product. They add specific ingredients, such as avocado, as a limited time only special to their sandwiches and then use descriptions such as “superfood” to spark more of an interest in your mind. As if that’s not enough, they also hire famous Olympic athletes to advertise, intending for you to think “Hmm, maybe if I eat their food I can become incredibly fit as well.” The producers of these commercials use rhetorical situations in order for the consumer, or audience, to purchase their product so that the company may gain profit from them. Rhetorical situations dominate the world we live in, appearing everywhere, especially on television or the internet, billboards and even in grocery stores.
After reading this multiple times, i still do not have a good grasp on what the real definition for rhetorical situation is. To me i believe, it is the situation surrounding the rhetor. The audience in particular. Depending on the audience the rhetor must change its way of writing or speaking. If the audience is very intelligent, they may use smarter words to get their point across, if the audience is younger they may need to use smaller words, and other things to strike their attention. In the end, however, the rhetor's job is to bring awareness to an issue and persuade the audience to do something about it.
ReplyDeleteTo me, the four men had some points in common, but some significant differences as well. I think Grant-Davie and Bitzer agree that the rhetor must have full knowledge of the topic and situation. In order to convince the audience, they must know every aspect of the situation and be able to answer any questions. Vatz on the other hand disagrees. Vatz believes that the rhetor is the reason behind the situation in the first place. The rhetor is the one that asks the question in the first place, and then finds, or presents the solution. COnsigny is there to tie both together in some ways, as he agrees with both Bitzer and Vatz. He thinks that the rhetor starts with a simple problem and basically blows it up to a point where it seems he brought it up, to agree with Vatz. Grant-Davie and Bitzer also agree on the three important pieces of the puzzle:Exigence, Audience, and Constraints. They both agree they are important, and there can be multiples of exigence and contraints. Grant-Davie takes it a step further, however, saying that the rhetor itself is another key piece to the puzzle, and that there can be multiple rhetors in the situation. Grant-Daavie believes their can be multiple rhetors because they may have to change personalities to suit the audience. Speaking of the audience, once again Bitzer and Grant-Davie agree that the audience is all real people in the situation, but once again Grant-Davie takes it a step further saying there are imaginary audience memebers as well. As the others question, he will say that the audience expands beyond those standing in the room or listening to the rhetor. Once the word gets around about the situation, anyone can hear it, and they need to imagine others around so they can reel in more people for the situation. There isnt much depth to constraints. Bitzer believes contraints are positive as Grant-Davie believes they can be positive or negative. I dont recall much from Vatz. In the end i think if they were all together, they would come up with a new definition as a group and it would just add to the multiple definitions that are already out there. This is what i understood from the text and reading multiple posts. Like i said i really found it difficult to understand.
For my essay i plan on taking the first contraint, the catch phrase, as my main focus. I think since it is the first wall people hit when writing their essay no matter what type it is, it makes sense to see how and why it stops us. I will look at how i go about trying to get a catchy first sentence and see how others were able to create one or werent able to create one and try to see what stops them.
The meaning of the term “rhetorical situation” has enhanced in my mind after taking a look at Keith Grant-Davie’s writing: Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents. The rhetorical situation is what the rhetor uses to construct the framework of the essay. It guides the subject or the discourse of the essay, which is comprised of four basic parts: the exigence, rhetor, audience, and constraints. When these are put together, they create what the rhetor wants the audience to interpret for what he or she is writing. As Grant-Davie explained his meaning behind a rhetorical situation as the rhetorical part being motivated communication and the situations in which it happens is the rhetorical situation. Bitzer gives his explanation of rhetorical situation as a response to a situation; where a writer feels the need to change the reality in their writings that may be affected through rhetorical discourse. Vatz uses the example of how writers ask questions and answer them, to explain his views on rhetorical situation. Last but not least, Consigny agrees and disagrees with both aspects of Vatz’s and Bitzer’s definitions of the term. He believes that the situation is usually created by the rhetor, yet argues that rhetoric should include the ability to respond to the conditions of different situations. Although each of their versions of the definition of rhetoric situation is different, there will never be a complete perfect meaning to it because of all the different ideas everyone has of the topic.
ReplyDeleteThe topic that I’m most interested in writing about for the construct essay is the idea of how the FCAT has messed up the school system in teaching students how to truly write a creative essay. Of course the FCAT measures the student’s progress in each subject, but the fact that it literally takes out all of the creativity in constructing an essay at such a young age. There are some positive aspects that come out of the FCAT, but main outcomes are negative and almost every college student I have talked to about this topic agree one hundred percent with me.
-Gille, 0037
0M08
ReplyDeleteBefore reading this my knowledge of rhetoric was not to advance, the only time I had referenced this word before was in the term rhetorical question. Which in my understanding was a question that wasn’t supposed to be answered. After reading this my knowledge of rhetoric is more advanced to so I think. A working definition of rhetoric that I have evolved from this weeks reading is a situation where there is a question and an answer or a problem and a solution that isn’t explicitly stated. One of the first examples was the friend that was cold and instead of outright telling you to turn up the hear they simply stated that they were cold and from past experience and context clues you could tell that your friend wanted you figured out the solution to their problem.
