Work

When I think about the concept of 'work,' I evoke numerous associations: work as drudgery, opposed to leisure; work as a necessity, an inevitable consequence of one's being immersed in the world of process or prakriti (all things are moved to action by natural and karmic laws); and work as vocation, as those activities that give one's life an individual meaning and purpose. The authors whose writings appear in The Changing Landscape of Work in the Twenty-first Century  explicitly mention two of these; therefore, I would agree with Ciulla when she writes that "[t]here may be no one particular feature present in everything we call work, but rather many characteristics that overlap and intersect." Most people, when asked to ponder this topic, will provide many similar answers. Their definitions are not necessarily contradictory, but complement each other, and reflect the variegated experiences of work that human beings share.

Reflections On My Visual Analysis

I feel rather confident about the success of my piece. I have done a thorough job of analyzing the posters; admittedly, I probably could have pared down my paper more than I did. It is a part of my neurosis that I must include every thought that occurs to me. 

Indeed, I deplore that I had to leave out supplementary material. I would have liked to outline America's history of oppression towards minorities. This would have strengthened my argument by further illustrating the mechanisms of control that were reflected in the posters. 

Whenever I reflect on my writing, I am concerned that I am verbose in places, or have wrongly presumed the reader's knowledge in a certain area. This holds true for this paper.

It is possible that I could have enhanced my paper by doing more research on each image (for example, for "I Married a Communist," I could have watched the movie or at least read a synopsis). 

If I had more space, I would have done more to engage myself in academic discourse on the topic. I only briefly touched on an alternate view that is not so much a scholarly interpretation as it is a public prejudice. 

I think what I struggle with most in this and other papers is audience. Before taking this class, I have never had to consider audience. I think I have this difficulty because I am someone who always by default used an advanced vocabulary (that is only because most of the books I read are of that ilk, and I have learned to write mostly through emulation), to the point where it has become an incorrigible habit. I suppose this isn't that significant an issue within the context of academia, but still, I ought to become more flexible as writer. 

Visual Rhetorical Analysis

Design Plan for Visual Analysis

My purpose is to highlight the reactionary sentiment that dominated American Anti-Communist propaganda during the 1950's. By analyzing four posters, and emphasizing the role of minorities in each, I will prove that the Red Scare was only partly concerned with the spread of a repressive ideology throughout Europe and Asia: in large part, it was also a mechanism of perpetuating social imparity within the US. In this light, I will also undertake an exposé of the collective psyche at this time, which presents itself as a classic example of the phenomenon of psychic projection, insofar as it is evident that America projected its shadow (its own oppressiveness) onto the Soviet government. Consequently, I wish for my audience to gain a critical perspective on US culture and politics. This way, they will be able to assume a more active, thoughtful role in the political process.

My audience consists of young voters in high school or college, whose political opinions have still not ossified, and who have at least some background in United States history. They may be those who are apathetic, or they could be blindly patriotic. In either case, I will motivate them to reconsider their views. By emphasizing the social consequences of something even so remote to them as Soviet expansion during the mid-twentieth century, I will evince the urgency of their political participation. I shall also make clear that pride in one’s country is not necessarily pernicious, but that jingoism is. Democracy depends on an informed, decisive electorate.

The context is approximately half a century removed from the posters’ inception.  It is likely that the audience may only have a limited understanding of the Red Scare, of which only their grandparents probably have any immediate recollection. It will be necessary, then, that I provide a brief historical account. In addition, I realize that I am writing in a time characterized by some as one of increasing political polarization. This could have an undue influence on the audience’s reception of my piece, as their perception of what they believe to be my ideology will determine whether they thoughtfully consider my argument.   I may have to address this issue, or at least make clear my intentions (which are partly to demonstrate that governments, just like people, are imperfect, and possess a “shadow” side).

As always, I would like to establish an authoritative ethos with my audience. I shall try to find reliable sources to corroborate my claims (much of what I know about US History I learned last year in my AP US History Course; unfortunately, I no longer have access to the textbook).

Though I often consider myself as apolitical, I may employ a patriotic pathos. I will make an appeal to nationalist sentiment by asserting that a true nationalist who is concerned about the integrity of American government would not blindly believe in its absolute goodness. Rather, they would view representative democracy as the best possible form of government that nevertheless depends on a plurality of interests (to obviate the oppression of a minority by a majority, or vice versa) and a system of checks and balances.

