Wednesday, August 02, 2006

ch-ch-check out my m-m-main claims

Word up tiffany and simon! I hope you two are having a FABULOUS evening!
Here are some claims for you guys to ch-ch-check out:

*Analyzing the bulletin about imagination using Austin's Speech Act Theory, it becomes evident that it is rhetorically persuasive to the intended audience of the loyal citizens of the one-state. These citizens believe that everything they are told is true, and will do anything that they are told is a good idea....anything to become more machine-like.
*The language of the bulletin will propel them to go have their imaginations removed.
*To the revolutionaries, no matter what the bulletin says, they are not going to think it's a good idea if it is put out by the One-State.
*To those citizens on the fence (D-503 and O-90), the bulletin may or may not be persuasive (which do you guys think?). On one hand, all they know is the One-State so they are inclined to think it's true, but on the other hand they are questioning the ideals of the One-State, so it might take some very persuasive verbal action going on to convince them that it's a smart idea to have their imaginations removed.
*Regarding the Speech Act Theory, I will incorporate the following:
1. "certain performatives are only effective if uttered by authorized people" --> the faithful citizens of the one-state obviously believe that the guarantor would be considered "authorized".
2. "for a performative to be effective, it must be uttered correctly, completely, and sincerely." --> the bulletin accomplishes this, but it can only reach the people who are willing to accept what it puts forth.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand, I've got nothing else. Let me know your thoughts!
have fun not going to class! not that rhetoric isn't like amazingly fun everyday, but everyone loves having a free day and an 8-day weekend! enjoy!


Blogger Tiffany said...

Hey hey hey!

Okay, here's what I'm thinking:

You might want to express the One State's/the bulletin’s illocution, which is something along the lines of: "Submit to the Great Operation" and have your imagination nodule cauterized so that you can be a perfect machine!!! (Sounds oh so appealing, right?) And then express the perlocution of the three different groups of audience we discussed. This might help to expand your arguments a little more using Austin’s theory.

And to try to answer your question: “To those citizens on the fence (D-503 and O-90), the bulletin may or may not be persuasive (which do you guys think?).”
I think that the bulletin was not persuasive. Like you said, at this point “they are questioning the ideals of the One-State…” even though the One State is all they know and, at one point, believed everything it encompassed to be true. I know. I know. D-503 ended up getting the Great Operation done. But I think he felt that he had to and he was somewhat manipulated into it. O-90 obviously was not convinced… she left the One State.

Okay, I think that’s it! Have a great one and good luck, Madame!

12:16 PM  
Blogger Simon Says said...

With regards to the speech act theory, you may want to discuss implicit versus explicit speech, as well as illocution and perlocution. These have dramatic effects on how persuasive the argument is. When you discuss the loyal One-Staters, the on-the-fence folk, and the opposition group Mephi, this is where illocution and perlocution intersect. Though the One-State wishes its members to get the operation (illocution), the different groups you mentioned will interpret the bulletin in varying ways (perlocution).

You're definitely on the right track, but don't forget to beef up your paper with all the terms Austin uses.

Woohoo for writing papers!!!! Aren't you sooooooooooooo excited!?!?!?!?!?

1:34 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home