Then again. . .

There's this on the official occupy page:

"On Saturday, Mayor Quan's actions again demonstrated that open war has been declared on the spirit of democracy and the people of Oakland and this nation. We call for the end of Mayor Quan's administration and a regime change in Oakland. We continue to stand in solidarity with Occupy Oakland and will support them as they continue peaceful protest and community building until this and all other authoritarian administrations have been ousted from their place of illegitimate power. Together, we are building a stronger world, a stronger community, a stronger promise for the next generation."


And this video of police brutality:

Occupy Wall Street--Flag Burning

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/31/occupy-oakland-flag-burning_n_1243232.html


"The images of the flag-burning went viral in the hours after Saturday's demonstrations on Oakland's streets, with Occupy supporters denouncing the act as unpatriotic and a black mark on the movement. Others called it justified."

In his article, Fitzgerald argued that the movement was becoming reifed as a particular group of people, rather than maintaining itself as a claim. Occupy Oakland, by burning the flag, has only reinforced the idea that Occupy protesters are anti-Americans, who engage in semi-terrorist like activities. Many have spoken out against this portrayal of the movement, but the fact is that this is now the static image we have of Occupy protesters:

The flag's been torn, the protesters have bandana masks on, and one guy is smiling and holding up what appears to be a occupy poster, essentially equating the movement with Anti-American sentiment. I wish I could see exactly what is on that poster, because it matters if it says "Occupy Oakland" or "Occupy Wall Street."  More than any other photo I've seen, this solidifies the "us" versus "them" mentality. "They" are doing something and we don't like what "they" are doing, so they transform themselves into an isolated group of people rather than one part of a vast network of occupy movements. Occupy Oakland is now a fixed entity that now Occupy Wall Street in general cannot help but try and distance themselves from--this may be the first step in the breaking down of the solidarity of the network. Perhaps this was the danger inherent in occupying more than New York--the center of Wall Street.. .I am just not sure.

Response to Summary's of OWS article

I'd like to start with a question: Does the summary have to start with the introduction and follow the article linearly?

I would say not necessarily. Furthermore, summaries are really hard to sustain without moving into "interpretation" mode. I think most of you did a great job giving equal attention to about 3 main parts of the argument (most of you, in fact, divided up your response in 3 sections).

The first regarded the introduction, which pointed out the current status of occupy wall street as something that has become less interesting as we have begun to "understand" what the movement "is."

Many of you mentioned the analogy of the reality tv show and some of you defined and honed in on reification. The idea that Occupy has become a "thing" and that it can be defined is the main problem for Fitzgerald (most of you pointed this out).

Most of you decided to cite the difference between "it" and "us" and some of you cited or paraphrased Fitzgerald's idea that we need to understand Occupy Wall Street as a claim rather than a "thing" that can be easily defined. This is a main point of the argument.

All in all, I was happy with the summaries. I think that we need to keep in mind that while a decent summary can be written on the fly, it usually comes with several revisions, combining sentences and thoughts in order to make it as concise as possible. This will be especially important when you condense Geertz (30 pgs give or take) to a mere 300 words!! Sometimes it might be useful to write a rough sketch that is WAAAAY too long and then combine and condense afterwards. I know this is more work, but, trust me, it frequently pays off.

Summary/Analysis Response Writing Prezi

Strong Response Writing on Prezi

Summary/Analysis Kanye West Example

Great Student Example of Summary/Analysis

Summary/Analysis of Kanye West’s “Power”

            Rapper Kanye West, well-known for his cleverly-constructed yet controversial song lyrics and videos, compares his rise in the music industry to the rise to the superiority of Greek gods in his video “Power”. In this one minute and forty-three second video, a stern and omnipotent West plays the role of a Greek god as a number of subordinate Athenian characters slowly and gracefully move around him. West, who gradually marches forward in front of the open gates of heaven, exerts dominance and resilience even in the growing presence of these characters, which symbolize what he calls “the cruel world”. In both the lyrics and video, Kanye West reminds critics that his rise to the elite as a rapper has given him such power and responsibility that no one can knock him off his pedestal except for power itself.

