As the semester begins to draw to a close, with finals just starting to loom on the horizon, I keep finding myself looking back on my classes and realizing how much work I’ve actually done in such a short few months. Some classes are even starting to take shape in their meaning and value, becoming more than just homework and projects and exams. CAS 137H is one of those classes, to my intense surprise. Thinking back to the beginning of the semester, I can remember and break down the class into specific assignments:

1. Civic engagement speech

2. Rhetorical Analysis paper

3. Paradigm Shift paper

4. TED talk

5. Controversy video project

In a list format, the projects seem so disconnected and unrelated. Even when we began progressing through assignments, I cannot pretend that I understood what the point of completing them was. I was merely going through the motions of the class.

However, in all my other classes, where was a moment of clarity when everything came together, and CAS went the same way. I think my moment of clarity occurred somewhere in writing and practicing my TED talk. I can’t tell exactly what made me realize it, but I felt as if everything I’d worked toward in class so far had been in preparation for my TED talk. I had already practiced and analyzed my speaking skills through our first speech, and later during in-class speech exercises. My analysis and organizational skills had been reviewed and improved through the various papers we had written. All of these skills I implemented into writing and performing my TED talk, which I felt showcased all of my improvements nicely. I felt more lively and outgoing, as more well-spoken and organized during my TED talk, without notes, than I had during my first speech with notecards! Having realized this, I see the skill sets that CAS 137H has helped me to develop.

Additionally, I appreciate the RCL content that this class has incorporated all year. I initially saw “Rhetoric and Civic Life” as an abstract and meaningless thought process designed without any intent of implementation into the real world. Today, I feel that though the textbook makes RCL seem flat and lifeless, allowing students to explore RCL topics through some of the various projects we did helped further interest in RCL give it context in the real world. I personally explored “slactivism” as a specific example in RCL, and it gave the textbook readings of civic engagement much more meaning.

I enjoyed struggling a bit with the public speaking, and learning college writing skills through feedback on the papers I wrote for this class. Now as it draws to a close, I’m interested to see what next semester will hold. Though my peers in the class will be the same for the most part, the content of the class will most likely shift slightly from its current angle. With this in mind, I’m ready to shift from CAS 137H to ENGL 138T and whatever the next semester holds!

I came to Penn State to be an engineer. Engineering, after all, has always reflected my passions and interests. When I envisioned myself at Penn State while I was still at home, I saw myself working at a desk under a pile of books and papers, solving tedious, intricate math problems. I did not see myself standing before a class of fellow freshman, half-speaking half-singing the lyrics of “Don’t Stop Believing” as a speech exercise. In fact, I did not put much thought at all into what my CAS 137H class would be like. I figured it was a requirement I would get through then forget about. Yet I’ve been realizing more and more progressively that also my CAS class will not ultimately make me better at engineering, it’s teaching me a lot about how to communicate effectively, which is useful to, well, life.

Take for example our first speeches. I have become progressively more relaxed about giving speeches over the years, but still feel a nervous edge when it is time for me to deliver a speech. I was slightly miffed when I realized we would be speaking in this class. I kept thinking “Do engineers really need this?” Although I turned to embrace that civic engagement speech and was fairly satisfied with my result, I soon remembered that a TED Talk was just around the corner. I resigned myself to giving the TED Talk, hopefully the last public speaking project I would ever have to give.

However, the preparation work we have done in class has made me realize how exciting giving a TED Talk truly is. I’d seen TED Talks many times before, and didn’t believe that we would truly be producing legitimate TED Talks. The student examples we watched the other day convinced me otherwise- they looked very professional. Suddenly, I realized I would be in that professional spotlight soon, delivering my own TED Talk, and instead of seeing the TED Talk as another speech, I saw it as the chance to be professional, funny, and engaging, just like regular TED presenters. Now I have a goal to strive for in how I want my performance to come across!

When we did the impromptu exercises during class, I had to practice my eye contact by delivering “Don’t Stop Believing” as a speech to the class, making eye contact with every single student in the class. I at first believed I was going to make a complete fool of myself, because I usually struggle with eye contact during my speeches, focusing on only one person rather than the whole class. However, when I got up in front of the class, I felt surprisingly giddy. I half-spoke, half-sang the song, and was actually able to make eye contact with the whole class! This personal victory made me realize I actually can have a very successful TED Talk. I can be professional, defeat my usual weaknesses, and give a great speech if I prepare and practice well.

I may be an engineer, but now I am an engineer who is excited about being uncomfortable with public speaking and doing it anyway.

