Rhetoric in E minor.

I keep trying to look past rhetoric as only persuasion, but its hard to. Scot said in rhetoric you must "know your enemy" to be productive and look past their tactics used in persuasion. However, he then moved onto a definition of rhetoric that is comprised of three parts: seeing, making, and doing. Seeing gives you a point-of-view, making is the art of putting things together, and doing is the action or motivating of others. Now this makes the term rhetoric more broad and takes it beyond persuasion.

Scot used an example of ships to explain the new definition, but i like to think about it in terms of music.

Seeing: When someone is performing a piece of music, there are many different view-points where a person can witness the performance. As an audience member, you are enjoying the music. As a member of the accompaniment, you are working with the performer. As a fellow musician or teacher, you are critiquing the performance. Depending on where you are physically as well as how familiar you are with the material, you have a different way of looking at the performance. I feel that with rhetoric it is the same deal. A person can receive a message differently based on who is delivering it or what kind of knowledge they have on the subject of the message.

Making: I find this art of putting things together in a couple ways with music. First, the person who makes the instrument is not always the one who plays it. Also, the person who spends countless hours composing or arranging a piece of music is not always the one who performs it. Also, the quality of the the instrument or piece of music effects the overall sound or quality of the performance. As in rhetoric, the way things are put together affects the overall deliverance of the message. The planning of the message is very important in how the message is perceived.

Doing: Music performance takes many days of practicing and preparation. One must plan and mold their technique in order to put on a spectacular performance. I feel that this is the same in rhetoric. Again, the deliverance of the message is so important in how one views it and what actions one take when hearing it.

----

The article on banning the use of Wikipedia has made me think about resources and the way people perceive things in different ways. In the article by Yancy, i feel that she wants to move toward an age where the network and Internet are the predominant media for teaching and curriculum. I think she would respond to the wiki article by saying that technology is forever and we should only use Wikipedia as a starting point. However, the article by Faigley,he argues that "fast rhetoric" is dangerous and accident-prone. I think he would respond to the wiki article by saying the use of other materials needs to be taught.

I want to focus on Yancey's reading because i agree that the network as a medium of learning is where curriculum should be heading. Not only could the network act as a great learning place, but "it could help foster a world of peace never known before" (301). With a wealth of possibilities, a network curriculum could allow for more interconnectedness in learning throughout the world. "...the screen has become ubiquitous" (305) Yancey says, and it can be used for a greater and more efficient way of learning.

However, I do not know if this new curriculum can be implemented presently. Many schools and children are without the resources to switch over to a network curriculum. With this, if teaching becomes network-based in some schools that are able to switch over, those children in the school that are not able to switch will fall behind in learning and will not be able to be at the same level as other students and ultimately not have the same opportunities as everyone else. I feel that a network curriculum is something to strive for in the future, but for now, we need to focus on current problems.