Nonetheless, logos will be the most prominent appeal in my paper. I will focus on the posters’ visual composition (which includes typeface, vectors of attention, saturation, and hue), text (the meaning of the text and its use of ethos, pathos, logos) and the interface between text and image, as well as intertextuality (the way that all three posters interact to manifest a paternalistic attitude towards minorities). I will moreover present an alternative point of view that suggests that at least one of the US government’s presumptions concerning Stalin’s regime were unfounded; ergo, the Red Scare was, to some extent, a disproportionate and even a mendacious response to Soviet expansion.

In the posters themselves, I shall discuss pathos, ethos, and logos: how they use garish colors, sans serif typefaces, and peremptory statements to capture attention and evoke fear (pathos); how they make ethos a matter of patriotism by ways of a dichotomy (“us vs. them”), accentuated in their contrasting depictions of each party and jingoistic declarations; how they utilize a downward vector of attention to imply social entropy; and the logical fallacies present in the text (such as hasty conclusion) (logos).

The selection of posters was based on their implicit views of minorities (as weak, inferior, easily corruptible, naïve, innocent).

The medium is a formal academic paper written in MLA format that will include three photographs (reproductions of the posters).

Concerning arrangement—I will first present the posters whose central figure is a woman, and then juxtapose these with a third poster that, prima facie, does not appear to be related (an African American appears who does not seem to be an important character, but still reinforces the leitmotif of the first two posters). I am still considering what I shall use for the fourth image. One poster I am considering employs an image of a young girl to demonstrate the US government’s pure intentions in giving aid to European countries during the Soviet blockade. In retrospect, I would present this image first in order to establish a contrast with the nefarious purposes apparent in the other three posters.

To test my composition, I shall participate in peer review in class. I may also have one or more of my current or former instructors review it. 

My Reading Experiences

Nowadays, I read in the short intervals between work, school, and sleep. I read in my school's library, as I wait for after-school tutoring. I read late at night, when I am content with the day's work and crave a little free inquiry. I read when I have finished an assignment in class that others are still working on. I read even though I know I will suffer certain consequences, for example, loss of sleep and less time spent on homework assignments. 

I read because I am curious. I read because I am of the opinion that, in order to live life to the fullest, one must think critically. One must read others' viewpoints. One must gain knowledge in a variety of topics, and learn to see from a myriad of perspectives. I read a combination of religious texts, academic prose, and sublime poetry. Thus, I am a spiritual reader, a professional reader, a hedonistic reader. Of course, I am forced to read for my classes, which I do enjoy, but not nearly to the same extent as I do when I am allowed to choose the text. 

From my reading experience, I derive a sense of purpose and identity, that of a reader and an intellectual. 

Design Plan for Photo Essay (Revised)

I have two main goals for this project: to become more versatile as a communicator by learning to incorporate images into a text (something with which I have little experience), and to create a piece which will inspire my audience to think critically about the commonplace. Specifically, I will introduce to the audience the idea that truth is invariably constructed to some extent via signs, whether they be linguistic or pictorial, and that even through such seemingly transparent media as photography and film, one could only hope to possess a partial representation and not a neutral record of reality. My intentions are ultimately rooted in Socrates's dictum that "the unexamined life is not worth living." I hope that others may not be dismayed, but fascinated by the perplexity of the world, so that they realize the uniqueness of human life and the necessity of exercising their rational faculties.

Part of my audience is comprised of my classmates and professor. The larger audience I hope to reach consists of high-school and college-age students whose epistemic attitudes have deviated little from the "commonsense" view of reality (that there is one truth independent of the subject and faithfully conveyed by signs). This group will most likely include those with no background in philosophy or semiotics, and who are not familiar with academic parlance. Despite this, they are insatiably curious about their surroundings and willing to examine themselves and their beliefs.

My classmates are going to receive my text in an environment which may not be ideal for stimulating intellectual discussion. It is towards the end of their school day and after lunch, meaning that they are apt to feel lethargic and unreceptive to ideas which fail to provoke their interest. Simultaneously, my colleagues are a part of the more general audience to which I alluded, who are at a time in their lives when they are establishing new identities in the world. They are searching for themselves and are becoming more and more independent of their nuclear families; therefore, some may reconsider the dominant Weltanschauung. My piece will be an appeal to those seeking alternatives, and an insinuation to those who have never seriously contemplated their most basic assumptions about life.

