Memory and Ethos Creates for a Winning Combination

First off, I loved this chapter. Hands down this has to be one of the best chapters so far. I also love the fact that I can actually attach a youtube clip of a song entitled “Memories” from the Weber musical “CATS” which actually demonstrates Crowley and Hawhee’s main argument in this chapter. But to be completely honest, I really fell in love with this chapter once Crowley and Hawhee started talking about “Literate Memory Systems” (383). In this section, they are completely talking my language especially when they mention the “Dewey decimal or Library of Congress cataloging systems”(385). Please do not even get me started on the “card catalogues” (385). Talk about memories and their (memories) influence on people, the card catalogues are the reason I am still a reader, writer and student. Last semester, I had to write a literary narrative paper for another Dr. Kearney class and I was amazed at how influential the role of card catalogues played in my literary development.

The real focus of this blog is about the relationship between memory and ethos. While reading this chapter, I could not help but to note how memory can positively or negatively impact the ethos of a rhetor and writer. More importantly, it appears in this chapter that if a person can memorize a great deal of things and successfully reproduce it either in a presentation or written statement that the individual will appear wise and gifted. For example, while at the conference in Savannah, I realized that some of the popular (well-known) and praised speakers were scholars who not only had been attending the organizations joint conference for years but were also the ones who had memorized their papers. These scholars were dynamite and engaging and when asked more in depth questions, they seemed to have been well read and mentioned numerous texts, articles and authors that interested listeners should become familiar with. Indeed, many people would say that is THE scholar on Shakespeare, etc. The reason this person was granted a favorable ethos is the fact that he or she had a fantastic memory and because he or she has provided plenty of examples from numerous texts. (Even in scholarly articles, readers love to see a well written piece that provides enough scholarly and accepted examples to declare that the writer is knowledgeable about his or her topic. For example, if I am writing a thesis on Alcott, you better believe that I will have numerous Madeline Stern examples cited throughout my piece since she is THE ALCOTT Scholar, otherwise, I will risk the rejection of my thesis because I have neglected to involve Stern in my work.). Crowley and Hawhee best summarize this thought when they write that “We often being reading a book by looking at its index, to see if it lists any terms related to our current research or if it lists the names of persons who are important thinkers in the area we are researching” (384).They also write that “Obviously, people who speak in public need reliable memories” since “memory requires an attunement during the moment of speaking or composing, a recognition of the right time for recalling an illustrated examples, argument, and so on” (375). Thus, a person can gain a reputable ethos, like being called a scholar, when he or she demonstrate that he or she has mastered the whole concept of memorization based on the audience’s positive feedback.

However, memorization and a good ethos are not only limited to speeches. Writers also strive to have a likeable ethos so that they can sell books. In the writing world, the ethos scholar is traded for the ethos of best selling author, Pulitzer Prize winner, etc. Thus we see that the most important part of the relationship between memory and favorable ethos is that the “Composition, whether written or oral, would then amount to selection, combination, and amplification of appropriate topics and their variations to suit a particular occasion” (377). Once again, we see that writing and speaking are complex processes that centers on a situational audience. In fact, Crowley and Hawhee write that “writers do have to be able to remember information or to recall where it is located and, more broadly, to remember what arguments they have heard on a particular issue before. It is also of a crucial importance to be aware of what events or knowledge might dominate the memories of a particular audience” (375).

