Ethos

I’m drawn to the section entitled Demonstrating Intelligence by Doing the Homework. On page 113, there’s a note of caution to avoid making a “rhetorical disaster.” This perfectly describes what I see and hear on a regular basis. As the authors suggest, “Rhetors who wish to appear intelligent and well informed must demonstrate that they have done whatever research and contemplation that is necessary to understand an issue.” First, I respect their recognition of actual intelligence versus staged intelligence. Rhetors must establish themselves as well informed about the issues they discuss. Some people, however, are motivated by appearing to be well informed. We don’t always have enough time/occasion to learn if the intelligence is authentic, and therefore we might be misled. On the other hand, there are those instances when (because we have enough time to learn the “truth”) and witness failed ethos. Shamefully, I must admit that I find these moments entertaining. If ever I hear someone making claims/generalizations that are uninformed, I can’t help but observe. Here’s an example from my classroom that happened in 2008, in the weeks leading up to the Presidential election:

Student A: “Hey man, what’s that pin on your bag?”

Student B: “Are you kidding me! You mean you really don’t know? It’s an Obama pin. He’s running for president. He’s way better than Bush, and he’s definitely going to win the election.”

Student A: “Oh yeah, that’s right….but who’s Biden?”

Student B: “ Ah, that’s Obama’s last name”

I know it’s basic, but it’s a perfect example and so embarrassing. The saddest part is that neither student knew that he was so misinformed. Student B thought he was informed and sophisticated. His pin was the extent of his knowledge. Most likely he never had to prove his intelligence because most people who saw the pin would understand. It wasn’t until he was asked to delineate on his understanding that a person could see his ignorance. One minute I assumed he was aware of the political campaign, and the next I realized he KNEW nothing. We must be careful about first impressions and appearances.

The section on Grammatical Person will be helpful in my classroom. I find myself changing my explanation for why it’s recommended that writers use third-person discourse in the writing assignments. The description provided on page 126 sums it up in way that students could understand. Additionally, it is helpful to see the example of how first person can be more effective, depending on the topic(s) being discussed (see Mary Douglas’ excerpt on page 127).

It was interesting to look at the ethos of an email. I’ve never thought about how “exotic punctuation marks work to close distance between writers and readers” (132). It amazing that we have developed a new language and coincidentally a code for this language. Many people understand when this new language and communication is appropriate. We’ve developed systems to establish intimacy and emotional interaction to a form of communication that lacks personality.

Finally, on a completely unrelated note, I was happy to see John Irving used in our text. He is probably my favorite novelists, and I don’t typically thinking of him as a rhetor. It reinforces the claim that “everything is rhetoric” for me.