If the four of them were to have a chat about the definition of rhetoric, I am sure that it would be a heated debate on what to include and what not to include in the final draft of the definition. One of the things that seem to be a discrepancy between the four is a rhetor, the person who generates the rhetoric. Biter and Vatz, both don’t go into detail about the importance of a rhetor. On Consigneys terms rhetors create ethos for a situation, which is the ethical appeal. Back to the example in the first paragraph if you friend says that they are cold, ethically you know the right thing to do is to turn up the heat. Consigney argues that this is consistent and doesn’t change from audience to audience so if you present the same rhetoric situation to one hundred people one hundred people will give you the same answer.Bitzer and Vatz think similar to Consigney in this way that there should be a formulaic approach to determine the proper response to a rhetorical situation. If you were to order them from most restrictive to least restrictive I think that Grant-Davie would be the least respective and the definition that everyone could their own aspects of in it. But Consigney’s would be the most restrictive definition of the four parties.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For my construct essay, I want to investigate the different mindsets behind writing fiction and writing nonfiction. I think this is interesting because when I talk to people some say they are only good when they can make the details up as the go and others rely on facts to be their inspiration. I think knowing the difference in the construction of the two would be interesting.
Grant-Davie, Vatz, Consigny, and Bitzer all decide to sit down one day in a park to discuss their differences in opinion on rhetorical situations.
ReplyDeleteGrant-Davie: So, as you all know, I am very familiar with all three of your opinions on rhetorical situations. I have asked you all to come today to discuss with each other the differences you have.
Bitzer: Well, first and foremost, I would like to say that I personally think that a rhetorical situation is one in which a writer sees a need to change, and thinks that that change could possibly be effected through rhetorical situation.
Vatz: I agree to disagree with you on this one, Bitzer. I think that the writer, who may I add is known as the rhetor, not only answers the question, but they ask it as well!
Consigny: Hmm, I think that you both are right and wrong. I believe that this so-called rhetorcreates the situation, but only partially. Vatz, I agree with you because I also think that the art of rhetoric should be able to apply a standard set of strategies to any situation that a rhetor may face.
*Vatz nods approvingly*
Consigny: And Bitzer, I agree with you in the sense that I think that a rhetor should have the ability to respond to the conditions and demands of individual situations.
*Bitzer thinks for a moment, as if almost unsure, and finally nods*
Bitzer: Yes, that sounds about right.
__________________________________________________________________
The construct of my essay will be a five paragraph essay, with a catchy beginning, and a good final closing paragraph. I am going to try to work on forming a solid layout of what I want to write about before I begin the essay, and I want to research a little bit more into all of the different ways that I have been taught to write.
0M08
ReplyDeleteI would define a rhetorical situation as any event, occurrence, or interaction in which at least one individual or group is using language or is communicating in some way. Grant-Davie's definition is very similar but adds that the language or communication tries to get people to do something (WAW 101). Personally, I think that is almost unnecessary because I think that there is always a target in speech, and there is always purpose for the use of the language. I think there is an expectation of reaction from every target of communication. If two strangers are walking past each other on a sidewalk, and one says hello to the other, regardless of how or if the other responds, the interaction between the two is rhetorical. The person who said hello, for whatever reason, expects some form of reaction, whether in the form of a verbal response or a nod of the head, making this a rhetorical situation. My point is, anytime speech is being used in a situation, it has become rhetorical because that use of words has a target, and it is expected of that target to react in some way.
_____________________________________
I'm not too sure how I imagine a conversation about rhetorical situations between Vatz, Bitzer, Consigny, and Grant-Davie. Perhaps it would take place in a classroom setting. It would start with Vatz and Bitzer, who are two students, debating the topic between each other. They have more conflicting viewpoints on the topic. Consigny, a fellow student, would jump into the conversation and propose a more middle of the road viewpoint. Lastly, Grant-Davie would enter the discussion as the teacher and challenge all three to take their definitions and explanations a step further.
Vatz: So Lloyd, how exactly do you define a rhetorical situation?
Bitzer: Well, basically its anytime a speaker or writer notices a question or problem and uses discourse to adress it.
Vatz: Hmm, interesting.
Bitzer: Do you disagree?
Vatz: In a way.
Bitzer: Go on.
Vatz: I think that the speakers, or rhetors, do more than just notice the question. Often, they ask the question and then answer it through discourse.
Bitzer: Sounds like you're just trying to one up my definition.
Vatz: And what's that suppose to mean?
Conisgny: Now hold on guys. Have you considered that maybe you're both right?
Bitzer: Oh, typical Scott, going to remedy the situation are we?
Consigny: Just hear me out. A rhetor does have a role in the creation of the rhetorical situation but not entirely. A rhetor should be able to apply strategies regarding any situation, and they also need to be able to respond to the situations.
Grant-Davie: What interesting topic of discussion.
Vatz: Mr. Grant-Davie, you could hear us?
Grant-Davie: I could, and I'd like to give you my two cents on the idea.
Consigny: Please do.
Grant-Davie: I think all your explanations have merit, but could be taken a bit further. There are several factors in any rhetorical situation.
Vatz: Like what?
Grant-Davie: Well you have the speaker, the need for discourse, the audience, and any constraints on the situation. It is more than just the speaker and the audience. All of these factors play a role in defining a rhetorical situation.
I really liked how you used the example of two people walking on the sidewalk to point to explain in depth what rhetorical situation is. I agree with your definition of rhetorical situation that it is in a interaction between people whenever someone uses a language to communicate. Your conversation was very interesting. I liked how you were able to explain everyone's point of view.
