Final Thoughts

I wasn't sure what to expect going into this class, and I'm still not sure what this class is. I enjoyed our discussions, and looking at how speech and identity develops, but the overall layout of the course left me questioning what I gained. I did the readings and did my best to keep up with blog posts, but I found it difficult. The blog posts were not easy to write without prompts. This is mainly due to a lack of understanding of the course material on my part. I am a writing minor and at times I felt disadvantaged in my comfort with the material we were working with. Some of the writing majors seemed to have spent time with much of the material or similar works, before.

Despite these misgivings, I did enjoy the class. Kirk is a great professor and made a very welcoming classroom. He seemed to care about the students in the class and that made for a much more enjoyable semester. Hopefully this course will develop into a more structured format, because I think it could be fun and valuable material for the writing program.

Letter with image adjustments

A Few Documents

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3De4BiqdK71VmF4QU5SMTZEeFE/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3De4BiqdK71TEppTGlnTXpVZnc/view?usp=sharing

The Difficulties of Going Public

In this post I will provide a written version of what I hoped to present for my 'Going Public' Assignment. Unfortunately, what I choose to present gave me a relatively small audience, and setting to give the presentation in. I hoped to speak about my experience as a young diabetic. This was intended for an audience of young diabetics who could hopefully gain from my experiences, as well as provide some insight to those who are unfamiliar with the disease.

The only location that this would have been appropriate is the Diabetes Center at the hospital. I got into contact via email, and provided a detailed explanation for why I wanted to give such a presentation, as well as the topic of the class. I was quite confident with my proposal, but for an unclear reason I was given the response, "This would violate Hospital policy, therefore we cannot help with your project." I replied attempting to inquire what policy I would be violating. I also further detailed why I wanted to do this, stressing that it would hopefully be a beneficial thing for young patients. They replied with no explanation, and once again stated that it would violate policy. Due to the extended periods of time between emails, I found myself unable to find an appropriate place to present my project, so I now give you what I hoped to provide at the hospital.

I remember when I was 9 years old, I was sick. This sickness wasn't a cold or some monthly ailment. This was something more serious. At the time I didn't understand what was happening. I hadn't felt great for some months. Stomach aches, headaches, constant thirst, and a relentless fatigue had filled my days. Finally my mother said I needed to see a doctor.

When I heard the diagnosis, I wasn't sure how to react. I remember crying, but mostly because I thought that was the appropriate response based on how others were reacting. After a few weeks of dealing with multiple daily injections and blood sugar tests, I began to understand what I was dealing with. This wasn't something that would go away.

Doctors don't like to tell kids that they are going to be sick for their entire lives. They avoid saying directly, at least. My doctor said "You are going to need to do these things everyday now." Looking back, I wish he would have just said "You are going to have to treat this disease for the rest of your life." Instead, I had to come to that realization myself.

For a 9 year old to have a existential crisis like that is not healthy. I didn't handle it well at first. I developed and obsessive compulsive disorder, which centered around numbers. I needed to do things a certain number of times, and each act had a different number. When I shut the light off, I would flip the switch a few times. I even had to open and close doors a specific number of times before I was satisfied.When you lose control over you body, you feel the need to control something else, and I did all these things to feel that.

Even though control is what I desired, I began to lose it to my obsessive nature. It affected my sleep, my social life, and my family. I didn't know how to change. It was like the OCD had taken the reins, and I was just a passenger. The control was gone, or at least the delusion of it was.

How did I get used to my new life? I just accepted that it can't change. It sounds like a simple realization to have, but it took years for me to have it. It is a releasing experience. It doesn't happen in an instant, but gradually. I began to not feel so sorry for myself. "I have this disease, and that won't change," is what I began to tell myself. I decided that what I could control was the disease. I didn't need to lose my body just because I thought I had lost control.

It sounds like the end of the world to be diagnosed with diabetes at a young age, but it isn't. It only affects you as much as you let it. That doesn't mean you can pretend you don't have it, because then it can affect and control you. You need to own it, or else it owns you.