This quote made me think about the article I am reading for this class. In the article, “Memory as Social Action. Cultural Projection and Generic Form in Civil Rights Memorials” by Victoria J. Gallagher, Gallagher tries to discuss the importance of the four civil rights monuments in the hope that readers will invest time in going to one or all four so that they can better understand the true history of the civil rights movement in this country. Crowley and Hawhee write that “we remember things we learn from teachers, parents, clergy, relatives and friends, the media and books, just as well as we remember experiences” (380). Thus, Gallagher discusses how these civil rights monuments allow visitors to recall these past events and lessons. She writes that “analyzing the built environment, including public memorials, monuments, and museums existing in the public spaces of urban America, is essential to understanding how cultural artifacts create, sustain and reproduce racial ideologies” (qtd in Sullivan and Goldzwig 150). This statement is suggestive of Crowley and Hawhee’s idea on cultural memory. They write that
“Cultural memory was formed after 9/11 in myriad ways: the continuous replay
on television of the disintegrating towers; photographs of victims pinned to every
available nearby surface-storefronts, telephone poles, fences; widespread praise
for heroic first responders; display of the American flag; expressed admiration for
New Yorkers and how they were able to pull together in the face of such dreadful
circumstances… give rise to new commonplaces or resurrect old ones…”
(Crowley and Hawhee 381).

We can see that these items serve to remind us what happened on that day. Gallagher, Crowley and Hawhee all believe that these items forever impact our lives and the items significance will forever reveal around the respective events (9/11 and the numerous events that occurred during the civil rights movement). Gallagher agrees with Crowley and Hawhee’s cultural memory theory when she writes that “inscribed in a memorial discourse, which both honors the accomplishments and reminds us of the tragic losses accrued during the civil rights movements of the 1950’s and 1960’s in the United States” (qtd. in Sullivan and Goldzwig 162).

However, Gallagher is aware that some visitors will be unfamiliar with the numerous events of the civil rights movement. She believes that in order to inform a post 60’s student with the commonplaces of the civil rights there needs to be “ an interest in learning about the past, not simply through reading history but also through ‘experiencing’ it via multiple modes … all the sites appeal to the multiple senses, particularly hearing and touch in addition to sight, and they seek to form emotional identification through physical layout, personal narratives, and juxtaposition of symbols and artifacts” (qtd. in Sullivan and Goldzwig 162). Otherwise, the civil rights memorials and their message will be lost and neglected. She even equates how two negative experiences (near one of the memorials were “several sites commemorating [the] Civil War and Civil War life in Montgomery, including the preserved and restored White House of the Confederacy and the location of the action block were slaves were bought and sold” and her second negative experience involved “two women at the city of Montgomery’s visitors center who, when asked for directions to the civil rights memorial, were quick to assure me that there were other sites more worthy of my time and attention”)influenced her experience at a particular monument and encouraged her to “provide a composite vision of the ongoing nature of racial identity development: education, remembrance, self-reflection, participation, and paradoxically, a break with the past” (qtd. in Sullivan and Goldzwig 162, 165, 171).

Thus, this chapter was an extremely interesting one. It obviously will be playing a large part in my article paper but it also showcases how both writers and rhetors can have a good ethos when they remember to invoke excellent examples and other well known scholars in their work. I love how words can mean thing to one group and different thing to another. Found two interesting tropes (metonymy) in this week’s reading. First off, the mention in the Gallagher article of “the White House of the Confederacy” was charming and priceless (qtd.in Sullivan and Goldzwig 162). If she had not added that it was a southern replica it would have confused the reader since most twenty-first century readers associate “‘the White House’ for the president of the United States” (Crowley and Hawhee 357). The second metonymy was the term “stacks” (386). Crowley and Hawhee define stacks as “The rooms and shelves that hold books” (386). For Penn State Harrisburg students, the term stacks can relate to the college’s cafeteria. Embarrassing but sadly true story. Last year was my first year here at PSH and I was walking from the parking lot into Olmstead. I heard some guy talking to another student about meeting up in the stacks later to go over their presentation. I have an old fashion library background and I was dumbfounded as to how the students were going to discuss their project because I knew what stacks meant. Two days later, a student asked me if I knew where stacks was and I said, yes. I told him that stacks are in the library and it appears to be mostly the second and third floors that have the most. The student thanked me and hurried away. I learned later from a fellow student that Stacks was the cafeteria and I was so embarrassed. So now I make it a point to verify what stacks or Stacks are in question.