Kuan

Posts Tagged ‘rhetoric’

Free Write on Carl Beam

In Uncategorized on April 5, 2010 at 11:13 pm

Questions:

How is Beam’s work acting as an act of resistance? What rhetorical strategies does he use? How do¬†you perceive my essay as an act of resistance? What is/are my main rhetorical purpose(s)? What legitimizing identitities am I working against? What community and/or project identities am I creating on the page and aligning myself with? What are the specific rhetorical strategies that I use to accomplish my own rhetorical purposes? What can you learn from reading this essay that you might employ in your own essay?

Reflections:

I think Carl Beam’s work uses writing as rhetoric on canvas to target at both native and non-native audience, which is an active act of resistance to art that merely target at either the oppressors or the oppressed. Beam’s art also resist to the linear thinking of western art. His collages with distorted images and writing create a strong voice that advocates a change of perception of the native and their art. Lastly, I think Beam’s work spurs reactions and responses from the audience, which differs from many other art pieces that merely present the artists’ state of mind.

Beam uses Eurocentric visual to challenge the Eurocentric idea of the Indians, which in a way makes me think of autoethnography. He uses images of Indians that were taken by the colonials to challenge the colonials themselves. Another strategy that Beam uses is juxtaposition. The position of the photos and painting on the canvas creates an interesting juxtaposition that challenge the linear thinking of the white. The irrational juxtaposition poses uncomfortableness among the audiences, and thus challenge their perception of art, and their understanding of the content of the art.

This essay in many ways act as a form of resistance. It resists to traditional linear way of reading. The interruption of the sentence poses challenges on readers in the process of reading, that readers may have to go back a few lines or go back and forth between the lines in order to connect the content. In this way, our notion of acquiring knowledge is challenged. Knowledge or understanding should be granted as this linear, streamline-like system, but be respected as a process of thinking back and forth what we’re learning. As scholars, we need to go back to ask “Wait, what did you just say?” more often, instead of blindly following the stream rational line.

The fact that quotations should not be viewed as secondary text also serves an act of resistance, as the “voices” of others are respected as equally as author’s own. This way, the author tries to challenge what Powell puts as “Academic as another powerful agent of imperialism” (4).

In a way, I think this article is trying to engage the viewer with itself to represent the notion of “‘active participant’ in the mizzens” (Gries, 8). I was drawn to the writing of the author and the visuals throughout the article, and I realized afterward that I was participating in this piece of writing as an active thinker and responder.

The most helpful take-away I get from this piece is to engage with the audience with whatever I produce as rhetoric. In my final seminar project, I’m interested in knowing how audience can interact with different sensational experience and thus react to my presentation. I will look into more about audience’s engagement for my project.

Advertisements

Class Leadership Project Reflection

In Uncategorized on April 1, 2010 at 2:30 am

We are learning, constantly, through an exchange of knowledge and understanding of certain subjects. As class leaders, we learn just as much, if not more, as the rest of the class. It’s fantastic.

When I approached Amanda about teaming up to do this project, I was a little nervous. I wasn’t sure if my research interests would fit hers, either was I sure I would be helpful to her ideas. But once I mentioned to her that I’d like to do something with African art, her eyes sparked and then our project unfolded: looking at African American quilting as a form of resistance.

I started searching very generic African resistance art, but the topic is too broad to be really studied in such a short period of time. I was frustrated with my research, and I turned into Amanda to see if she got some ideas. She told me that she is work with the Somali-Bantu kids on a quilt, and that fascinated me. Soon I became more and more interested in this particular genre of African resistance art. First appearing as a topic too specific to relate to other rhetorical strategies, quilting, as a form of resistance, keeps opening up to me as a world where many struggles, compromises, conflicts overlap and interact. It relates to almost everything we have talked about: slavery, definition of “writing,” resistance, autoethnography, Alzadua’s usage of language, imperialism, eurocentricism, contact zone, etc. Quilting, as a act of resistance that has long been overlooked, should be understood, respected and appreciated. Maybe choosing, researching and then presenting the topic itself is our resistance to that ignorance.