Writing as a tool for change

As I read White Guys Send My Uncle to Prison, I was struck by the statement of how minorities often don't directly challenge their place of disadvantage, but can do "linguistic strategizing." This made me think about how the US has reacted to events on a rhetorical level.
The reaction to recent police violence in Ferguson, Chicago, and other cities was met with an interest public reaction. People across the US, who were not directly involved, began to engage in rhetoric about the issues that caused these cases of violence. I began to wonder why people who don't have a direct connection to an event take an interest in it. This goes back to the "linguistic strategizing." It is clear that publications across the US began to react to these events. Opinion pieces as well as direct coverage was across the internet, and news print. Even tech websites wrote about how social media was engaged in the issue. This showed me how society can react to an issue that may not directly affect them, but does affect the society they live in. Today, they can learn and bare witness to these events through the rhetorical efforts of social media, news, and even activists in their local area.

Status updates, and other related news...

I struggled with what I was going to do for the "going public" assignment. I am disappointing uninvolved in the community, and upon the assigning of this project I began to panic. However, I decided to engage with a public that I have consciously avoided. I am a Type 1 diabetic, and I have always choose to avoid being a part of any group associated with the disease. It is a way I limit its intrusion on my life. Many groups are active in spreading information and providing a outlet for those with diabetes to engage in. I hope to speak to some younger individuals who suffer from the disease, and tell them of my experiences and how I dealt with it in my youth. I am currently in contact with the hospital, and hope to arrange something in the next week.

For the Montana Rhetoric project, we seem to be working towards a focus on the "Americanization" of cultures in Montana. In particular, we hope to focus on American Indian tribes, and how many were stripped of their cultures and languages. I am in a group with Eric and Peter.

Rand Paul Speech

I think his method of argument is very interesting. He doesn't follow many of the trends of Right-Wing politicians. Multiple times, he calls out both parties for their hypocrisies. Although I don't agree with all of his policies, I do admire his passion when it comes to his beliefs. Ultimately it may have been his honesty that doomed his Presidential bid.

Assignment 1 - State's Identity

Warner brings attention to the state’s presence in the construction of publics. He states that a public "must be organized by something other than the state”(51). This is an assertion that I disagree with. While not all states are capable of being a public, some are inherently so. The Nazi Party, French and Bolshevik Revolutions, and even the American Revolutions can all be examples of how a public forms a state. Once a public become a state, does it remain a public?

The Nazi Party were the product a devastated Germany following the First World War. The people and government were destroyed by the largest conflict in history. Out of this ruin, a radical party arose. The Nazi Party, or National Socialist German Worker’s Party, delivered a message of order and progress to a society that was desperate for both. This formed a powerful public that was formed around anti-capitalism, anti-communism, and anti-Semitism. This party would then form the national party of the government.

The Nazi Party was formed around some of the very issues that the United States’ publics are addressing. Anti-capitalism is a burgeoning issue in the country. The Occupy Wall-Street movement of a few years ago could be described as an anti-capitalist one. Furthermore, the popularity of the Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders reflects this sentiment as well. The same issues were facing Germany following World War I, and similar publics formed then. 

The primary issue for the Nazi Party was the strong presence of Jews in Europe. So much so that economic, foreign, and domestic policy were formed around it. I would assert that this makes the Nazi Party and its supporters very much a public. Once they rose into power in the state, they continued the same rhetoric and policy, so they must remain a public. When Warner makes his assertion, he may only be thinking of the United States, or similar nations. With this logic, I would agree that the state cannot be a public. Both nations are formed around a diversity of opinion. Also, both nations are by composition, democratic. Other nations, which are ruled by dictatorships, communism, and monarchies (historically) can have a very different method of presenting opinion, and perceiving what issues face the country. Nazi Germany was a dictatorship, and its dictator Adolf Hitler shaped the public issues as he liked.Examples stretch beyond that of Nazi Germany as well. 

The French revolution called for the destruction of the Monarchy, and formation of a more democratic state. This was a violent affair, and many publics attempted to usurp the throne. The French revolution presents another question; Do the publics that formed the rebellious side of the French revolution, form a collective public? If so, this is another example of a public becoming a state. This one is complicated, as many different publics rose to power, albeit briefly before Napoleon became the eventual victor. However, when a nations is in such turmoil, that the state is engaging in the same debate as a public, how can they not be considered one?

