The Rhetorical Artist in (Most of) Us

"Art is the only way to run away without leaving home." - Twyla Tharp

I've never thought of myself as being an architect of anything, mainly because I could never draw a straight line (even with the help of a ruler). Soon, I stopped chastising myself for this inability and instead I corraled it under the heading of "creativity." Creative people don't draw straight lines. That's the whole point. Creativity is not static; it is unpredictable, immodest, flowing, original.

Design to Thrive and the RIBS concept is upsetting my lack of interest in being deemed an architect by linking architecture with words like influence and experience -- all of which are creative terms. Through the RIBS concept, I am learning that I could and should be an architect of user experience, influence, belonging and significance.

Art is a word that aligns closely with the notion of creativity. The chapter on Influence was eye-opening as it provided the reader with tools for dissecting the mindset/personality/needs of the user and rhetorically designing an online community to meet various needs. It is "the art of designing influence." (81) If we view this entire RIBS concept in the lens of artistry, then we can manufacture powerful user experiences that include remuneration, influence, belonging and significance. In other words, the RIBS concept is empowering to the architect and the artist alike.

I am impressed by the depth of these concepts and its applicability outside of the realm of online communities. I am thinking about the RIBS concept in terms of my own classroom. I am a first-year teacher of English 103, and am keenly aware of rhetorically creating a classroom experience that encourages learning and trying. I use the word trying because more than 90 percent of my students do not have an affinity for English and my goal is for them to try to learn what they don't know, as opposed to completely tuning out based solely on the subject area. I'm reassessing my classroom and trying to determine who are my creators, who are my collectors; how can they feel a sense of remuneration in terms of the time spent in class; how do I help them feel a sense of belonging while avoiding the "pitfall of 'leveling rituals'" that could occur through the hierarchy of grading (which can be a classification system). I am applying these concepts outside of the setting of the online community (which makes me feel remunerated).

Forming, Storming and Norming, Oh My!

"...it often feels like the majority of teams spend most of their time storming." -Dr. Tharon Howard

I must say that it is a pleasure to read a textbook from an author that you have access to in an academic setting. Dr. Tharon Howard's Design to Thrive is a well written, easy to follow and informative text for students and professionals alike -- anyone who is or who will be a designer or architect of online communities. According to the heavy digital and social culture we live in, most professionals could be included in the rhetorical audience for this text.

As indicated by this week's quote above, I would like to focus on Tuchman's Stages of Team Development. Having worked as a professional in journalism and public relations, I could apply Tuchman's stages to my real life experiences and past mistakes. It is true that people are often thrown together to constitue a team without the benefit of shared professional focus. The more theoretical approach of applying an epistemic lens to the formation of communities is brilliant and, coupled with Tuchman, can help ensure effectiveness, productivity and positive ethos in an online or actual setting.

While I can see how most groups don't move past the Storming stage, I personally was most fascinated by the Forming stage where "members of the team begin to get to know each other and use rules of polite society to communicate." (33) I spent the earlier part of this year investigating politeness theory, so the use of the word "polite" immediately caught my attention. I would be interested in studying this more closely, observing rhetorical appeals and Burke's theory of Identification in the Forming stages of team development. How do individuals in a group move from turn-taking and tact, which are tenets of politeness, and evolve into the Storming phase? What generally happens to move a team from the 'honeymoon' phase of Forming to the 'post-honeymoon' stage of Storming? How do personalities evolve and how are roles determined when everyone begins at the same stage? And, what effect does an epistemic approach to creating communities have on the evolution/formation of personalities and roles?

I also appreciate the structure of Design to Thrive and it's use of color and layout to promote a non-threatening user experience. While it's clear that the author is an expert on the topic, I would feel comfortable sharing this text with members of my former pr staff (neither of whom had an advanced degree in this field ) for them to read and for us to discuss as a team.