In this project, I will be using a combination of text and images to achieve my purpose. For my pictures, I will use natural objects which are easily accessible, such as fruit, so that I may denaturalize them (illustrating the artificiality of their representation, and/or the relative arbitrariness of their categorization), thus jarring my audience and evoking thought. I will accomplish this by incorporating different icons of the same apple and angling the headers in the slide show to resemble a stem of an apple (the body of text lying underneath), and also by using the "organic" theme in Microsoft Powerpoint. I have also thought about the potential uses of light and shadow. The “natural light of reason” is an allusion to Descartes that I could use to demonstrate the necessarily perspectival element of knowledge (the “light,” after all, belongs to an individualized consciousness in a particular locale). Darkness naturally lends itself as a symbol of ignorance and of the unconscious (those seemingly uncontrollable elements which seep into one’s communication).

I hope to establish an ethos that is authoritative yet relatable; that is, I would like to exhibit my knowledge without coming across as pedantic. I must try to raise serious academic questions in a lighter, more playful manner through images that will be intriguing but not frustratingly difficult (for I do not have the space to explain all the minutiae, as much as I would like to). I will achieve this by including cultural alusions which will indicate my frame of reference, establishing my credibility with those who have the proper background, while also limiting my use of jargon so as not to alienate those who are new to the topic. Accordingly, in regard to typeface, I will select a font which is neither too ornate nor too dull, but elegant and at least semi-formal.

I would like my pathos to be bizarre and disorienting, to challenge any complacency. I will use a recurring image of an apple, whose position will vary according to the placement of other elements within the slide. For example, if the apple occurs in a second picture, it will be absent from its customary position on top of the bible found at the top left corner of the page. This will create the impression that one has reached into the text (so to speak) to grasp the object and move it across the plane of the text. This obvious absurdity demonstrates that the pictures used are not reality itself, but belong to a sphere of its own which can be manipulated according to one's purposes. I will also do a tribute to Magritte's "The Treachery of Signs," by writing captions which are plainly descriptive yet contradictory (see "The Text) as well as subtly inserting the famous image into one of my photographs. However, this might be off-putting unless there is some levity. Humor will be used to bring philosophy down from the infamous “ivory tower;” for the audience, unfamiliar with the terminology, would not yet be able to participate in or critique that type of discourse. Therefore, in the conclusion, I will utilize the extensive metaphor of light in a simplistic manner which will refer to a quotidian experience (turning on a light) so as to provide a contrast to the mostly abstract arguments of my essay.

My logos will follow this pattern: in the beginning, I will emphasize divergent perspectives; at the end, in order to refute the idea that the only possible conclusion is relativism, I will suggest the complementarity of differing viewpoints by photographing multiple "lights" or perspectives (hence perspectivism). Thus, I could properly denounce dogmatism by refuting both extreme fundamentalism as well as skepticism, while simultaneously providing an array of perspectives and insights that the audience could examine themselves. A second strategy I will use will involve the use of a secondary language—French—to challenge the idea that there is a 1:1 correspondence between words and objects (words possess different values in different languages). A third approach I have utilized is to invert the visual hierarchy endemic to the West by presenting text and images in order from right to left. (In "Mediation," for example, the vector of attention follows from right to left to indicate that the portrayed gesture is retroactive [one is reflecting on the original conditions requisite for the incipience of language and thought].)

I will have a title slide, a beginning slide which will contain the narrative, and a concluding slide to summarize the purpose of the essay and to discuss future possibilities in connection with the discourse. Because I’m trying to introduce a different perspective, I might do well in the body of my essay to juxtapose two pictures on some slides. I could present one ordinary image, and then a second which undermines its “ordinariness.” Still, I will want some (purposeful) variation. A group of three photos could be used to both introduce the notion of negative differentiation and suggest the limitations of dualism (Truth, especially God, must transcend opposites, which are inextricable from the phenomenal flux and necessarily interdependent, whereas Truth/God must be supra-historical and independent). In a similar vein, I will divide the essay itself into three parts. Yet another alternative would be to use one frame which contains multiple images, to express the self-referentiality of signs (apparent in the irreducibility of linguistic signs to images and vice versa).

Testing will occur between my classmates and me. I will moreover receive feedback when my professor grades the assignment, and when (and if) I receive comments on my blog post. This will help show if my conclusions coherently follow the narrative produced by the images, or if I need to elaborate on certain points; if my piece is leading others to reflect or is simply confusing them.

The Treachery of Signs (La Trahison des signes)

Every college student knows from their rhetoric professor that "everything is an argument," but what is the long, circumambulatory trail of premises that leads to this axiom? What are its socio-political and philosophical consequences?

