Yesterday, we chose to read and discuss Don Delillo’s White Noise.  Unfortunately, because it is an amazing book and the world is against us, there is a shortage of copies in Tulsa.  For your convenience, here are the number of books and their locations around the city:
Border’s 81st: 6
Border’s Midtown: 3
B&N 41st: 1
Steve’s Sundry: 0
Gardner’s Used Books: 0
Waldenbooks in Promenade: 0

Grab a copy if you have a chance.  I’ve ordered five more copies from B&N at 41st, but they will take around a week to come in.  I’ll let you know when they arrive.

We will begin this unit with shorter works that are thematically related to White Noise. The first of these will be "Raj, Bohemian" by Hari Kunzru (originally published in The New Yorker), a short story about modern identity and consumer culture.  As we dive in, feel free to bring to class anything you feel will supplement our discussions.

Remember, article analyses are due every Tuesday and Thursday.

Enjoy your weekend.  Go outside!  Read near an open window if it’s raining!

What I need from you, dear blog readers: If you are reading this, I assume you check the blog often enough. I need you to bug the others to get on here. This is the front-line source for articles online. The heart of my discussion material.

What I need from everyone: Topics! Ideas! If you are into something, I want to hear about it. We are creating a class on the art of persuasion, so there is nothing that we cannot discuss. But we must discuss often. We must post often. We must write often. We must read often. In this, and in all things, we shall prevail! [Diction, anyone?]

Oh, sorry for the extra-long post, but here are the notes from today’s class:

This course is founded upon learning and applying rhetoric in your academic and everyday lives. To this end, you will bring in two articles/essays/works of art/books/etc. each week (every Tuesday and Thursday, even if I forget to remind you), with a synopsis and an analysis of the argument presented for each. They do not need to be typed, but each must contain the following:

1.   Your name and date at the top. (This is logistical; I cannot give you credit if I do not know it is yours.)
2.   MLA citation of the work. (You will most likely be using the citation guidelines under the “Article in a Web Magazine” or “Page on a Website” headings.
3.   Author, name of article/work, and name of periodical (if you pulled it from a magazine or journal) in the first paragraph.
4.   Short (single sentence) explanation of which rhetorical devices the author uses and whether the work is persuasive.
5.   One paragraph outlining (with examples) how the author uses these rhetorical devices.
6.   One paragraph explaining why the article is or is not persuasive.

This may seem like a lot to do, but once you start writing them it becomes second nature. We will discuss these articles in class, so pick articles that argue a point (this is important; many newspaper articles merely report on a topic, so check the Opinion or Editorial pages for arguments) and come prepared to discuss. If you have trouble finding something to bring to class, or if you forget about it until the last minute, check out the RSS feed on the left of this page. I have set this up to deliver articles that I think are worth reading. Snag one, write an analysis, and enjoy class knowing you came prepared. It’s a good thing.

Example

Here’s a quick example of an average article analysis of this article from last year.  Note that the student dissects the argument without identifying the rhetorical devices used.  This is appropriate as you begin writing your analyses, but take chances and implement the vocabulary you learn in class.

Parker, Kathleen. “The Perils of Pandering.” Tulsa World. 17 Jan. 2008: A19.

“The Perils of Pandering,” the title of Kathleen Parker’s latest opinion article, details the paradoxes and labyrinthine mix of intentions involved in the Democratic front-runners’ candidacies, specifically those of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Parker explores the argument of “it shouldn’t be about race or gender but it is” by referencing the candidates’ own words and actions to display their contradictions. For example, Parker quotes Clinton’s insistence that she is “not asking you to vote for [her] because [she is] a woman,” while following up with Clinton’s cry to “shatter that highest glass ceiling” at Wellesley College. The juxtaposition of the paragraphs emphasize Parker’s point; that the candidates don’t know whether to play their minority cards.

Another interesting topic is brought up in the article: the idea that a victory for one candidate is a defeat for the other’s minority group. “The battle for race and gender has become a fight between race and gender,” Parker states. “If a Clinton victory is viewed as a victory for all women, then her defeat can only be viewed as a defeat for all women.”

Parker’s argument is convincing; it’s hard to disagree when the quotations are from the candidates themselves. Her bias is mild compared to other articles she has penned—she acknowledges the party’s “noble intent” as she bemoans the identity politics. Her audience is not a narrow one; she can appeal to Republicans and Democrats alike. All in all, it’s a very effective piece.

Welcome back to our T-DIDLS series. We are covering TONE as we move along, and have covered DICTION here and here and here. Go back if you are uncertain about diction, connotation, denotation, jargon, or colloquialisms.