The American Revolution, an event close to home, also represents a public becoming a state. When the colonies rose against the British Crown, they formed a public. It started as protests such as the Boston Tea Party, and then became a war. Once the war was won, the early United States government could be considered a formation of many publics. The founding fathers were made up of federalists and republicans, Catholics and deists, and many other opposing parties. The early years of any nation can be considered a public, as there is not a prevailing rhetoric early on. This may contradict my example of Nazi Germany, but it represents the different forms a public can take in the state. Germany used a very public issue as the basis for its government, while the early United States government was made up of very different groups of individuals, each representing a public. 

James Madison and Alexander Hamilton. A republican and federalist, respectively, each represented a very different United States. Madison wanted the States to hold the power, while Hamilton believed in a powerful central government. This discourse in the late 18th century would shape what would eventually become the modern United States of America. While this argument prevails today under the current political battleground, each party still holds a fundamentally similar structure for the state. The outcomes of debate following the revolution had drastic implications for what would become of the state. 

One issue that is not addressed by Warner is whether nations interacting with one another can be considered publics. Two very different nations, the United States and the Soviet Union for example, could be considered publics on the scale of international relations. Each nation had very different rhetoric, and their interactions could be seen as a representation of two publics engaging in discourse, with global conflict on the line. This may be a strong assertion, but these are the questions that I have developed as a result of Warner’s claim.

Asen describes how “The nation resides in the “minds of each” inhabitant” (349). The nation, or state is then created by the public. With this, how can the state and public be separated by Warner? Asen continues to argue that publics are also imagined by its members. This establishes, according to Asen, that both the public and state are formed by its inhabitants. Warner does not address this as fully as Asen, but the claims raised by the latter are important. If the state and public are formed by the same means, a shared imagining, then why are they so different?

Rebuttals will surely follow my claims. The idea of a state not being able to be considered a public just doesn't sit right. The arguments made in defense of the state as a public may be in vain, as few seem to agree with the assertion. However, I will continue to fight for the state’s identity, and hopefully gain its place among the publics. 

First Assignment Draft

The following is my working draft for the first assignment in the class. I am 500 words in, and am still working on how the order the paper. I hope you enjoy!

Warner bring attention to the states presence in the construction of publics. He states that a public "must be organized by something other than the state”(51). This is an assertion that I disagree with. While not all states are capable of being a public, some are inherently so. The Nazi Party, French and Bolshevik Revolutions, and even the American Revolutions can all be examples of how a public forms a state. Once a public become a state, does it remain a public?

The Nazi Party was the product a devastated Germany, following the First World War. The people and government were destroyed by the largest conflict in history. Out of this ruin, a radical party arose. The Nazi Party, or National Socialist German Worker’s Party, delivered a message of order and progress to a society that was desperate for both. This formed a powerful public that was formed around anti-capitalism, anti-communism, and anti-Semitism. This party would then for the national party of the government.

The Nazi Party was formed around some of the very issues that some of the United States’ publics are addressing. Anti-capitalism is a burgeoning issue in the country. The Occupy Wall-Street movement of a few years ago could be described as an anti-capitalist one. Furthermore, the popularity of the Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders reflects this sentiment as well. The same issues were facing Germany following World War I, and similar publics formed then. 

The primary issue for the Nazi Party was the strong presence of Jews in Europe. So much so, that economic, foreign, and domestic policy were formed around it. I would assert that this makes the Nazi Party and its supporters very much a public. Once they rose into power in the state, they continued the same rhetoric and policy, so they must remain a public. When Warner makes his assertion, he may only be thinking of the United States, or the UK. With this logic, I would agree that the state cannot be a public. Both nations are formed around a diversity of opinion. Also, both nations are by composition, democratic. Other nations, which are ruled by dictatorships, communism, and monarchies (historically) can have a very different method of presenting opinion, and perceiving what issues face the country. Nazi Germany was a dictatorship, and its dictator Adolf Hitler shaped the public issues as he liked.