Delete0119
ReplyDeleteA rhetorical situation is a situation in which every aspect of it is influenced by the speaker, audience, modes of communication, and everything else that relates to what is going on. There are four constituents of a rhetorical situation, and each of them can overlap one another but generally all contribute to the situation. For example, the audience can change based on the type of discourse, or communication, of the rhetor. Similarly, the audience is dependent on the exigence of the rhetorical situation. In a political debate, you could say that the problem being addressed by the rhetor, or exigence, is taxes; therefore, the audience would be primarily republicans. This situation is rhetorical because it was shaped by factors such as the rhetor, the exigence, and the audience.
The following conversation will consist of the rhetorical analysts Bitzer, Consigny, Vatz, and Grant-Davie at a dinner party.
Grant-Davie: So, Consigny I see that you believe that the rhetor has significant effect on the overall rhetorical situation.
Consigny: Yes I do, the rhetors can change their views based on the views of each audience and adapt to each of these situations.
Vatz: I disagree! The only thing the rhetor does is to define the situation!
Bitzer: Yeah, like what Vatz said, the rhetor’s role is minor. I believe that the only thing the rhetor is involved in is in the contributions to constraints. I don’t even consider the rhetor as a constituent of a rhetorical situation.
Grant-Davie: All of you have very different, but interesting views on what a rhetorical situation really is. Until next time analysts, we shall meet again.
__________________________________________________________
For my construct essay, I plan on comparing and contrasting the details effectiveness between the five-paragraph style and the four-paragraph style. Also I will investigate how the introductory and conclusion paragraphs can be created with an effective purpose that isn’t just or summary of the subjects in the body paragraphs.
0119 (Part One)
ReplyDeleteIn the reading “Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents” by Grant-Davie, great insight is put forth towards explicating the rhetorical situation. Based on this reading and the technical definition of rhetoric—the use of language designed to have a persuasive effect on a designated audience often via indirect or insincere means—I can surmise a more customized definition of a rhetorical situation. A rhetorical situation has several constituents, a present need or exigence, a designated audience, situational constraints, and the rhetor(s). I consider rhetorical situations to be ubiquitous, identified by a person whose exigency to persuade a target audience relies on meek discourse to sway the audience towards a level of bias. A great example of these situations are seen in politics. In class, an example was given analyzing how certain audiences receive or perceive discourse from the presidential candidates based on situational constraints. Another excellent example is in the enacting of business. A company based in the United States will have different versions business proposals and persuasive methods to companies based in other countries. A common element in these examples is the situational constraints. These are factors that affect how the rhetor accomplishes his or her desired objective with the audience. Rhetorical situations surround us, each designed to fulfill an exigence present for the indented audience.
0119
ReplyDeleteA rhetorical situation involves a speaker or writer, their purpose, and the message they convey. When developing a rhetorical situation, you must consider the message to a very high degree. As Grant-Davie illustrated (Grant-Davie 106) you must first ask what the message is about, why is it needed, and what is its goal. By asking these questions you can create an effective rhetorical situation. Bitzer and Vatz argue whether the message and the speaker is dependent on the situation or if the situation is dependent upon the message and the speaker. Vatz believes that the speaker creates the situation by asking questions then relaying the message, while Bitzer believes that the speaker delivers the message only because they see a need for it. In my opinion I agree with Consigney that the situation is partially dependent on the speaker because you can make-or-break a situation. Therefore, a rhetorical situation, which doesn’t even have to be rhetoric (Grant-Davie, 101), must first be anazlyed by understanding what is the need and what needs to be done, then the speaker will address all these aspects in their message in order to make their audience do something. I also agree with Grant-Davie that there can be multiple speakers and audiences.
______________________________________________
Camera-man: We are going live in 5,4,3,2..
*points to table with Vatz, Consigney, Bitzer, Grant-Davie, and host of Literary Exploration Steben Tolbert*
Tolbert: Good evening everyone and welcome to Literary Exploration! We are sitting here with Richard Vatz, Lloyd Bitzer, Scott Consigny, and Keith Grant-Davie in order to listen to their rhetoric about rhetorical situations. Lets start the soap box first with Lloyd Bitzer!
Vantz: Rhetorical situations are determined by the rhetor, the speaker, and that there is no message without the speaker. The speaker is there to identify the need for a message.
Bitzer: So you’re saying that there is no message unless the speaker identifies it?
Vantz: Correct.
Bitzer: So when President Obama conducts his speech, he addresses any situation he wants or he addresses the situation that needs to be handled first and then models his speech around it?
Consigny: Actually gentlemen, you are both right. For example, if President Obama was set to address Obama-care, this situation would not be a problem without President Obama. However, President Obama sees the need to address Obama-care which will open door for a larger topic; his re-election. Therefore Obama relies on the situation and the situation relies on him, just as a symbiotic relationship in nature President Obama comes on to address his audience of voters.
Grant-Davie: I agree with Consigny. However, President Obama does not come on to address only one audience. See, rhetorical situations can have more than one rhetor and audience. President Obama’s audiences are both voters and un-decided voters. The rhetors are President Obama and the Democratic Party.
Tolbert: Alright gentlemen, well lets just agree to disagree in this rhetorical situation.
0119
ReplyDeleteThe subject I will be investigating for my construct essay is APA and MLA writing. In order to investigate this subject I will research first what are the differences between these writing styles, the exact guidelines, what constitutes as writing a right or a wrong APA or MLA paper. Also, I will research in what situations are APA and MLA writing is required, and who requires them.
