Archive of ‘RCL’ category

Thoughts on TED Talk (RCL #10)

Going into my TED Talk, I felt like I was pretty prepared. I had everything ready to go, my cues all lined up for what I was going to say and when I was going to say it, and I felt confident about my speech. Just to be safe, before I started my speech, I went through my PowerPoint to make sure that everything was running smoothly. It was then that I noticed that the video that I had embedded into my slide wasn’t working. Despite my best efforts to get it to work, it just wasn’t happening. I had no choice but to delete the slide. This was a pretty bad situation for me, because it threw off all my cues and I had to improvise from that point on. Another technical difficulty with mine was the sound I decided to play. I wanted to briefly play the Monday Night Football theme song, so I set a 10 second clip of it in the slide, but for some reason it played the entire thing, almost one minute long. Looking at the video, it didn’t sound as bad as I thought, but it was kind of jarring for me and I wasn’t really able to get my thoughts together until it stopped.

Other than those two issues, I think the content of my speech was pretty good and I addressed the concept of what a TED talk was all about. If it wasn’t for my technical difficulties I think my speech could have been much better. The other speeches in my group were all great, they spoke well and I was very interested in what they had to say. One thing I really liked and remember well was Matt’s animations on his slides. He had people circled and as he would talk about each person the circle would shift over their head. It looked like it took a ton of work to make that happen and I was really impressed by that. I think as a whole, our group did very well on their TED talks.

Sharing my favorite TED Talk (RCL #9)

In my time spent researching for my own TED Talk, I’ve come across a ton of different talks on a wide variety of topics. There are talks about breakthroughs in science, talks that are an analysis of historical moments, and all kinds of talks regarding self-motivation and how to succeed. One of my favorites, however, was one of the few that I hadn’t come across in my research, because I had already known about it. It’s a shorter video, relative to the average TED talk, only three minutes long.

http://www.ted.com/talks/bobby_mcferrin_hacks_your_brain_with_music

This video is actually part of a larger talk about neuroscience, with one of the speakers on the panel you see being Bobby McFerrin. McFerrin is actually a composer and singer, world renowned for his ability to replicate sounds of other instruments using only his voice. In this video, he simply jumps in certain places of the stage, corresponding them to certain pitches. Using this, he creates the pentatonic scale and is able to create music just by jumping in different places. It’s funny hearing the audience struggle to hit the notes on the extreme ends of the spectrum, and being able to predict the next note without being told due to their understanding of music. It’s entertaining to watch, but his brief explanation afterwards makes it much more profound.

After his performance, he explains that no matter where he’s traveled, in every venue he’s been to, his audience has been able to understand and successfully follow along to the instructions. At no point does he give directions other than pointing his fingers. This experiment shows that music is a universal language, and regardless of what country a person is from, they can still experience an emotional connection through music. It is a very simple yet insightful message into how neuroscience works, and stresses the importance and value of music in understanding the human mind. It was probably one of the first things I had stumbled across on the internet that wasn’t a pointless video and actually had me thinking for a long time. If there was one TED Talk I recommend everyone watch, it would be this one.

Paradigm shift outline (RCL #8)

For my paradigm shift, I was very unsure of what I wanted to do for my topic. It still is pretty unclear to me which topic I want to write/speak about, but after a lot of thought I’ve narrowed it down to two topics.

My first choice of topic was going to be Prohibition. I really enjoy historical topics, learning more about them, and doing research on them. Alcohol use has been prevalant throughout basically all of history, people were drinking wine thousands of years ago in the Roman Empire. So why in the 1920s did the United States decide all of a sudden that it was a bad thing? What shifted this change in public opinion on alcohol use, and what are its effects today? For my TED Talk on the issue, I would talk about the parallelisms between Prohibition and the marijuana legalization movement today. Many supporters of the movement make comparisons to their fight to the fight to end Prohibition. My talk would be about how accurate this comparison is, and what kind of precedent it set for the country.

