Thank God for Chapter 6! It was a much easier read for me than the other chapters. I'm sure others probably felt this way too. This discussion of ethos in this chapter resonated with me because I experience this and am aware of it in everyday life. Whether its watching commercials on TV or talking with a used car salesperson, ethos is everywhere. One part of the chapter which jumped out at me was on page 199 where the authors state "...That Americans are very much interested in the character and personal habits of public figures," (Crowley & Hawhee). We are borderline obsessed with the behavior and morals of our entertainers, sports stars, public figures, politicians, etc. Just look at the past (and present) examples of Bill Clinton, Rod Blagojevich, John Edwards, Tiger Woods, Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Michael Jackson. I could write names of public figures all day. I could also write about the media reactions and the reactions of the everyday citizen, too and be here all day. It is amazing the lengths these public figures will go to in order to restore their image. They will have press conferences where they tearfully apologize to their constituents or fans and it usually takes a very long time for anyone to trust them or to take them seriously. For example, it will be very difficult I suspect for Rod Blagojevich to garner the same respect as he did before his scandals broke out (it also didn't help that he went on Celebrity Apprentice). Just look at the Michael Jackson scandals of the 90s and beyond. These rocked the public so much that his career tanked and he lost the appeal he once had.
The most recent scandal (I don't know that it will become as huge as Clinton or Blago's) is that of Illinois politician Jesse Jackson, Jr. He has a lot of situated ethos baggage (he is the son of civil rights leader Jesse Jackson Sr.) and so a scandal like this does tremendous damage. If the allegations explained in this article and the accompanying video are true, it may be a long time (if ever) before he reestablishes his character and morals.
Something else which interested me about the reading was the section regarding "a rhetor's attitude toward the issue also influences distance," (C&H, 214). It made me think of two professors I had in undergrad. One was Dr. G - he was the 'more attitude = intimate distance' professor - and Dr. B - he was the 'less attitude = more formal distance' professor. Dr. G was everyone's favorite professor. He would sit on his desk, he never wore a suit or tie, talked about his love for hip-hop and indie rock, and talked openly about his political views (I had several of his classes during the aftermath of 2004's presidential election, and the years that followed ... you do the math as to his opinions, insert smiley face). Dr. B, well, poor Dr. B. He meant well. Ask anyone who had him, and they would tell you the B in his last name stood for Dr. Boring!! He was very proper, wore a suit every day, never showed any kind of emotion and generally had the appearance of a well-dressed robot. He did not necessarily teach difficult classes, but everyone dreaded his lectures and assignments. It was not easy to approach Dr. B with questions and there was difficulty in establishing a 'vibe' from him. On the contrary, Dr. G taught classes which were considered by many to be difficult, but people loved his lectures!! I don't know what I'm trying to get to, or if I'm trying to make any kind of point. I guess I'm just demonstrating how I understood the section in the middle of page 214.
Again, I enjoyed reading this chapter and I can safely say have a good grasp of Ethical Proof. I look forward to class on Thursday and the discussions we will have about this chapter.
No comments:
Post a Comment