0M08
ReplyDeleteFor my construct essay I will investigate the construct of how an essay or paper should have at least three main points. Im curious to see if I can figure out where this construct originated. Also I want to interview other students to see how common this construct is and what their opinions of it are.
0119 (Part Two)
ReplyDeleteGrant-Davie delves into great detail on how he and his fellow colleagues define the rhetorical situation. Rather than create dialogue, I prefer to juxtapose each proposed definition in order to provide a holistic understanding and definition of the rhetorical situation. Lloyd Bitzer defines the rhetorical situation as an identifiable need by a rhetor to change the reality of a particular audience by means of rhetorical discourse. Bitzer adds that understanding of a situation is important in order to tailor the rhetorical work that is to fulfill the exigence. Here it is seen that Bitzer believes that rhetorical situations are present in nature and control the response of the rhetor. Richard Vatz contributes to the definition by slightly offering his dissenting view on that last component—the inherent presence of a situation. Vatz argues that rhetors are not controlled by a situation, rather, they create it. Therefore, he adds that the rhetor not only responds to a proposed questions, but they pose them as well. Thus far, we have an agreement in the definition with one polarized component of it. Scott Consigny’s approach to defining the rhetorical situation offers a middle ground to Bitzer and Vatz dissenting addendum. He suggest that rhetorical situations are only partly created by the rhetor, and adds that the rhetor is endowed to the concept of receptivity of the situation in order to fulfill the exigence. Grant-Davie identifies key elements from the proposed definitions given by his colleagues and extracts those to form his definition of the rhetorical situation. The key elements present in a rhetorical situation are the rhetor, exigence, audience, and constraint.
____________________
For the construct essay assignment, I plan on analyzing how a rigidity in structure can impede the writer to fully and eloquently convey an idea or point. This analysis is rooted in the very unyielding structure taught often prior to college composition course that impedes the student from effectively delivering content in an essay.
0119
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Keith Grant-Davie’s “Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents”, I gained a better understanding of rhetorical situations. They can be defined as situations in which a rhetor wishes to convey a message with the purpose of getting the audience to do something. Although it sounds simple, rhetorical situations become more complex as we take into consideration the exigence, rhetors, audiences, and constraints. According to Grant-Davie, we should ask three questions about the situation: “what the discourse is about, why it is needed, and what it should accomplish”. In a speech, for example, we examine not only what the discourse concerns, or what topics are addressed in the speech, but also what needs to be resolved. We should also ask why is it now the most appropriate time for this to be delivered? This involves taking action, which is part of the rhetorical situation definition. The rhetor is convincing the audience to do something. Furthermore, we have to think about who the rhetor is, which is not simple. Just like actors can play multiple characters throughout their careers, rhetors may play different roles depending on the audience. You will not speak the same way when telling your kids to do something at your house as you would when giving a speech at a meeting in a professional setting, for example. Just as the role of a rhetor cannot be defined, it is not clear who the audience is either. Any person listening to a speech, watching a commercial on television, reading a book, or even any person who a writer imagines when writing, can be the audience. It is important to understand that the audience greatly affects the message. As Grant-Davie mentions, writers may have to edit multiple times, depending on “what sense of audience is reflected in the text they have created”. Lastly, we have to explore constraints, which include countless things. Bitzer defines constraints as limitations on the rhetor, which the rhetor has to work with. There may be “positive constraints” or “negative constraints”.
____________________________________________
*In this setting Vatz (V), Consigny (C), Bitzer (B), and Grant-Davie (GD) are at the beach. After observing the people around them, they engage in a conversation about rhetorical situations.*
ReplyDeleteConsigny: (After listening to a mom trying to convince her kid of putting on sun block) Why can’t she just tell him to put on the sunblock? Why does she say one thing instead of what she truly means? I mean, she is the boy’s mom, right?
Grant-Davie: She probably does not want to have an argument with her son at this moment since everyone else in the family is having a good time and she doesn’t want to ruin the fun. So she is telling her son to do something in a more calm way. Rather than just calling him and pressuring the little boy to put on sun block, she is convincing him that he is getting burnt and therefore needs it. It’s a rhetorical situation.
Consigny: I see.
Bitzer: I believe that understanding the situation is important. The reason the mom is creating the rhetorical situation is the family members around. She does not want to sound rude to the family even though she needs an authoritative tone to speak to her son.
Vatz: Yes, but that’s not all that matters. In my opinion, the mom has to be what we call a rhetor. If there is not a rhetor in the situation creating rather than discovering the situation, then it is not rhetorical.
GD: True. The rhetor, or the mom in this case, is very important as she chooses to play the role of a caring mother because her son is her intended audience, even though the other family members are unintentionally listening.
C: I see your points of view. However, I think that the rhetor does not wholly create the situation.
V: How so?
C: Well, in this case, we have to think of receptivity, or the individual situation. The mom is not just telling her son to do something, but she is doing it keeping in mind her surroundings.
B: Which is why I expressed my opinion about the situation earlier.
C: I agree in part with both of you, my good friends Vatz and Bitzer.
GD: I guess we can say that a rhetorical situation involves all these factors together in order to control the discourse?
C: Yes, we can say that and keep tanning under today’s bright sun.
V: Speaking of which, did everyone put on sun block, or do I need to be the mother reminding you so.
*Everyone thinks for a second*
GD: How about we pretend we never mentioned this?