Through his body language, Kanye West captures the role and journey he has taken as a song artist. He embodies a tough-as-nails persona through his piercing eyes and bull-like charge in his walk. As West steps forward, he encounters a growing crowd of Athenian figures, most of which are females portrayed as sex symbols. West’s forward walk signifies his ascending toward the pinnacle of his music career. The encounter of the female characters as well as the two male characters that leap in the air and draw their swords refer to the distractions that West himself inevitably faces in his career: women in search of fame, sex, or money; criticism from the media; and feuds with other artists. Just as notable is the placement of the female figures that resemble runway models; West deliberately positions these Athenian female characters below him to indicate that women are inferior to him. Throughout the entire video, West stares straight ahead

at the viewer, paying no attention to the characters surrounding him; by doing so, West insinuates that his focus is on his career and that he will not let anyone keep him from attaining and maintaining success in the music industry.

In addition to body language, Kanye West’s choice of words to describe himself and to address his critics highlights his egocentric personality. West admits that he “embodies every characteristic of the egotistic,” and in the chorus, he refers to himself as a “21^st century schizoid man.” Schizoid, according to the Cleveland Clinic, is a type of personality disorder characterized by aloofness and detachment from others, little desire or enjoyment for close relationships, “difficulty relating to others, indifference towards praise or criticism, and daydreams or vivid fantasies about complex inner lives.” These characteristics may well describe Kanye West, but it is the deliberate insertion of the phrases “embodies every characteristic of the egotistic” and “21^st century schizoid man” that one realizes that West is fully aware of his arrogant, self-centered personality. This awareness empowers him to ward off any form of criticism hurled at him.

 In the music business, great power draws greater scrutiny from the media and the public. As Kanye West points out in his lyrics, many of his critics believe that West is an “abomination of Obama’s nation” or a hated figure in present-day American society.  While such a comment may have at first offended West, West simply shrugs it off and reminds critics that “at the end of the day goddamn it he is killin’ [it]/[he] knows damn well [his critics and supporters] are feelin’ [it].” In other words, despite people’s abhorrence toward him, he continues to excel in both album sales and song charts. His music still resonates with people, and based on his prolonged success in record sales and on billboard charts, people continue to value his music, which is what matters to him most.                                                                                                                       

Finally, in an unexpected turn of events, Kanye West adds a suicidal element to the end of the song when he reiterates that he is “jumping out the window [and] letting everything go”. While West accepts and embraces the power that he has gained through his success as a music artist, West knows that he is vulnerable to the added pressure and scrutiny that comes with power. This overwhelming pressure can eventually lead to the demise of the powerful, but West sees this tragedy as a “beautiful death”. In this paradox, West suggests that there is beauty in the reassuring fact that by achieving success in his career, he has obtained the freedom and power to rid himself of everything he has gained. One may question why West would want to purge himself of his accomplishments. In response, West implies that he is only human and that one can only take so much pressure before he or she can no longer handle the demands of the media and the public, thus leading the almighty to dispose his or her power.

In the video “Power,” Kanye West appears not as a human being but as a god; a force that shows no sign of slowing down or losing strength, but beneath his tough exterior lays this vulnerability that feeds on growing power. As shown in his dominant stride, West, infamous for his detached, self-absorbed personality, embraces his egotism in order to protect himself from those figures—women, critics, foes--that take advantage of him or that wish to see him fail. In the lyrics, West considers himself “chosen” in a “white man’s world”, given the adversities that those particularly in the black community are going through such as poverty, education, and incarceration, and yet he still struggles with his own hardships, including taking on adult responsibilities as a prominent musical figure in society. For West, “reality is catching up with [him] taking [his] inner child [while he is] fighting for custody,” his “inner child” being that comfort zone that allows him to use his imagination and to engage in complex and creative thinking. This obstacle suggests that while Kanye West’s critics are not a major threat to his power, he, however, is.