After turning in our paradigm shift essays, I feel it is appropriate to conclude my analysis of paradigm shifts with a more shallow look at a paradigm shift of the current holiday: Halloween. Specifically I want to look at women’s Halloween costumes, and how they have become more and more revealing and sexualized over the past few decades.

Ask any female college student what they are planning on being for Halloween, and nine times out of ten they will respond with something like “a cat”, “a nurse”, “a maid”, or some other similar response. Though those costumes may not seem very well connected, they are all alike in how revealing they are. Typical female Halloween costumes are usually described as “slutty”, almost as if it were a prerequisite to how costumes are supposed to look.

Some typical female Halloween costumes typically include exposure of the stomach, excessively short skirts, tight, low-cut tops, or a combination of all three. To illustrate my point, here are some examples of typical female costumes…

Essentially, a woman can dress up as anything for Halloween as long as she can put the word “sexy” in front of it. Although Halloween is generally an extreme holiday, it is important to note that male costumes are rarely ever sexualized. Whether they be dressing in scary or funny costumes, minimal skin is exposed and few costumes ever are intended to be sexual. Here are a few examples of typical male costumes…

Clearly there is a major difference between male and female costumes in regard to their level of sexualization. However, the most important contrast to note, that  makes the revealing costumes a paradigm shift, is how Halloween costumes used to look, especially for females.

Halloween costumes from earlier times had similar themes in what they portrayed as costumes do today. However, women were almost always completely covered, even wearing masks. Their costumes were not intended to emphasize their bodies, but transform them into something completely different, while women’s costumes today are less focused on what they are and more focused on how sexual they can be. Here are some examples of older Halloween costumes from previous generations of trick-or-treaters.  Overall, the change between how women’s costumes used to typically look compared to today’s costumes has changed towards more revealing, skimpy costumes usually referred to as “slutty” or “sexy”. This trend has most likely been caused by the general changing of societal values. In general, women have been sexually freed through the Women’s Rights movement, introduction of birth control, and the overall loosening of strict moral conduct previously upheld by society. However, one must question whether this current trend of sexualization is negatively affecting the rights women have worked to gain over the past several decades. The revolution that gave women the freedom to dress as they do today may soon take away from the original values of the revolution itself.

After debating between by two possible topics for my paradigm shift paper, I decided to select the topic on globalization and modern communication. Since this topic is so broad, I have since developed and narrowed it into just “networked individualism.” Here is the introduction to my paper for this topic. Please let me know what you think!

The Rise of the Networked Individual

Imagine waiting in line at a popular restaurant. Today, it is common to look around and see the other people in line completely absorbed with their mobile devices. One person may be using their phone to call or text someone else, while other people might be checking their Facebook updates. Another still could be using a restaurant app, complaining about the lines at the very restaurant you are in. People eating in the restaurant may also be using their laptops to listen to music and work on typing a document, while still others may be taking a picture of their food to share with their friends. Though these devices may appear to be more of a pesky distraction from real conversation than useful tools, they represent more than just distractions, and contribute to a meaningful change in how individuals communicate in modern society. A number of significant technological innovations that have allowed for the evolution of these devices. In correlation with world events, these technological innovations have given rise to a new type of individual: the networked individual. Networked individuals are completely connected members of society who enrich their interactions with members of all of their networks through in person and online interactions. The concept of a networked individual did not exist until recently, and now it encompasses most modern individuals. The shift in how individuals communicated, which lead to the rise of networked individualism, can be traced through the growth of social media and other online communication, though it was spurred by events with older roots in the history of individual communication.

Since we’ve been talking a lot about paradigm shifts lately as the topic of our next essay and TED Talk, this week I did a little research on the TED website and discovered a really interesting TED talk that directly addresses a paradigm shift (perfect, right?)

Here’ s the full video of the TED Talk.

The speaker, Jackson Katz, is a pioneer in spreading awareness about gender violence prevention, and runs Mentors in Violence Prevention, a program widely used in college and professional athletics programs. His talk is all about common perceptions of gender violence and how those perceptions needed to be changed. Interestingly enough, within the first seconds of the video Katz references a “paradigm shift.” However, he addresses paradigm shifts in a much different way than our class has perceived them in our discussions.