*A few hours later they are all burnt from the sun*
0119 -last part-
ReplyDeleteFor my construct essay, I plan to investigate the reason behind the five-paragraph essay and the negative effects it has on both skilled and unskilled writers. I will ask different students about their opinions and experiences with standardization. I will also obtain information on whether they believe this rule causes writers’ block. In addition, I will investigate if this rule still affects them in college. If not, how easily they forgot about it.
oMo8
ReplyDeleteGrant-Davie offers a definition of a rhetorical situation based upon the work of three different authors, Bitzer, Vatz, and Consigny – “a rhetorical situation as a set of related factors whose interation creates and controls a discourse.” (Grant-Davie, 265) The way that I interpret the meaning of a rhetorical situation is an instance when the rhetor attempts to modify a particular aspect of a person or persons. This aspect could be anything ranging from their stance on milk to their political affiliations to their general mood.
Both Vatz and Bitzer take slightly different approaches to defining a rhetorical situation. Bitzer “defines a rhetorical situation generally as ‘the context in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse.’” (Grant-Davie, 265) Vatz takes the point of view that rhetors should also be considered constituents. “Vatz only points out that rhetor’s role in defining the situation, yet it seems to me that rhetors are as much constituents of their rhetorical situation as are their audiences.” (Grant-Davie, 269) Bitzer would argue that the rhetor does not create a rhetorical situation, rather they serve as constraints to a situation that has already formed. Consigny takes the view that both Vatz and Bitzer are partially correct. “To use Consigny’s terms, rhetors create ethos partly through integrity – a measure of consistency they take from situation to situation instead of putting on a completely new mask to suit the needs of very new audience and situation; and they also need receptivity – the ability to adapt to new situations and not rigidly play the same role in every one.” (Grant-Davie, 270)
________________________________________________________________________
Time and time again, it was always stressed to us that a paragraph was a minimum of three sentences (on the whole, English teachers seem to find a particular fascination with a trinity). I intend to look at several different specimens of classical literature, and see if those that are deemed masters of their crafts utilize paragraphs with less than three sentences. From there, I will compare those works to the literary criticisms that have been published on them to see if those in academia hold hard and fast to this rule. As of now, I’m considering doing my final report in the form of a journal article to be submitted for peer review and to be published.
0037
ReplyDeleteRhetorical situation: A situation that is created by rhetor(s) that have discovered an exigence and viewed the constraints and create a discourse to target an audience(s) that will examine and explore it to modify the exigence. In Grant-Davie’s writing, he explains other’s definitions of rhetorical situation and defines exigence, audience and constraints which allowed me to create my own modified definition of rhetorical situation. “He contends that situations do not exist without rhetors, and that rhetors create rather than discover rhetorical situations. In effect, Vatz argues the rhetors not only answer the question, they also ask it (105).” The rhetor presents and asks a question allowing the audience(s) to analyze the situation and opens it up for them to answer it, but the rhetor is also proving a guided answer that is one of many possibilities.
A conversation starts between Bitzer, Vatz, Consigny, and Grant-Davie in a local Starbucks about rhetorical situations to help Grant-Davie brainstorm for his next piece of work…
GD: Thank you men for helping me! I am researching for my next piece about rhetorical situations… can you each give me your own definition for rhetorical situations?
B: Well Keith, a rhetorical situation is “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigience.”
GD: Seriously? I am quoting you for my piece and the audience is freshman college students. How about you make it easier and give your definition in simpler terms?
B: okay, how about this… “rhetorical discourse comes into existence in response to situation, in the same sense that an answer comes into existence in response to a question, or a solution in response to a problem.”
GD: Better!
V: I am going to have to disagree with Lloyd. I believe that the rhetor’s response is controlled by the situation and“that situations do not exist without rhetors, and that rhetors create rather than discover rhetorical situations.” In other words, “rhetors not only answer the question, they also ask it.”
GD: Hm, interesting thought!
C: Both of you make pretty good points about the rhetorical situation. I support Richard in the fact that “the art of rhetoric should involve integrity”. On the other hand, I support Lloyd in the fact that “rhetoric should also involve receptivity.”
GD: So based on the definitions you have provided me with, it is safe to say that a rhetorical situation is a set of related factors whose interaction creates and controls a discourse.
GD: Thank you for your involvement in my research for my upcoming piece. I need to now go further as to better understand and examine the constituents. I hope I haven’t taken up too much of your lovely Saturday morning! Have a great day and please let me know if you have any more you’d like to add about rhetorical situations.
B: Thank you for having me, I feel honored that I was included!
V: Thank you as well, can’t wait until you are finished and it is published
C: Another thanks! I will probably be calling you soon! Have a good day.
What ends up happening as these four converse about rhetorical situations, Grant-Davie realizes that everyone has a different definition of a rhetorical situation, but they each include the four constituents: exigence, rhetors, audiences, and constraints.
__________
In my construct essay, I am going to examine the writing construct when emailing. Computers are not the newest technology, but they are in everyone’s homes,school, and businesses. A child is brought up on computers nowadays… Many know the proper etiquette for writing an email, but do they know the differences in structure when emailing a professor, or future employer, or a loved one? There are many rules when it comes to emailing and I plan to find out why and what might be the reason for having a different format for each kind of email.