My second choice would be the discussion of player safety in American football. In recent years, player safety has become a huge topic and there has been huge pressure to increase standards to create a safer environment for the players. With all the former players coming out with CTE, it has created a new understanding of head injuries that we never had before. This topic would cover the progression of player safety over the years and the development of the protective padding that we have come to know, the discovery of these traumatic head injuries, and where player safety will go now and what it means for the sport. My talk would cover the future of American football now and what kind of sports would replace it if it no longer existed.

Adichie TED Talk (RCL #7)

In class on Wednesday, we watched two TED talks from Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie to prepare for our TED talks of our own that we will be giving in class. Many of us probably know Adichie as author of the novel Americanah, which we all were given a free copy of as freshman here. I thought both of her talks were very interesting, but I particularly enjoyed the one titled “The Power of a Single Story”. This talk focused on being narrow minded and focusing too much on one story you hear about a person can give us a limited perspective. In particular, I liked the anecdote she provided about her roommate in college treating her differently because she was African.

In this story, she tells stories about her roommate thinking there is a much larger cultural difference than there actually is. She assumes that Adichie does not know how to work an oven or use even the simplest technologies that we have become accustomed to. Her roommate has a limited perspective based on the single story she hears about Africa. This story isn’t from one person though, it’s a story told by our country as a whole. America typically portrays Africa as a primitive, poverty stricken country where everyone lives in straw huts and kicks soccer balls around in dusty streets. Although this image might be accurate to certain areas, you simply can’t just generalize an entire continent. She even explains how in America, Africa is often referred to as a country. I liked this because I have personally noticed this mistake a lot in my life, and it shows just how uneducated Americans can be when it comes to the country. We are focused on the single story of Africa, and don’t take the time to learn the reality of it, which is a problem. Out of the whole TED talk, the best part to me was that this issue was brought to light.

Rhetorical Analysis rough draft (RCL #6)

Based on my last RCL post, I had quite a few ideas for my rhetorical analysis paper. Out of all of them, I decided to do my paper on Jim Jones and The People’s Temple, and on how rhetoric plays a strong role in cults and their culture. So far I only have my intro and thesis, but I plan on talking about how rhetoric allows these cult members to understand Jones’ ideas as completely logical and the passion they have for them, despite them seeming so illogical today. Jones used a variety of rhetorical devices in his speeches to convince his followers. So let me know what you think so far! I welcome all criticism.

What Made You Drink The Kool-Aid?
Rhetoric is a powerful tool. Politicians and lobbyists, preachers and philosophers alike all understand the power behind rhetoric and the implications that come along with it. A person who has a firm understanding of rhetoric and how to manipulate it can convince someone to believe almost anything, good or bad. Martin Luther King Jr. convinced millions that civil rights were a liberty that every African-American in our country deserved. Adolf Hitler convinced millions that the extermination of the Jews was essential and the Aryan race would create a stronger Germany. If a person knows how to use rhetoric, they can become a savior or they can become deadly. Jim Jones was a man who knew what rhetoric was and how to use it. Using his mastery of rhetoric, it allowed him to found The People’s Temple of the Disciples of Christ, more commonly abbreviated as The People’s Temple, and create a cult following that took him deep into the jungles of Guyana. Here in these jungles, Jones convinced nine hundred and twenty people to take their own lives because he believed it was God’s will. Jones’ infamous final speech to these followers before they took their lives is a testament to the power of rhetoric, and how willing people are to believe a convincing rhetorician, regardless of their background.

Rhetorical Analysis Ideas (RCL #5)

After hearing what the topic for this paper was, I was actually excited. I enjoy writing papers, I look at it as like a puzzle, trying to make your ideas fit and mesh together with each other. I did take AP English in high school, but I didn’t write nearly as many analysis papers as I would have liked. I’m looking forward to this assignment, and I already have a few ideas as to my approach I was going to take.