Imagery and detail. If diction is the part of a writer’s VOICE that packs meaning into individual words, Imagery and detail are the two parts that keep a reader interested, and "paint the picture" of whatever is being described. Actually, as imagery is the representation of any sensory experience in words, it also "sings the sounds," "invigorates the touch," "supplements the taste," and "supplies the scent" of any scene or experience. Let’s look at this sentence from Bram Stoker’s Dracula:

The windows were curtainless, and the yellow moonlight, flooding in through the diamond panes, enabled one to see even colours, whilst it softened the wealth of dust which lay over all and disguised in some measure the ravages of time and moth.

This section contains some striking visual imagery, but the other senses are possibly heightened by the imagination. What does the room smell like? Are the surfaces rough or smooth? If you tasted something in the room… Okay, maybe that one doesn’t work. Taste is tough.

Detail can be a more slippery term, but coupled with DICTION, it is a vital aspect of IMAGERY. Think of the words on a page as a camera lens, and the writer as a cinematographer. By bringing certain aspects of a scene into focus (the curtains, the dust in the previous example), the author/cameraman can leave the rest of a scene out of focus, trusting us to fill in the blanks (again, what does the room smell like? Ask a bunch of people what they think and I bet you will all have similar answers.)

From Alberto Alvaro Rios’s story, "The Iguana Killer":

An old man, Don Tomasito, the baker, played the tuba. When he blew into the huge mouthpiece, his face would turn purple and his thousand wrinkles would disappear as his skin filled out.

Just like in a movie scene, the first sentence sets the mise-en-scene, while the second takes the reader/viewer into a close-up of the tuba player’s head and neck. [Quick review: what does the author’s choice of the word "filled" add to the whole scene and the detail of the neck expansion in particular?] If we changed the second sentence to something like When he blew the tuba, his face turned purple and his cheeks puffed out, how is the tone and your feeling about the baker change?

Tying it all together: Just as we examined metaphor and simile in light of CONNOTATION and DENOTATION, IMAGERY adds to these devices as well. Check out this example from H.G. Wells’s War of the Worlds:

Yet across the gulf of space, minds that are to our minds as ours are to those of the beasts that perish, intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded this earth with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us.

Recognize the device from ACT or SAT prep? This is a wild analogy (one in its natural habitat, not one used by Johnny Carson) that could be set up this way: Martian minds : Human minds :: Human minds : Animal minds. How does the focus on the Martian’s minds add to the overall creepiness factor of this passage? [Rhetorical side note: If this were a persuasive piece (and someone could certainly make that argument), which of the big three would this analogy fall under? Think about how this passage affects you as a reader hint hint. Click here for the answer.

To sum up:

• Details are facts or observations, and are used to highlight certain aspects of a situation being written about. Much like a camera lens focused on a specific aspect of a scene.
• Imagery in written works is used to bring the reader into the writing through sensory connection. If there is a written description of a visual, tactile, olfactory, gustatory, or auditory experience in a piece, it is an image.
• Imagery is vital to many metaphors (Wells’s choice of “vast and cool” to describe Martian minds above is a metaphorical image representing metaphorical tactile experiences).
• Analogies are fun.

We worked through Michael Lewis’s "Cross-Buying" in class today.  I hope you now have a better understanding of how to go about annotating a text.  If you are still unsure of where to begin, here’s a quick set of guidelines:

1.   Make sure you have a working knowledge of the devices we have discussed in class so far.  These include:
Diction
Imagery
Detail
Audience
Speaker
Tone
Any other devices with which you are familiar
2.   Skim the piece once to get a general idea of the argument.  If you want to begin marking up your page at this point, go ahead, but the first pass should simply give you perspective on the work.
3.   Begin reading the work more closely, looking for words or phrases that stand out (because they are unusual, interesting, or unfamiliar), devices that you recognize, and any counter-arguments presented.  Each time you come across something worth marking, ask yourself "Why has the author included this?  What does it do for the work?  How does it help/hurt the argument?"
4.   Look for the thesis.  This is rarely at the end of the first paragraph in published works, and not always a single sentence.  The thesis should cover the scope of the argument.  For example, in "Cross-Buying," the author states that his "fondness for buying women’s clothing is nothing more than a fondness for—and a curiosity about—women themselves."  It is important to understand what the author is arguing before you begin writing about the work.
5.   Finally, go over the work one more time, focusing on your annotations.  How do they fit with the thesis?  Does your interpretation of each support or contradict the author’s thesis?  (If they contradict it, you may have misunderstood something.  Or the piece is poorly written/argued.  It’s possible.)  Do you see any connections between the various devices?

That’s it.  I like to use several colors to annotate a work (diff colors for vocab/interesting things, things I don’t understand, questions I have, and reactions), but do whatever works for you.  The important thing is that your hands are busy.  It will take longer to read a work at first, but this will eventually become second nature to you.  Pretty soon you won’t be able to read without a pen in your hand.  You’ll be better for it, I promise.