Jayda Burkhardt
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete0037
ReplyDeleteA Rhetorical situation is the combination that exigence, rhetor, audience and constraints have on a person’s perception of a particular writing. Rhetorical situation is a large umbrella with many components underneath it so it is very difficult to pin it down as one specific thing. Grant-Davie stressed the idea that it is asking the same questions and understanding why you are asking them. He explained in the writing that it is important to be flexible in your questioning but not too flexible. You want to be able to make it apply to different pieces but still manage to get an understanding from it. Grant-Davie also points out that rhetorical situation help us comprehend that everything happens for a good reason. He tells us that by breaking down any writing you can find some order through this process.
The setting that I am putting Vatz, Cosigny, Bitzer and Grant-Davie in is ENC 1101 where they are given the assignment to discuss their personal definitions of rhetorical situations.
(Bitzer starts of the argument)
Bitzer- Considering that I was the first to develop this idea I believe that my definition is the most accurate. Speakers and writers are the ones who develop rhetorical discourse and the discourse comes as a response to the rhetorical situation.
Vatz- Not true! A rhetor creates the rhetorical situation rather than discovers it. I believe that the rhetors both ask and answer the questions at hand.
Cosigny- Come on now men, you both have valid points! When you are going into a rhetorical situation it is important to have a set of tools at hand but you have to keep an open mind when dealing with this.
Grant-Davie- I agree, a rhetorical situation is a set of related factors that influences the discourse. There a many things that can have an effect on it such as exigence, rhetor, audience and constraints.
Bitzer- Okay, concerning exigence there are two sides: the actual discourse and what might be solved by the discourse.
Grant-Davie- Right! Now don’t forget that the audience can influence the identity of the rhetor.
Cosigny- Yeah, you also will carry on several roles at the same time. You can be perceived as several different rhetors which can have an influence on the audience.
Grant-Davie- Don’t forget that rhetors can spark new ideas in an audience. It shows them not only who they are but who they could become! A rhetorical situation ends when the discourse has been delivered.
Bitzer, Vatz, Cosigny- ahhh I agree!
The subject that I will investigate for my construct essay will be my AP English Language and Composition class that I took my eleventh grade year. I plan on writing to my former teacher and explain to her my opinions on the format she taught us. I will defend the format that I was taught because I felt that it was very effective and greatly improved my writing skills.
0M08
ReplyDeleteAs Keith Grant-Davie elaborates on in “Rhetorical Situations and Their Consituents,” the rhetorical situation is extensive and can be interpreted in a number of ways. The definition I found to be most useful is Grant-Davie’s argument that the rhetorical situation can be utilized through the interdependent relationship of a few key constituents. The discourse created in this situation by the rhetor, or the writer, can be addressed efficiently, claims Grant-Davie by asking why and how something happens. To answer this, the writer must consider the relationship between the audience, constraints (positive or negative), the exigence (the issue being addressed) and themselves. Examples of the way the rhetorical situation can be executed can be found in political campaigns, or debates over civil rights issues. For these particular examples, the rhetor would need to address why and what issue they are arguing for. However, this depends heavily on the audience addressed (is the audience more liberal or conservative?), which then creates the constraints the writer may decide on how to use within his/her discourse(what approach to take in addressing a certain audience). Here, you can clearly see that the rhetorical situation does not have a clear definition defined by separate entities, but rather, it is a process of constituents that are to be interpreted by the rhetor on how he/she will continue with their discourse.
If Vatz, Consigney, Bitzer, and Grant-Davie were to converse on the subject of rhetorical situations, I think that it would consist of Grant-Davie elaborating on Bitzer’s defintions he considers to be too vague, Vatz in completely disagreeing with Bitzer’s comments and Consigney as sort of the mediator in the situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------
0037
ReplyDeleteAfter considering many different aspects and definitions of rhetorical strategies, I have composed the idea that a rhetorical situation is an assigned problem or “exigence” in which motivates a writer to efficiently use language, under certain constraints, to persuade an audience. There are at times, certain situations in which the problem will initially provide a desired audience. It becomes the “rhetors” task to abide by the “constraints” or guidelines in order to write an effective argument. Although many may disagree, I believe the discourse of a writer’s approach is strongly influenced by the initial exigence. One of the more interesting points that I was in complete disagreement with was Richard Vatz’s statement that “rhetors not only answer the question but are responsible for asking a question. “ although sometimes this may stand true, most writers are initially motivated by and outside source or problem. They rarely come up with the situation themselves. Ultimately, after reading the entire essay, I have come to see the differentiating point of views of the multiple writers in comparison to the composition of the Declaration of Independence. Although there were only three main men given credit for composing the declaration, (John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson) Bitzer, Vatz, and Consigny were all incorporated into Grant-Davie’s final product. I can see these men all sitting down in an editing room voicing their different opinions with Grant-Davie playing the role of Thomas Jefferson. Although Grant-Davie would consider all there points, a lot like Thomas Jefferson did, Grant-Davie would have the final overall decision and outlook of the entire analysis of the topic.
0119
ReplyDeleteMy definition for rhetorical situation is when a person tries to voice its opinion in a non-intriguing way to someone with equal or higher authority then him about a certain situation hoping to get immediate results or changes. A great example that was mentioned was or two friends in a room where one voices its opinion stating that the room is too cold, by saying this he hopes that his friend will pick up on this “hint” and go and change the temperature of the thermostat. I liked when in a more professional setting like politics, Grant-Davie included an important ingredient that must be included in a rhetorical situation, credibility (Ethos). These politicians must be able to put the money where their mouth is if they wish to convince the audience they are focused on. Through this another great point was brought up and that was that of the audience in which Blitzer described simply as a group of real people within the situation external to both the rhetor and the discourse. Douglas Park offered four specific meanings of audience, the readers and listeners of the discourse, the readers and listeners who form part of the external discourse, the audience the speaker or writer seems to have in mind, and the discourse itself. With the information I am sure to explore situations more at the core instead of focusing on an external image, like the example brought up about how we ask “what happened?” when it come to history, what we really should be asking is, “why did it happen?”