One possible approach I thought of would be to use my hindsight a little bit and take a speech that was very ineffective looking back or a speech for the wrong reasons, and analyze how the speaker was able to convince others to believe their ideas using their rhetoric. Some possible topics include:

-George W. Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech in 2004
-Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich
-Jim Jones and The People’s Temple
-Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky

Another possible approach that I could take would be to analyze the speechwriters throughout the Presidential era, at what point these writers started taking over, and whether or not the rhetoric skills of Presidents have been degrading throughout the years. For example, Lincoln was a lawyer and had an unbelievable command of his rhetoric, he wrote all of his own speeches and gave some of the best speeches in the history of this country. Whereas someone like George Bush or Barack Obama has a speechwriter on the payroll that does this for them, and although it takes a lot of rhetorical skills to get to where they are now, it raises questions of whether these skills have been dulled a little bit due to their lack of development and use. Both of these approaches are very appealing to me, and it’s something I’ll have to consider over the weekend.

Thoughts on Speeches this week (RCL #4)

After watching everyone give their speeches, I would say there were definitely some strong points and some that needed work. One thing I particularly liked was the visual aids that everyone used to go along with their presentations. There were many excellent PowerPoints with a lot of great information to support their claims and pictures to draw in the audience. Looking back, I wish I had made a PowerPoint myself. It was a very effective tool, at least personally I felt like I paid more attention to the speeches that used them.

As a class, I think one thing that could have been better was the classroom involvement. A lot of people, including myself, tried to get the audience involved, and they just weren’t into it. Most people just asked the audience a question and had them raise their hands. Perhaps a better way to get the audience involved would be to give them the floor for a second. Rather than asking a rhetorical question, ask a real question and get some feedback from the audience. This way it changes from being spoken to, to speaking with the audience, and this will allow the audience to focus and become more active in the presentation.

Within my own speech, I would have liked to have worked on my nerves a little bit. I knew my material very well and addressed all the points I wanted to get across, but whether it was the camera, the fact I was being graded or that it was my first college speech, I definitely came across way more nervous than I would have liked. I have given plenty of speeches in my life too, so it wasn’t exactly a new idea to me. If there was one thing I could change, I would come at it with much more confidence and speak more powerfully.

When’s It Going On? (RCL #3)

For our Unit 1 assignment, we were tasked with choosing an artifact that represents civic life and how our examples from our readings can relate to it. Based on my interpretation of the reading and using my prior knowledge, I felt like the perfect example of a civic artifact was Marvin Gaye’s “What’s Going On?” album, an album written by Gaye in the prime of his career as a protest album in response to the Vietnam War. He uses his popularity as a vocal artist to spread his message to the youth of the generation, and it promotes civic engagement through awareness. Gaye encourages the youth to take a look around at their surroundings, their community and their home. He wants them to recognize the problems around them, and hopefully through recognition that can spur the initiative need to create lasting change in the community. But, I don’t want to go into too much detail about his call to civic engagement because that’s what my speech is going to address.

In terms of kairos, Gaye uses it by timing his album release along with the peak of the Vietnam War. At the time, civil unrest was at an all time high, and violence was no longer just overseas, it was at home as well. The tension at home wasn’t just an issue for the news anymore, it was something you could see in your backyard. There were riots in the streets and protests going on pretty much constantly. The general consensus was that something needed to be done, but nobody was willing to step up and take charge of the situation. By releasing this album during times of serious strife, he hoped that his message would also citizens to take a look at the urgency of his message and change their ways. To me, this is why this album is so successful as a civic artifact and has such an everlasting impact.