Katz approaches domestic violence as an issue we view with primary focus on women, when in reality men are the real perpetrators of the violence. He expands this idea to include a prevalent cultural mindset that men are not to blame for attacks on women, that men are dominant over women, and that women who try to stand up against men are somehow anti-men. Though all of this discussion is very interesting, I think the most interesting element of the talk is when he addresses a paradigm shift in the thinking around gender violence that needs to happen but hasn’t happened yet. This statement caught me off guard. I had previously seen a paradigm shift as an idea someone could look at in retrospect, but not have active participation in creating. Our class had always portrayed paradigm shifts as a change that we were not aware was happening in the moment. Paradigm shifts were supposed to be subtle, gradual changes, but what Katz was proposing was a conscious shift that would occur intentionally. He was proposing our society embrace a new paradigm shift on gender violence, having men stand up with women to stop gender violence.

At first I was a little uneasy contrasting these two opposite definitions of a paradigm shifts. I didn’t want to disrupt the content idea I already had of a paradigm shift, and thought perhaps that Katz was misinterpreting the definition of a paradigm shift. However, after looking more into what a paradigm shift was, I found it to be solely defined as a “change in assumption”, a “fundamental change in approach”, and other similar descriptions. With this in mind, I now believe that the way our class looks at paradigm shifts is one interpretation of what a paradigm shift can be. Perhaps a paradigm shift can be speedy or slow, be unconscious or purposeful, or even good or evil. Within these parameters, a paradigm shift can be interpreted in so many different ways. Although I am sticking to the same original type of paradigm shift introduced to us in class, I think it’s fascinating to explore paradigm shifts of all types, and am glad to have stumbled upon this TED talk. I hope it can open your perspective on both gender violence and how to define a paradigm shift.

I love the idea of a paradigm shift. There is just something so refreshing in the idea of natural change in a of a way of thinking, culture, or perception. Today parents constantly emphasize to their children how their morals are slipping away and society is slowly but consistently corrupting itself. What they fail to remember is how their parents said the exact same things about them. But a paradigm shift is so much more than the generational changes that cause stress between parents and their children. Paradigm shifts can alter the world altogether. In light of the paradigm shift essay which we will be writing shortly, I am dedicating this post to the exploration of a few notable shifts.

It’s always exciting when you can tie in information from another class, right? At least it’s exciting for me. My one class (IST 445H- only available in the fall, look it up, it’s awesome) studies almost exclusively the paradigm shift of globalization; that is, changes in trends of information technology, foreign policy, and private corporation behavior in light of the availability of technology. In essence, the technology available is what is causing the shift, and the changes in behavior of major U.S. and global entities are the shift itself. It’s a fascinating concept that I’ve enjoyed devouring in my IST class, and now after reading up on paradigm shifts I see globalization as a major paradigm shift that I know a good deal about. I’ve read lots of research and critiqued many theories regarding global behavior for my IST class, and I believe this branch of thinking would lend itself nicely to a paradigm shift essay. With such a broad focus, the shift to globalization would provide an extended timeline and broad subject range that I could choose to narrow down.

While considering this broad, worldly topic, another paradigm shift a little closer to my heart also peaks my interest. Having always been a passionate artist, I have a great love of art and art history, and bizarrely enough, modern art. I adore modern art. Whenever I check out an art musem, which is frequently, I am always sure to head right to the modern art section and see who they are featuring. The more confusing and seemingly un-artistic the piece is, the more I like it. I’m that weird person who can find meaning in a blank canvas.

With this passion in mind, I’ve also considered writing my paradigm shift essay on the development of American modern art over, say, the past century. I want to analyze the context of various famous pieces, and show how the changes in artwork reflect the changes in values in popular culture. To narrow down this wide scope, I would most likely select a certain value, perhaps society’s perception of women, and portray how modern art has changed to indicate a paradigm shift in how this perception has changed.

Both topics are battling for my interests. The issue of globalization is one I am very well versed in and could make for an intriguing TED talk later down the road, but art history is a passion I usually have to leave unfulfilled as an engineering student. Either way, I know both could make compelling paradigm shift essays to write about in the future. The hardest part of this essay will most likely be choosing a topic!

As our rhetorical analysis unit draws to a close, I am going to take a moment (well, an entire blog post) to reflect on the concept of “slactivism” and its effect on how rhetoric is perceived over social media in our current age of omnipresent technology.

My initial draw to slactivism came when we began planning our artifact of civic engagement speeches. My artifact was the KONY 2012 video, a call to civic engagement I was introduced to on Facebook a few years ago. As I analyzed it, I realized that although the video had very effective rhetorical devices (as I outlined in my speech), the video was overall horrendously ineffective. In fact, the video is viewed almost comically today, after the pitiful outcome is already known. KONY 2012 is a prime example of “slactivism”, the concept that people believe they are being engaged in a social cause by only supporting it on the internet and never interacting with the cause in real life. The KONY 2012 video went viral on Facebook and YouTube because it was easy to watch online, but the real-world events like “Light up the Night” that KONY created were poorly attended compared to the online response. Ultimately, slactivism is an act of laziness, when people refuse to put in the effort to care about a cause when it requires real work.