Grant-Davie: Listen guys, the true definition of Rhetorical situation in an event that is shaped by language or communication that tries to get people to do something.
Blitzer: Yes true but what is really important is the understanding of this situations because the situation that is at hand largely defines what rhetoric work that responds to it.
Vatz: Blitzer, Blitzer, Blitzer, the situation itself doesn’t exist without rhetors; it is them who create the rhetorical situations.
Consigny: You both are as much right as you are wrong, the rhetorical situation is partly, but not wholly, created by the rhetor. Vatz, I do indeed believe that the art of rhetoric should involve “integrity” but also “receptivity” just like Blitzer stated.
______________________________________________________________________
For my constructive essay I wish to bring up the topic of standardization in the modern world and its effects, both positive and negative, it has on us. I wish to do this through research and hopefully interviews with both students and teachers.
0119
ReplyDeleteAfter reading “Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents” by Keith Grant-Davie, I have come to believe that a rhetorical situation can be defined as the communication between 2 or more rhetors that can answer a question (specific or general) while also having the ability to present the question it is intended to answer. I do believe that Bitzer and Vatz would agree with my definition along with Consigny since his definition is somewhat of a mergence between the two. I do believe that Grant-Davie would also agree with my definition, although I still debate in my head whether a rhetoric situation has to be a verbal statement or if it could possibly be presented in a nonverbal gesture. There are always forms of nonverbal communication present in everyday life such as a simple nod suggesting an exit from a room or giving handshake just by seeing someones hand go out. These gestures are not mandatory, they are suggested for actions presented by one rhetor which influences another rhetor to provide a counteraction. Rhetoric situations can be swayed both by facts and by personal opinion. The type of rhetorical situations that are most often present in our everyday lives are rhetorical questions. These are often influenced by person opinion rather than fact such as “You know what sounds amazing? The beach.” An important aspect of how and when a rhetorical situation is the audience to whom it is presented. While reading Grant-Davie’s article I noticed he stated “the roles of rhetor and audience are dynamic and interdependent.” This means that the actions put out by the rhetor as well as the reactions of the audience can change the course of the situation and both the audience and rhetors can adapt to the course of the situation. The rhetorical discourse of a situation can also have a grave impact on how a situation plays out. Though it was not thoroughly expanded by Grant-Davie, the language style, tone of voice, and show of confidence play a factor in the success or failure of a rhetoric situation.
If Grant-Davie, Bitzer, Vatz, and Consigny had a conversation together at a meeting to help Grant-Davie write his article “Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents”, this may be how it plays out:
0M08
ReplyDeleteMy definition of a rhetorical situation is as follows: a situation in which language or communication can be used by the rhetor effectively to convey a message or present a discourse, in which an exigence is provided, to convince the audience to respond in a particular way; the context implements a rhetor, discourse, exigence, audience, and constraints. I pulled mainly from the definition Bitzer gives and the simplified version that Grant-Davie states on page 105, which says, "We might define a rhetorical situation as a set of related factors whose interaction creates and controls a discourse."
*In a Bar*
Bitzer: The situation we are in, a rhetorical situation, provides that I am the rhetor and my discourse is based on the events taking place at the moment that involve the audience, you gentlemen, and what I do is based off of you.
Vatz: But you also control the situation, do you not?
Bitzer: I believe that everything taking place, including our conversations, our reactions, and our messages change do to the exigence, audience, and the constraints presented to us at the time and place of interaction.
Vatz: The situations could not exist without the rhetor though. You state that most of the situation extends from the audience but how is the audience to know what is being responded to or asked about if the rhetor does not provide this information?
Consigny: Gentlemen, I believe you are both to be right. A rhetorical situation is partially created by the rhetor in the sense that a rhetor must be present to respond to the conditions of the situation, however, the rhetor must also consider strategizing about certain situations that may show themselves. For example, I just showed up to change the audience of the conversation taking place between you which may change your respond or action or statements that are made but also consider that my presence should not limit either of you to a specific set of responses.
Bitzer: I may then think of you as a constraint because you could change or limit my decisions.
Grant-Davie: I think a combination of all of your thoughts are in order. To make a more solid, cohesive definition of a rhetorical situation, let us look at the parts of each of your definitions. We ca state that a situation is made up of the interactions of all parties involved-the rhetor and the audience-, the message being conveyed, the circumstances in which the communication is taking place. This gives room for a change or evolvement of each party, each event, and each relationship in the situation.
For my essay I wish to provide examples of how writing has evolved over time, from the construction of Old English to colloquial terms to ways that I ways taught to write. I want to provide a broad overview of how writing has evolved and what it has done to change my writing styles over the years.
-Grant-Davie: Friends let’s be serious for a moment. I’m having a fair amount of trouble trying to decide exactly what a rhetorical situation is. I mean, I know there must be a rhetor and an audience but how exactly are we supposed to describe this situation?
ReplyDelete-Bitzer: That is a simple answer Mr. Grant-Davie. “‘A rhetor is a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of exigence’” (105) Well, now that I say it aloud I suppose it is not so simple after all.