Language and Vocabulary

In order to be able to talk about our writing, we need a common vocabulary to describe it. Luckily, most of these are standardized. So now, I am going to list a few words I frequently use that you may or may not know and attempt to define them.


What do I mean by text?


--A text is really anything that has the possibility of being interpreted, used, or looked at. We can look at the body as a text, a house as a text, a book, an article, a desk, a video, an image (painting, photgraph, whatever). "Text" stems from the latin, texere, which means "to weave" I like to think about "weaving together texts" in order to make meaning.

What do I mean by discourse?

Discourse is a common word that we use in the humanities that may sound fancy or intimidating, but it really just means "a way of organizing knowledge, ideas, or experience that is rooted in language and its concrete contexts"

Example: I might talk about the "discourse" of a particular thinker. This refers, to simplify, to his particular way of using and engaging with language. So we might say "In Geertz's discourse, culture is a text"

What do I mean by meta-discourse?


Meta-discourse is simply one remove from discourse; or, discourse about discourse. For our purposes, I mostly mean language that describes language or writing. Examples of meta-discourse can be seen below. We will return to this term.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just as Bartholomae and Petrosky might talk about appropriating (taking, making-one's own) the 'discourse' (the language and mode of organizing ideas) from some of these texts, I want you to either

a) Adopt some of the language I use in the class. If I say something you do not understand please stop me and I will attempt to define it. Some of the language I use is such a part of the way I speak that I may have to actually look up a definition online and then if that doesn't make sense to you, give you examples and "interpret" that definition.

b) Suggest your own language/terms/concepts for the stuff we are talking about; Define them for the class and myself and I will adopt your language and try to speak that. Although I do want to teach you different ways to talk about stuff, we also have to meet each other half way. If we cannot speak with similar vocabularies or at least touch vocabularies, this will be a very hard semester for all of us.

Language changes the way we think. Its that simple. We learn new words or use old ones to describe new things--it opens us up to new ways of seeing. I believe all language is figural--there is no such thing as "literal" meaning, although for convenience's sake we may speak of a "literal meaning" (or "denotative" rather than "connotative" language in jargon terms). There may be a "literal meaning" within a given context or use of language, but there is no intrinsic literal meanings. 

"What then is truth? A mobile army of mteaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms--in short, a sum of human relations, which have been enhanced, transposed, and embellished poetically and rhetorically, and which after long us seem firm, canonical, and obligatory to a people"   

                        --Nietzsche, "On Truth and Lie in the Extra-Moral Sense"

"Saying" and "doing" --One more attempt

So I'm reflecting on maybe a better way to explain what I mean by "doing." So I realize that there are several ways to describe what an author is "doing"--that there is no one thing that would constitute "doing." So look for

Rhetorical strategies such as figurative language (metaphor, metonymy, synechdoche, simile, extended images)

"movement" cues -- One the one hand, on the other hand, Although, However, In contrast, Consequently, First, Second, Third, Similarly, Analogously, Like x and y, Just as x, so y;

"Movement" cues are what indicates difference or similarity in the essay and makes the essay progress or move in a somewhat linear fashion.

Another metaphorical way to say this: What is the "function" of the language the author is using? How about the paragraph? What is the function of the paragraph within the whole essay?

I hope this gives you other ways to think about what I'm trying to say. What an author is "doing" usually describes some sort of writing strategy non-specific to the text at hand.

You may think that these are silly distinctions, but once we all acquire this vocabulary of "meta-discourse," we will be able to apply it to several different texts and hopefully end up on the same page. Grammar is another kind of metadiscourse that we can use to talk about writing. So another way to think about these words is that they are an extension of grammar to the realm of rhetoric.