Our project in many ways relates to our course readings and discussions. The most distinguish connection to me lies in the patterns of the quilts to Eurocentricism. The patterns African American slaves made for themselves are very different from those they made for their masters. Their masters like linear, organized, floral patterns that come from linear Eurocentric thinking. By saying that Eurocentric thinking is linear, I mean the European rational thinking: if A then B–the streamline thinking or the one-point-to-the-other-point thinking. In contrast, the almost chaotic, integrated, non-linear, colorful African American patterns, which are rooted in Africa, reflect African’s circular/fractal thinking. Everything is related with everything else: individual to community, women to men, nature to human to spirit. That kind of thinking to me is like a spider web, the center is nature. The fact that European-trained slave masters despised the native African patterns, and asked the seamstresses to make quilts using their organized, detailed patterns reveals the oppression of other culture and the domination of the European thinking.

The other important relation between African American quilting and our readings and discussions is that quilting challenges our notion of “writing.” Not only writing is defined as verbal documentation in Western cultures, but also are other forms of writing denied by scholars. Quilting hasn’t been acknowledged by scholars as crucial historical evidence of resistance until 1970s because for so long, non-written information doesn’t count as scholar enough. The African oral story telling tradition was taken away by the scholarship. What is writing exactly? This blog post? The words on your T-Shirt? Books? Does music notes count as writing then? If so, then so do the stitches on African American quilts. Those stitches form patterns that symbolize their native language: the rhythm of the stitches is like music that carry a deep cultural meaning that sometimes even goes beyond written words. Furthermore, who has the authority to say whether or not written evidence is “true’? Those questions bothered us while we were doing our research, and we hoped that our presentation could make the rest of the class think about those questions and re-value “scholarship.” What we are doing as students: are we consumers of colonial system of knowledge or we are learning to resist those authorities?

With that goal in mind, I think our presentation was successful in asking those questions and relating our presentation to previous class discussions. In their responses, students hit most of the points in the answers we prepared. For example, in answering the question how is quilting a form of resistance and to what they resist, they not only mentioned the codes/symbols that embodied in the quilts as African heritages, but they brought up some points that we hadn’t prepared. Kiana said that quilting broke the silence among African American slaves, and it is quite loud itself. That point never occurred to me during my research. In comparing quilts for slaves themselves and for their masters, I think students also did a good job identifying many differences.

Yet, I would like our discussion to be a little more self-initiated by the students, not by us. During the class, I felt the urge to push the discussion sometimes. It was certainly not a bad thing, but I guess I would like the conversation to flow more naturally. For future leadership projects, we can work on improving the relationship between questions and maybe try the activity first and then unfold the questions, etc. We also prepare more than we delivered because of the time we had. I think I’d like to have the whole class period for the presentation because we’d then be able to finish off with the other topic we wanted to talk about: gender roles.

During the research, we found that many African American studies scholars such as Booker T. Washington promoted art that represented the manhood of African Americans, such as blacksmithing. Quilting, which is done by females, is excluded. Traditionally, African males create textile, but this situation changed when the slaves were brought to America, where women were supposed to do those craft jobs. Thus, women took on Eurocentric gender role of seamstress. Although the act of imposing gender roles on African American slaves was undoubtedly wrong, it might not do as much harm as the oppressors expected. Women’s taking on the job that was used to be done by men encourage a tie between women and their family in the community. Quilting didn’t separate families, but actually bond them tighter. Woman’s role in quilting also leads to the appearance of female leaders in the civil rights movement. If we have a chance to compare women’s resistance to that of men, it would be very interesting to see the results. In my opinion, the resistance of females is not as violent, yet more effective.