As I realized this about the KONY 2012 video, it occurred to me that the well-constructed rhetoric in the video was completely wasted because of slactivism. Other online campaigns as well, such as the Breast Cancer awareness campaign, spread easily through Facebook and have a wide audience, but fail to motivate any real action despite their rhetorical appeals.

Here, for example, is the Breast Cancer Awareness Facebook page. Although the page is incredibly well organized and promotes various campaigns that attract a lot of attention, the movement’s Facebook outlet seems to motivate little participation besides spreading awareness.

With all of this in mind, I am calling for death to slactivism, to save the art of rhetoric that we have studied so diligently these past few weeks. Rhetoric is useless unless it can inspire people to do something, and the use of rhetoric on social media for these various social causes is no longer able to do so.

So, I am calling all of you to pitch in the little that you can to save rhetoric. Don’t be that annoying person on Facebook who is constantly liking pictures of starving children in Africa, or sharing statuses about “Feeling your boobies” to promote breast cancer awareness. While these actions are taken with good intentions, they only promote slactivism and perpetuate the standard that it is acceptable. Instead, I encourage you to take your interest in social causes to the real world. Attend a rally if you are politically minded, or watch a political debate on TV. Donate to the blood bank. Volunteer at the Humane Society. Hold a car wash to raise money. By contributing time and money rather than clicking a button on Facebook you are contributing to the real activism that actually matters, and preserving rhetoric as what it should be, an art of persuasion that motivates action.

In class, we have been discussing the use of kairos to heighten the affects of a rhetorical argument. Kairos encompasses the idea that timing is key, and arguments can have major impact if their timing coincides with the timing of outside events. Looking at the advertisement I am considering writing about for our rhetorical analysis essay, I see an element of kairos in how the ad was presented.

Often Super Bowl commercials are fleeting entertainment. They are goofy, ludicrous videos that elicit a laugh and allow for some discussion the next day at work or school. I would never have previously considered a Super Bowl commercial as a means of convincing through rhetorical devices, that can seriously affect an audience. But recent exposure to various commercials in class made me remember a commercial I saw in the past year that touches a deep part of the American identity, and was aired during the Super Bowl.

This video made my heart swell a little, and I’m sure it made yours swell a little too. This is because it relies heavily on its appeals to pathos to affect the viewer as it desires. The video also makes excellent visual and audible choices to associate a specific part of American culture with the car the commercial is selling, the Dodge Ram. Together, this commercial makes a terrific case for why the viewer should want to buy the Dodge Ram. Some controversy exists over the themes of religion and racial stereotypes in the commercial, but ultimately it was still considered a very well made, effective commercial.

I think what made this ad so effective was it’s use of kairos. While most Super Bowl advertisements are not serious and often go for laughs, the opportunity presents itself to expose the national audience (lots of supporters of a piece of Americana itself, football) to the emotional, almost patriotic message that the Dodge ad represents. I think seeing this ad on regular TV would not be as nearly effective as seeing it during the Super Bowl, making the decision on when to air it so much more significant. Kairos was definitely employed in this ad.

With this in mind, I have decided to analyze the Dodge Ram commercial “So God Made a Farmer” for my rhetorical analysis essay. Initially I thought that I would analyze a heavier text- I even considered excerpting from Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. (as her namesake I’ve always been particular to her) but with this commercial in mind I’ve realized that a more dense reading does not necessarily translate into a better rhetorical analysis. In fact, I believe that a visual appeal such as an image or video, is so much easier to analyze because the viewer doesn’t have to waste time deciphering the meaning of the complex text. Instead, the viewer can directly absorb the meaning of the piece with the first viewing, even subconsciously.

With this in mind, I need to work on developing a thesis. I understand what the Ram commercial is trying to communicate, but articulating exactly what that is is very difficult. I think my thesis needs to reference the heavy use of Americana imagery that the video employs- this component is pivotal to the video and it wouldn’t be as nearly as effective without it. I think to establish a strong thesis I need to actively observe the video and develop all of my thoughts behind it to make for an effective analysis.

Like most high school students, I took a speech class in 10th grade. At least, I think it was in 10th grade. I’ve kind of repressed the memory, because I was not a fan of that class, or of public speaking in general. In fact, I loathed it. Thinking back on the speeches I gave in that class, all I remember is trembling hands, the pounding of my heart, and the desperate fear that I was going to forget to say something.

