Blog Post #4: For Argument's Sake

http://hamptonroads.com/2011/09/ban-cell-phones-bus-truck-drivers

After a severe crash in Kentucky, federal officials are looking to place a ban on all use of cell phones, both hand-held and hands-free. To my knowledge in this argument there really isn't a qualifier, though considering the source I wouldn't expect there to be. Qualifying words like "probably" and "maybe" are avoided most of the time, because the paper needs to know for a fact something before they publish it. Now, they can publish with these words included, but it might put the credibility of the paper in jeopardy, so must prefer not to.

However there is a rebuttal statement. The ban should be placed on cell phone usage unless in an emergency. This is a logical rebuttal statement. Things happen that the driver could not have accounted for and he will have to use his or her cell phone. It is a nice loop hole to get out of a situation.

I figure any good argument will have a rebuttal, because most people will need a loop hole so they can escape backlash from people arguing against the point. Having a qualifier I don't think is nearly as important though. While these words may make your argument stronger, they could also weaken the integrity of the argument, so it's kind of a crapshoot.

Blog Post #3: Letters

The letters written in medieval times and the letters written today are actually very similar. With the medieval letters, there are five key parts of a letter. The first is the greeting. All letters today start off with a greeting for if they didn't, the writer might be construed as rude and not willing to take the time to wish the reader of this letter well. The second thing is what was called the benevolentiae captatio. To my knowledge this is partially the hook to get the reader interested in the letter and partially a bit of flattery to get in the reader's good graces before asking them for something or delivering bad news. The third part lays out the facts that are being presented. Pretty straight-forward. The fourth part is the petitio, where the writer requests something of the reader. These are common in business letters today. If the letter is not in the format of "please do this thing for me," then usually there will be a line at the bottom requesting a meeting or a phone call. The final part is the conclusion which will sum up the letter and most likely include a sign off.

These similarities can probably be contributed to the fact that if something has worked in the past, then why change it? If formula letters were what a) got your point across or b) got you what you wanted, then why have a different way of doing things? They are easy to use, and in my mind if it's convenient then it is even better than the other alternatives. (Please note: that does not hold true in all circumstances. Just this one)

Technology has greatly impacted letter writing. For one, back in ye olden days it could take an indeterminate amount of time for a letter to reach its intended reader. There was no instant connection between all people. The improvement of technology has made delivery of messages so much faster and therefore the response time has also dramatically decreased. It has also changed the format of some letters. Letters become shorter if people are under a deadline and much less eloquent. They become demanding.

Blog Post #2: Presidential Rhetoric

For this I chose the "Remarks by the President on the American Jobs Act" speech that was delivered on September 9th. This speech was a very pathos driven argument. Almost everything he said was an attempt to pull emotion out of the audience to try to achieve his goals (passing the bill). He talks about the children that are learning in sub-par environments and the bridges on I-95 that need to be fixed for the safety of the public. Instantly with the mention of kids, he will have supporters on his side. People love stories where kids are being helped; it makes them feel good about themselves. President Barack Obama is using a surprisingly simplistic style of speaking which is a smart ploy, because it probably makes the people feel like he is on their level. Were he to use a grand style of speech he would be speaking using rather large words and I feel that some of the audience might feel that he was being "holier than thou." Now, I don't know this for sure, but it's just a thought. In this speech he used one VERY noticeable figure of diction, repetition. A little over a quarter of the way through the speech, he starts repeating "pass this jobs bill and..." This use of repetition makes it very clear to see what it is that he is trying to convince the audience to do. I think this speech was effective for two reasons. One, people's emotions are easily manipulated and pathos has always been an effective manner of getting the right outcome. Two, through use of repetition, it was very clear what it was that Obama was trying to accomplish.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/09/remarks-president-american-jobs-act

An Introduction of Sorts

Hello all! This blog will be for posts for my Rhetorical Studies class. So, an introduction about myself. My name is Jessica Starr and, as a lot of people in this class probably are, I am an English Major. And no, I don't wish to teach. Or write, for that matter. I am a Professional Writing emphasis (yes, I know I just said I don't like to write) and I would like to be an editor for young adult fiction books ideally. If that doesn't work out I'd like to be a copy editor for a newspaper. I am currently the copy editor for the Mace and Crown here at ODU. I am also involved with the swing dance club on campus. I can tell you I am a rather eccentric person. I love going to the Maryland Renaisannce Festival in the fall and when I have any sort of free time I am usually watching tv (I'll admit I have a love for Grey's Anatomy) and working on costumes for various things. I have already started work on my Halloween costume which is only 53 days away!