This week's reading of Clay Shirky's Here Comes Everybody is a good complement to Design to Thrive. Shirky's opening anecdote tells a powerful story of the new world we live in, thanks to the abilities of the individual through technology. The use of the Internet to form and inform communities transforms all aspects of our lives. Or, as Shirky aptly puts it, "When we change the way we communicate, we change society."

What I am confused about is Shirky's rhetorical decision with concept of his book. I do not understand his decision to house information about new modes of organizing and societal behaviors in a book that looks and reads like a traditional paperback novel. Perhaps it was a cost-saving effort (which I appreciate). Still, I want something more innovative in its presentation and less 'vanilla.'

Brain Surge: The Human Element of Convergence Culture

Convergence occurs within the brains of individual consumers and through their social interactions with others. - Henry Jenkins

Whenever I thought of the topic of convergence culture, I assumed that it stood on a foundation of technology and digitalization. The whole idea of convergence was first introduced to me when I was a senior in college and the College of Journalism and Mass Communication at USC in Columbia. Faculty were abuzz about the next wave of media technology: convergence.

I didn't realize how far I'd drifted from that shore until I read the words of Henry Jenkins and his concepts of Convergence Culture. Technological times have changed and what was once the next wave has become commonplace. When I consider my education to date in the MAPC program and the limited exposure I've had with convergence, I can appreciate the writer's argument that convergence does not originate with technology, but with people. Technology is mindless and meaningless without the human interaction and interpretations that allows convergence to happen.

Jenkins writes: "Convergence does not occur through media appliances, however sophisticated they may become. Convergence occurs within the brains of individual consumers and through their social interactions with others." (3)

This transforms my foundationalist view of technology as being a static form of truth that can replicate the same results for different people. Instead, technology and convergence will only have meaning through the lens of the individual it is engaged with -- and that individual brings social and cultural perspectives that affect their overall experience.

Sturken and Cartwright -- The Comeback

“Ahh, Sturken and Cartwright you emerge once again just when I thought I’d rid you from my academic life.” -Deneshs

As a new MAPC student in the fall of 2010, I was instructed to purchase Sturken and Cartwright’s Practices of Looking for my visual communications class. This would be the text that I would write many a response to throughout the semester, and it would be the text that developed a strong aftertaste on my scholarly tastebuds. Simply put, I thought the text was redundant and I thought Sturken and Cartwright used too many words to make their point. But what did I know, right? Right.

Today I sit in the chair of teacher and student. I am in the second year of the two-year MAPC program, and I teach two sections of English 103. I am no longer a girl but not yet a woman (proverbially speaking). I’m more like the teenager who has her license, but is not old enough to be permitted to drive after dark.

Still, what I do have is more perspective than I had when I was a new student. I read Practices of Looking with new, more educated and enlightened eyes, and I am delighted to say that I see connections now that I didn’t see before.

For example, on the very first page of Chapter 1 (page 9) the authors argue that “looking is a social practice,” and “like other practices, looking involves relationships of power.” In talking with my students just today about their visual rhetoric assignment, I told them that their interpretation of the image they choose is important; it reflects their perspective, which will be different for every person. How they see the world is the result of the experiences that have shaped their view of the world, which confirms Sturken and Cartwright’s statement that “looking is a social practice.”

When I put the readings in chapters 1 and 2 in context of our class/client project, I realize that I must look for visual signs that will help me meet the needs of the client during the site visit. On page 29, Sturken and Cartwright offer the following definition: “the image (or word) and its meaning together (the signifier and the signified together) form the sign.”

I know our client has a logo, but during our site visit, I will look for visual signs, based on the client’s needs and desires, that will communicate the appropriate meaning. This could be grape leaves, or a the image of the bottle itself, or some other visual. We are not looking to recreate the logo, but we are looking to create a label that conveys the intended meaning. And, with this task in mind, I can safely say that Sturken and Cartwright has re-emerged right on time. This text serves as a good reminder of timeless “truths” of visual rhetoric and practices of looking and I look forward to applying these truths in the context of this client-based project.