Since then, I guess you can say I found my voice. If 10th grade Rachel could see college Rachel now, I think she’d be pretty impressed. When my English class was initially assigned the “artifact of civic engagement” speech, I didn’t cringe or immediately begin plotting fake illnesses I could use to get out of the speech. Instead, I began brainstorming ideas. I was looking forward to the challenge of public speaking in college.

Our class as a whole did a wonderful job with their speeches. Sure, there were some shaky hands, a few “uhhhs” and “ums”, but everyone made a solid case for their artifact in my eyes. I like to think that my speech held up the level of quality that everyone else produced. Through the various presentations I’ve had to complete, I’ve learned nothing will make a speech better than lots of practice. Going into this project, I thought I would practice my speech a lot more than I was actually able to. But I still had rehearsed what I was going to say many times, and I think my practice showed. I felt that I was naturally able to talk about my artifact, with only a few glances at my note cards to keep my place.

My only regret is that I was not able to make my speech shorter. I say this because in the editing process of crafting my speech, I tried. I cut out large sections of text, rearranged and condensed information, and tried to keep from elaborating as little as possible. I did shave significant time off of my speech, but I couldn’t seem to get it below about 6.5 minutes, no matter what else I rearranged and cut out. Ultimately I made sure I covered all parts of the speech that I had intended. The mystery of why I couldn’t shorten it more may never be resolved.

However, ultimately I am pleased with how I spoke, especially since it reflects my progress in public speaking from high school. As for the future, I look forward to creating the TED talks. I love TED talks, and frequently watch them for enjoyment or supplement to research. They are dynamic and fascinating, and their performance without even the crutch of note cards is thrilling to me. The TED talk will be my next stepping stone on my journey in developing my public speaking skills.

“No Uterus, No Opinion.”

This a famous quote of Rachel Green, one of the main characters of the hit sitcom Friends.

In the scene being portrayed, Rachel is with her male friends in the hospital, discussing childbirth. When her friends Joey and Ross offer their humble opinion that epidurals seem to prevent women from feeling contractions, she shoots them down with a cold glare and sassy wave of the finger. Although her antics may just be for laughs, many of the women gathered around their TVs to watch the episode’s original airing would probably agree to her point enthusiastically. In the timeless battle of the sexes, women always like to assert that men aren’t allowed to have an opinion on a range of feminine topics simply because they are not female.

What I find interesting is that many people believe is wrong for a group detached from a social/political issue to be at its helm, leading discussion and passing laws about it. That is why Rachel’s comment resonates with so many women- because they believe men don’t have the right to comment to them about childbirth. Yet if you seek out any topic for debate, whether it be illegal immigration, abortion, unemployment, etc. most often you will see only one group of Americans leading the debate. White, male politicians.

Rhetoric at its most effective form is most likely the rhetoric used in policy making. The discussions taking place on Capitol Hill are the discussions that are slowly but surely forming the latest laws, or reforming old laws. These white male politicians are people we have trusted to make those decisions for us. In the next 50 years it is they who will decide how the issue of gay marriage is handled, how we will alter our border control and immigrant policies, where our armed forces will be most effective. I believe that it is sad to know that most of those people are not gay, do not know any illegal immigrants, and haven’t served in the armed forces. They have developed their own career as one dedicated to making policy for all types of people, without experiencing anything like those people.

It’s safe to say I find that a little ridiculous.

Though we have seen an increase in the number of black and women politicians in the past several years, the demographic for politicians is still overwhelmingly one-sided. I’m not saying that fact is any great fault of their own. I just wish there were a little more diversity. In the ancient Greek city of Athens, the government system took the word Democracy literally. People from all walks of life, from poor and rich backgrounds, united under one roof to discuss their laws as they, the people, would feel the effects of. Though the Athenian government was (frustratingly) all male, they still believed they were giving fair representation. That was thousands of years ago. My question is, today are we giving fair representation? I’d say probably not.

There doesn’t seem to be an easy solution to this problem- as women gain more political standing, hopefully the issue of under representation of women will go away. In an ideal world, I would love to see group of people in Congress or the House representing a minority group, debating their issue firsthand with policy leaders. Imagine the impact of having a gay representative present to Congress why he believes he should be able to marry his partner. Rhetoric in our government system could gain such a personal, poignant, and emotional element.

When or if the day of only white elderly men leading our country will end, I am not sure. I hope within my lifetime there will be progress. But until then, remember. Don’t try to tell a pregnant woman her delivery will be easy. You may just get the Rachel finger.