-Vatz: No my dear Bitzer, the only this simple here is your thought process (everyone laughs). If you ask me, rhetoric situations do not only answer the question presented but they also ask it.
-Bitzer: No, no, no that cannot be right. Could it?
-Consigny: It is very possible but there is a flaw with your theory Vatz.
-Vatz: Oh? How so?
-Consigny: Well this predicament depends on how the situation is presented. The rhetoric situation can simply present an answer, however it could also present the question.
-Bitzer: Ah you see Vatz! I am not wrong! You are wrong!
-Vatz: No Bitzer, neither of us is wrong. We are both right.
-Grant-Davie: Ah I now somewhat understand, but where is the focus of the situations? Is it the rhetors, the audience, or the situation.
-Bitzer: Oh you poor lost dog! Do you not see that clearly the focus of the conversation is the situation it is presented in? The situation is key to influencing the rhetorical discourse. A rhetor must master receptivity for his rhetorical situation. This means that the rhetor must be able to respond to the situation’s commands as it takes it’s course, making the rhetorical situation the lead so to say. Besides, how would it possibly make sense to have rhetors discussing a rhetorical situation if the situation was not already present? Do you see your answer clearly now?
-Vatz: Ah Bitzer the only thing he can see clearly is an oaf with a simple mind! (the whole table laughs)
-Bitzer: Eh!
-Vatz: How could a rhetorical situation lie undiscovered? It cannot. The rhetorical situation is created by the rhetor, therefore the rhetor is of the utmost importance in this debate. The rhetor controls by his integrity, meaning that the rhetor must be able to apply strategy to any situation. Do you see how this implies that the rhetor must be in control?
-Consigny: You two just keep putting the puzzle together but are blind to the fact that you only have half the pieces. Bitzer, you are correct in debate about the rhetorical situation having receptivity, but Vatz is also correct in his statement of integrity. These two rhetorical necessities are what shape the very path of the rhetorical situation.
-Grant-Davie: Ah! You all make valuable points and have valiant opinions, but I have come to believe that there are also certain constraints put on rhetorical situations.
-Bitzer: Right you are! These constraints can be both positive and negative however.
-Grant-Davies: How so?
-Bitzer: Well some constraints can move audiences and other constraint are put in place to discipline audiences. For example, a positive constraint could be avoiding a topic such as different religions so there is no conflict. On the other hand, the negative restraint does something completely opposite. A negative constraint could confine the perimeters of a conversation specifically to a topic such as different religions and beliefs. Constraints can come from the influence of the audiences, so the rhetorical situation can base itself and its path off the rhetor, constraints, and the audience.
-Grant-Davie: Ah I believe I see your point. Thank you for your time gentlemen, it was a pleasant experience. Now if you will excuse me, I have a new article to write through all the knowledge you have presented to me. Who knows, maybe one day it will be the subject of a prompt for an English paper!
______________________________________________________________________
ReplyDeleteFor my Construct Essay, I will not only be exploring what rules people follow when they write but also when they apply these rules. At different parts of my essays my rules change so I will be interviewing friends and family to see if they have had similar experiences while writing and if these rules change when they write for a class assignment or write just for fun.
0M08
ReplyDeleteIn my construct essay, I would like to address the creative writing process that I learned mostly throughout elementary and middle school. If I could, I'd like to recall each creative writing composition processes throughout the years and how they hold up compared to the others. I'd like to do this because this has always been my weakest part in writing.
Instead of the founding fathers composing the different aspects of independence these men are talking about rhetorical situations.
ReplyDeleteBitzer would be a lot like Ben Franklin as the older and wiser man in the bunch stating his definition of rhetorical situations is the most effective because his ideas have been around longer. Ultimately, Bitzer would state that a rhetorical situation is when a writer sees a need to change reality and sees that a change may be effected through rhetorical discourse.
In complete disagreement, Vatz, who would compare more similarly to John Adams, would fire back and argue the other side of Bitzer’s argument stating that a rhetors response is not controlled by the situation and rhetors not only answer the question, but ask it as well.
Being that there was only three and not four, Thomas Jefferson would play the roles of both Consigny and Grant-Davie. As Consigny, Jefferson would concede both sides of the story saying that they are both right and wrong. He would provide his two concepts of integrity and receptivity with one of them supporting Bitzer and the other supporting Vatz. Jefferson would also play the role of Grant-Davie as well by taking all the concepts from the ideas and philosophies of the preceding men along with adding in his own ideas, and bring them together as one final analysis of rhetorical situations. This final product would be similar to how the Declaration of Independence was formed.
0M08
DeleteI loved the analogy you chose to use in this post. You did really well in providing a metaphor that could be a lot easier to recognize for readers and I liked that you chose to show the different author's point of views and personalities through the views of familiar historical figures. I think I see why you chose to compare the writing process of the Declaration of Independence to a rhetorical situation. Just like the rhetorical situation that Grant-Davie states uses an "interdependent relationship" among different elements of it, the writing of the Declaration was composed from the views of very different men.
0037
ReplyDeleteIn my construct essay I will be addressing the issue of overall arguements and how the most effective ways of arguing an essay aren't always proving what something is, but by proving the opposite and what something isn't. I will aslo be evaluating the different ways people argue along with the approaches they take to prove their point to ultimately show that there is no specific standardized way of arguing. I will interview many different peers and get incite on wwhat they feel is the most effective way to argue.