This leadership project reminds me to define “writing” consciously, to look at rhetoric of resistance in a much broader sense: it can be revealed through stitches, clothes, textiles and many other aspects that we normally overlook. Moreover, it made me very conscious about the scholar sources I will run ino in the future, as I will be critical about the sources of their scholarship. Is education a product of imperialism? If so, how can we fight against it? That thought is scary: I feel like I am a product of this problematic system of education, and I have no idea about what I can do. The project also helps me look at art differently. I used to view art as a form of expression, and people produce art in order to resist. However, I think quilting serves as a form of resistance first before it become a form of art itself. Then what is art? How can we define it? The slaves didn’t see quilting as form of art. They saw it more as life necessity, a job, or an escape from heavy slave work. But later on, quilting is recognized as a form of art. Is the term “art” an imperial notion? Is it only when something is not so urgent anymore that it can be entitled as “art”? Is what we defined as art perceived in the same way by those who create them (“artists”)? How are we, as viewers, responding to “art” differently than for example, food? This project keeps puzzling me with those questions, and it really made me rethink many existing information that I took in for granted. It complicated my thinking in many ways, and I really enjoyed it!

Freewrite #5 on Identities as a Rhetoric of Resistance

In Uncategorized on March 2, 2010 at 4:53 am

In Borderlands, I think Anzaluda reveals that the fundamental aspects of the formation of identities can be seen in the borderlands where two different culture meet, infuse and clash. The Texas-U.S. Southwest/Mexican border in particular has been a place where oppression of women, multiple identities conflict with integrity, struggles of native language are easily exposed.

She uses many rhetorical strategies in her writing, for example, the shift in the written language in particular and the usage of the poems or songs written by the natives. They both serve as her way of resistance because the mixture of language make her writing only partially understandable to the readers. It is a demonstration of the statement that “we have to meet in the middle” as Anzaluda proposed in the beginning of her book.

She first talks about the history of conflicts between the U.S. and Mexico, and she argues that borders create a border culture, where the unsafe meets the save, us meets them. The inhabitants living at the borders are excluded from the other side of the line; and even worse, from it’s own country too. Because of the fragile of the state of the borders, identities are constantly being challenged, killed and reborn.

Although she never directly mentions imperialism, Eurocentricism and modernity, she implies that the struggles of the people at the borders are inevitably resulted from those larger contexts. The ideology of male above female, the slavery of the native Mexicans, the struggles of the natives with their land–their home, the exploitation of the raw materials in Mexico and taking over the economic control by the U.S. that leads to tragedies during illegal border crossing…They are all wailings of Mexico.

Unlike Dussel, Anzaluda spends a lot of time looking at her own struggle with her multiple identities. By looking at her rebellion against the beliefs of her culture, she makes me understand the resistance of many. When we are talking about Eurocentricism, modernity, we cannot forget that it is not only the ideologies that we are dealing with, it is also the human beings from whom those ideologies are created and spread. She says that humans fear the supernatural, and that “Culture and religion seek to protect us from these two force.” It is the insecurity that humans feel created culture and religion, and then culture and religion are used to salvage, to oppress, to exclude.

“The queer are the mirror reflecting the heterosexual tribe’s fear: being different, being other and therefore lesser, therefore sub-human, in-human, non-human.” I even think when I was reading that if culture itself is a form of discrimination: As we classify what is or is not within our culture, we define what is excluded too. Culture may not be able to protect its own people without harming the others, or can it be?

The choice is clear, as Anzaluda says, either to be feel a victim or to feel strong and in control. So is it to feel secure within ourselves, we can resist to what oppress us?

She later on argues that language is the core to individual’s identity. “Ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity–I am my language. Until I can take pride in my language, I cannot take pride in myself.” Until one can take pride in him or herself, one can be strong and in control. “The possibilities are numerous once we decide to act and not react,” she writes.

In order to solve the problems created by modernity, Eurocentricism and imperialism, we need to move towards “a more whole perspective, one that includes rather than excludes.” We need to tolerate, and to meet in the middle. We need to acknowledge the differences of each other’s way of living. We need to create this new value system that connect us to each other and to the planet because “nothing happens in the ‘real’ world unless it first happens in the images in our heads.”

The solution is internal: we need to be less individualistic and more communistic. Because if we contribute to the greatness of the whole, each one of us will achieve more. Collectivism, or communism (without any political implication) is a more advanced individualism in the end.