Often ignored is the fact that language, just like photography, paintings, and television, is a medium, which indelibly filters the content that one tries to express. Usually, one thinks of a sign system (e.g. a language) as describing all of the objects that one observes in the world--but how is it that an object of experience in one language is not present in another? Does the Transcendental Signified, the pure experience of the world and its phenomena which precedes signs, actually exist? Or is reality a product of language? Consequently, different cultures (and subcultures) would experience different realities. Their respective codes would necessarily contain an intersubjective element: disallowing Nature to present herself as she is in her self, prior to man's projections, a language already possesses inherent value judgments common to its users. These determinations constitute a narrative, viz., a series of metaphors often employed in the myths and fabula of a culture, which claim to reflect absolute truth.

As a result of the mystification of language ostensible in religious texts (note the prominence of the Word) and reinforced by literature (observe the Platonism of the Romantics), members of a culture unwittingly commit themselves to a Weltanschauung, a specific manner of relating themselves to the world, which is treated as natural, objective, and absolute.

In the beginning--the Subject awakens. He is Abraham, father of all nations, whose descendants possess an irrevocable title to the Promised Land. He is a conquistador, first set foot upon the shore, who arrogates to himself this New World, which really is not new at all. He brooks, to some extent, the destruction of heathens at Sodom and Gomorrah, and the transfiguration of Lot's wife. He instigates the innumerable pogroms of natives. Caught in Maya, Man invents the simulacrum to conceal his suffering and delusion, the meaninglessness and absurdity of the life to which he cleaves. He coerces the Other/Object to compensate for his own epistemological uncertainty, frailty, and isolation. His is an uneasy hegemony, with a dilapidated foundation ready to topple the entire structure.







Reflections

The largest obstacle to writing this piece was, ironically, language itself. Usually, the type of language one uses is determined by the audience. But even prior to a consideration of audience, the concern is raised that normal, everyday language is inadequate to capture higher philosophical truths. Thus, it becomes a question of whether one ought to write in a more sophisticated, technical prose, or a more poetic, versatile lyricism. Unable to give a satisfactory response to this question, the reader will find that the former style is predominant in my writing, but with elements of the latter present in the symbolism I used.

Immediately, the medium has already limited my potential audience (assuming that blogs aren't quite so common), and it is here that my writing suffered from my lack of familiarity with the medium. I have but a vague idea of the type of person who (voluntarily) uses blogs, and an even more confused understanding of the expectations of what should comprise a blog post (I imagine that my formality is out of place). Perhaps, given the above considerations, my topic was not suited to this mode of communication, in which case, my essay is merely a product of the obstinate desire to discuss whatever I please, regardless of whether or not it is practicable. My original design plan is wanting in many other respects, as well (lacking reference to the actual design), because I wrote it before I could begin work on the photo essay. I am one who must write in order to see the patterns of organization latent in my thought processes.

Based on my peers' reception (which was meager but still telling), I conjecture that the audience will be intrigued but mostly perplexed by my composition. Their understanding would be enhanced if I were to explain the philosophical foundation (the "metanarratives," underlying assumptions and unqualified premises) of my writing as well as the cultural and literary sources to which I allude. All I can say in this regard is that in the one case, the text would swell to absurd proportions, and in the other, I would be deprived of the conveniences of indirect communication (e.g. the ability to communicate multiple meanings at once). In the end, I suppose, I was driven by a creative impulse, fatigue, and ennui, commingled with an altruistic concern that others might be living their lives without being confused in the least.


Citations:

Chapman, Sean M. Knolwedge (Le Savoir). 2014. Joliet.

Chapman, Sean M. Mediation (La Mediation). 2014. Joliet.

Chapman, Sean M. The Origin of Thought (L'Origine de la Pensee). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. Knolwedge Emptiness (Le Vide). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. Three Wise Men (Les Rois Mages). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. Meaning (Le Sens). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. Marginalization (La Marginalisation). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. Man (L'Homme). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. "La femme est la femme d'un homme...". 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. The Text (Le Texte). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. On flane dans le Sens. 2014. Joliet.
Derrida, Jacques. De la grammatologie. 1967. Editions de Minuit. Paris, France.
Chapman, Sean M. Le Paradis perdu (Paradise Lost). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. (Ri-en). 2014. Joliet.
Chapman, Sean M. Perspectives/Les points de vue. 2014. Joliet.

.