A real life
example of Bitzer’s rhetorical situation would be the text messages that the
city of Tallahassee sent out to locals regarding the tornado warning that
occurred this past weekend. The exigency is the call to respond to the tornado
warning. In other words, since the city previously received complaints about
failing to notify the Tallahassians of the weather conditions or safety
information during Hurricane Matthew, they felt the need to respond to the
Tornado Warning and notify the city as well as give them safety pointers. The
audience of this rhetorical situation was indeed the Tallahassee citizens who
received the four notice text messages, and some of the constraints were that
some Tallahassians may have already been out of power with dead phones so they
could not see the text messages, or some people had not given their number for
the city to text them about the conditions.
On the other
hand, Edbauer focused on the term “rhetorical ecologies” in his piece. Edbauer
used the example of the slogan “Keep Austin Weird” to describe rhetorical
ecologies, which made clear to his readers the power of reinvention or re-mixes
of a slogan and their ability to preserve and extend the life of the original
slogan. Given this example, Edbauer was able to make his point that rhetoric
should be seen as “affective ecologies that recontextualizes rhetorics in their
temporal, historical, and lived fluxes. A great example of this would be Donald
Trump’s campaign slogan “Make America Great Again.” To begin with, Donald Trump
did not originate this slogan. He took Ronald Regan’s exact 1980 campaign
slogan for his own campaign—probably because he knew it worked. The rhetorical
ecologies derived from Trump’s slogan are the new slogans that came from his
original slogan, such as, “Make America gay again”, “Make America Dank Again”
and “Make America Green Again.” All of these slogans that people have created
have extended the life of the original slogan, “Make America Great Again.”
The
differences between Bitzer and Edbauer are that Bitzer aims his theory more
toward the importance of exigence and its “call to situation” to respond with
rhetoric in a rhetorical situation. He also stresses the components of
rhetorical situation: exigence, audience and constraints—believing that a
rhetorical situation does not exist without these things. On the other hand,
Edbauer sees rhetoric in a broader lens. He focuses on the different conditions
and ecologies that rhetoric could be used and transformed, that aren’t
necessarily being done in a particular set place. To compare the two theorists, both of them mentioned the importance of exigence in their rhetorical theories. In my perspective, I think both rhetoricians have great pointers and have made meaningful contributions to the rhetorical theory.
The text messages are a great example of the idea that rhetoric is everywhere. This was a clear example that covered many of the points that Bitzer made in his article. This helped my understanding of his ideas in general, but especially in regard to constraints.
ReplyDeleteThe example you used for Rice's work is a bit more unique. It takes a slogan that everyone is familiar with, and applies the logic of one of our readings. It fits extraordinarily well, but it's different enough from the other examples to provide a better overall knowledge of the topic.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe example that you used for Bitzer's rhetorical situation gave it a more modern approach and a new way of looking at the rhetorical situation. I never even thought of that myself so I appreciate the new outlook on the rhetorical situation and how it comes in different forms besides just a speech. The constraints are also very helpful because I wouldn't have even thought of those so you really emphasized on a new aspect on Bitzer for me.
ReplyDeleteAs for the example for Rice's rhetorical situation, I thought it was excellent. Although in the reading the Austin example expresses what the rhetorical ecology is, I feel your example really brought it home in a sense personally. It made it relatable and considering it involves current events, it made the rhetorical ecology clearer for me.