What’s so bad about bow ties? A lot. (RCL #2)

After getting the brief overview from our textbook (is that what we consider it?), I was very intrigued about hearing what Jon Stewart had to say. The book only gave a few brief excerpts from his interview on CNN’s Crossfire, which I could very easily understand. I decided to watch the rest of his interview on YouTube, and it absolutely did not disappoint. One of the funnier quips that I remember from it was between Stewart and co-host Tucker Carlson, when discussing how Crossfire should be more of a real debate:

Stewart: “Now this is theater. It’s obvious. How old are you?”
Carlson: “Thirty-five.”
Stewart: “And you wear a bow tie. So this is theater. And listen, I’m not suggesting you’re not a smart guy, because those things are not easy to tie. But the thing is, that you’re doing theater, when you should be doing debate, which would be great.”

When I heard this, I started thinking about debates, theater, and bow ties, and it all came together for me. It immediately reminded me of the “debate” between Bill Nye and Ken Ham. For those unfamiliar, and those who have about three hours to kill, I’ll provide the link below.

Okay you’re back? Great. Now since you probably didn’t actually watch it, here’s a brief synopsis: This debate is about whether or not creationism is a viable model for the origin of species. Ken Ham is a bestselling Christian author who believes that it is, and the science community chose Bill Nye to refute this and defend Darwin’s theory.

The reason I recalled this was because Bill Nye is also a man who is known for wearing bow ties, and he’s much older than thirty-five. Although I absolutely support Nye’s ideas and beliefs, this is a sham of a debate. The entire thing is just theatrics designed to make the Christian community look bad. The fact that Bill Nye is the man defending the scientific community makes it seem like they consider it a mockery. Nye does educational videos for children about the basics of science. Now don’t get me wrong, Nye is an extremely intelligent person, he attended Cornell and has a strong scientific background. But, he uses this to teach children. He talks to Ham like he is a child, disregards everything he says and relies almost 100% on facts. It is not the idea of a rhetorical debate at all. The difference between the two is how open-minded the rhetors can be. In this debate, neither has any intention of changing their beliefs at any point. They merely argue their points and try to sway the audience, which takes place at the Creation Museum, by the way, so even the audience has no intention of changing their beliefs. This is how you can tell it is theater instead of a real, rhetorical debate.

Like Jon Stewart said, “…you wear a bow tie. So this is theater.”

What does it mean to be civic? (RCL #1)

When I hear the word civic, I think of my freshman year. Not this freshman year though, my freshman year of high school. My first year of high school I had a civics class with a wonderful teacher and it was one of my better class I had throughout my four years. We learned about how our government works, the system of checks & balances, how the voting process works and our due diligence as citizens to get out and vote. But there’s one thing I never learned: What did the word civics actually mean? I’ve heard of our “civic duty” and the phrase “It is our civic responsibility as citizens to…” was thrown around a lot, however I never really had a clear definition of the word. So, after looking through these readings, I made an attempt to define civics for myself.

Look familiar to anyone?

Look familiar to anyone?

Simply put, being civic means being the best citizen possible. I’m sure most of you had a good idea about that though, so the question becomes: What makes us better citizens? Chapter 1 of our reading discusses four points on how to become civic. In my mind, two of these particularly stand out.

The first that particularly stands out is when civic activities become a part of everyday life. This is where we need to strive as citizens to better ourselves and make a conscious effort. Benefiting our community should be something that is always in the back of our minds, too often do we make decisions that only benefit ourselves. Part of being civic involves making those sacrifices to our personal gain and making choices that benefit others around us like our family, our work environment, our city or even our planet.

The other point that particularly stood out to me was the point about civic infrastructure supporting and encouraging civic involvement. When I read this, the first thing that came to mind to me was recycling. The university here strongly encourages that everyone recycles, providing multiple bins for each type of recycling material all over campus. Penn State provides infrastructure that allows every student here to perform a civic act by recycling, benefiting both our community here and the global community.

After doing the reading, I think I have a pretty clear understanding of what the word civic means. Being civic means helping others in any way possible. It means benefiting every type of community we are involved, from our home to our planet. It requires a lot of effort from a lot of people, but through collaboration, some motivation, and a lot of kindness, it’s possible to be civic every single day of our lives.