The French revolution called for the destruction of the Monarchy, and formation of a more democratic state. This was a violent affair, and many publics attempted to usurp the throne. The French revolution presents another question; Do the publics that formed the rebellious side of the French revolution, form a collective public? If so, this is another example of a public becoming a state. This one is complicated, as many different publics rose to power, albeit briefly before Napoleon became the eventual victor. 

My Own Imaginings

How do we imagine specific publics? Asen brings attention to the common stereotype of the welfare queen, which is the idea that certain recipients of welfare do not need it, and live somewhat  leisurely lives as a result. As a junior in the Criminology program, this is a common topic.

I began to think of other social imaginings, especially in how crime is perceived. Imagined publics are very common in crime analysis, by both society and the state. The idea that the Baltimore or Ferguson movements were filled with gang members, thieves, and anarchists is myopic. While some were looting and damaging public property, most were not. The majority of the protests were peaceful demonstrations in response to the events that occurred in each city.

The news media had very different responses, depending on the day. I am not a fan of television news, but I did see some of CNN’s coverage. While some of it was objective coverage, it often seemed that they were focusing on the criminal behavior that was occurring in each city, instead of the reason for protests and the emotions of those involved.

Politicians began to react to the imaging of these publics as violent entities, and condemned the actions. This demonstrates public imaging at its worst. When people begin to perceive a political movement no matter how pure it is at its core, as a destructive body, it begins to lose its steam. This comes at great cost to those who did not participate in the actions that are singled out by politicians and the media. 

I am beginning to examine my own imagined publics. I don’t know which ones I have yet, but upon this reflection I realize the importance of being aware of these perspectives. Hopefully thoughout the semester I will find which ones I have.

Publics and the State

When thinking of the terms publics and counter publics, many social movements come to mind. The Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 60s, the LGBT movement of the last decade, and many others. One that comes to mind for me is the rise of the Nazi Party in Post-war Germany. This example raises an important question. When a public or counter public becomes the State, are they still considered either?

According to Warner's classification, a public "must be organized by something other than the State." In the example of the National Socialist German Worker's Party, it began as a public, then formed into the party of the German government.  Does this mean that the Nazi Party is no longer considered a public? I think not. Unlike most political parties, the Nazi Party shaped its policy and discourse around their issue of Jews in Europe. This anti-Semitic rhetoric was the basis of most of the actions of Germany from the mid 1930s until their demise in 1945.

In post-World War 1 Germany, the rise of the Nazi party served as a counter public to many of the political movements at the time. It had a specific anti-Semetic and anti-communist rhetoric, as well as being a strong critic of capitalism. All these discourses could have singular publics formed around them, but they all fell under the Nazi party. Once they rose to power, their membership in the public was not revoked, as Warner would assert, but rather empowered.

So I disagree with Warner's claim that a public cannot be organized by the State. Perhaps in the U.S. where the government is not motivated by a specific social issue, or imperative, his assertion may stand. When a public transitions into the role of the State, it cannot be denied that it remains a public.

The Public

Habermas, and his piece regarding the public sphere made me think about what society considers "public." In class, we argued whether the class itself was public. While we attend and work in a public, government funded University, the small rhetorics class does not fall under a public designation. Aside from the small class size, the content and discussion of the class will rarely leave the classroom.

Sadie brought up an important point regarding how we define public. The example of the blind artist handing out his work on a public street corner comes to mind. Yes, he is in "public" and interacting with its members, but is he engaging in a public discourse? I think not. The public, in the context of this class, refers to a larger audience. The audience can vary in size, but it is always active in its attention. The artist may have a large audience, but many of its members are passive in their interaction. The defining feature of a public, is engagement.

Now that a public is defined, what is considered public in our society? The example that fits my definition the most is politics. The activity of its audience is higher than most in the public sphere. Not only are its members active listeners, but participants as well. The audience engages in the same discourse as the rhetors.

A similar trend develops now with the many forums of the internet. Whether it is Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or the comment section of Youtube, active discussion occurs frequently. Opinion is strong theme of the Habermas article, and the private opinions of society are entered into the public sphere through these forums.

My opinion of what the public sphere encapsulates will surely shift. Its constraints shift from setting to setting. By the end of this semester I hopefully be able to have a better understanding of what I consider Public.