Finish Strong!

Folks, do well and prosper next week! Thanks for your engagement this semester,

Officially closing down the blog,
-Prof. Graban

The Notion of Agency

As this is our last blog, I have been thinking about the critical dilemmas we explored this semester. For me it all comes down to agency, especially with the idea of representation from this last unit. Agency is complicated by every other dilemma (for example: representation, identification, agent, etc). I want to use these concepts to really understand how agency was affected by representation and diaspora in Up the Yangtze. It is time for me to really attempt being a rhetorical theorist.

The Yangtze...and what it stands for

I'm beginning to understand that representation is, basically, "...the use of one thing to stand for another through some signifying medium" (Bedford Glossary 438). In the case of Up The Yangtze, the river serves as this signifying medium--medium that is used to represent the social stratus, a factor of the tourism industry and even the economic boost of China.

Deification and Demonification: Burke, Hum, and What the Yangtze Means

From Dr. Nerdlove

Gross, right? Whether or not we think this man is a real agent, his profile shows he is operating on a paradigm that he has of Asian women and clearly missing the mark. Who would be flattered to see other women get cut down for not being the right race while being lifted up for something that they can't control?  Furthermore, he's acting like all Asian women are like this, thus preventing any dialogue by Asian women from occuring. Burke would say that this is a result of terministic screens: saying that he had gained this viewpoint through a world that had granted it to him. Sue Hum might say that this objectification is created intentionally to cast people in roles. Did the world create this gross guy or did this gross guy create the world?

Flattened Ideas and Misrepresented Concepts

       Last Summer when on a cruise in the Bahamas, my boyfriend of the time struck up conversation with out housekeeper. As selfish as it sounds at the time I wish he hadn't. She was from the Philippines and the mother of two children that she hadn't seen in five years. She took the job on the cruise line because there were no opportunities for her there. While this film was specifically about Chinese culture; it instantly make me think of that moment. On the cruise they have this obnoxious display where each staff member waves a flag of the country they are from. The ceremony takes about an hour since the nationalities of the staff is so diverse. No one really watches it. Its uncomfortable. Cringeworthy even. The pain from it comes from the fact that many of these workers have similar stories to that of our housekeeper. After speaking to more and more staff members; we sadly began to realize this was a norm. While the tourism industry presents itself to be about family; those who are making the experience meaningful are forced to be away from theres for years.

Are You Who They Think You Are?

How do you look to other people? Do you think you are fairly represented for the unique individual that you are? Or are you thrown carelessly into a mess of misconceptions based on external characteristics? Surely, no one is exactly as they seem. There will always be a part of you that is hidden from view, unobstructed by the judgments of others. But unfortunately, many look at the whole picture without taking time to appreciate the beautifully intricate details that are woven together that form who we are. So, is it our fault for not being completely forthcoming about every aspect of who we are as a person, or are we simply the victims of the never-ending battle of misrepresentation?

Representation will always be Misrepresentation

The task of trying to represent another person in any form and any medium will always fail.

The Chicken Or the Egg?

The paradox I thought of the most while reading "Terministic Screens" is the chicken-egg question. Is our reality constructed by our symbols and language? Burke claims "much that we take as observations of "reality" may be but the spinning out of possibilities implicit in our particular choice of terms" (Burke, 46). So, what does that mean about representation? As Butler points out, "representation is the normative function of a language which is said either to reveal or to distort what is assumed to be true about the category of women" (Butler, 2). For some reason, our society is obsessed with labels. It's as if you don't know who you are unless you are labeled, categorized, or represented by some sort of symbol. This blurs the line between what is real and what is represented. While Burke claims that man is attached to a verbal realism, Butler insists that "instead of self limiting linguistic gesture that grants alterity or difference to women, phallogocentricism offers a name to eclipse the feminine" (Butler, 16).

How do you present yourself?

We represent others based on looks and abilities--how they present themselves to others. You are representative of a type of person. For example, if I am a white female, 21 years old attending a University, I am representative of this dynamic, reflecting back on "my" group of people and their characteristics, so you can imagine that most people already have assumptions of such different groups based on other people they have met or seen.

Erasure, Representation, and Class in Up the Yangtze

“Up The Yangtze” offers stark documentation of tough times and new hurdles for families in ‘modernizing’ China during the construction of the famed Three Gorges Dam. Focusing on those displaced by the mega-hydroelectric dam that will eventually destroy their homes, farms, and arguably, culture, the film follows the lives of the relocated and their children, putting a face to the displaced Chinese locals that have long inhabited the riverside, as well as the economic futures of their children.

Up the Yangtze

I liked when we were discussing Up the Yangtze in class the other day and we arrived at the concept of privilege.  We spoke earlier in the year about understanding the world around us through metaphors, in terms of other things we can relate or identify with.  I believe that privilege functions as a barrier to identification or understanding between different groups created by class.

Unbiased Representation?

     After reading George's article on Helen Keller and Burke, and after watching the film Up The Yangtze, I realized that there will always be a bias when something, or someone, is being represented. It is inevitable. It cannot be helped. So then what representations should we believe? Which should we discard or investigate further? 

Representation and Up The Yangtze

I have to admit, at first I was a bit skeptical about Yung Chang's documentary Up The Yangtze only because I had no idea how on earth he could make this subject matter interesting to any spectator. However, after work on Monday night I came home and watched it in its entirety and was completely blown away not only by the Three Gorges Dam that is portrayed in the beginning, but with the story of Cindy and Jerry.
The main idea I got from watching this documentary that ties perfectly with what we discussed in class is the idea of representation. The way in which Yung Chang represents each of the protagonists in the film is different and that is so the viewers can get a better idea of what it's like for people working on this cruise ship on two completely different spectrums. On the one hand, Cindy is a young girl who unfortunately had to leave her home to have to work on the cruise ship in order to make money for her family. For Jerry on the other hand he willingly goes on the cruise ship simply for more money in his pocket.
This is one aspect of the film which I enjoyed the most. Depicting these two completely different lifestyles is in fact important, not only to the storyline of the film itself, but for us as the viewer to get a better insight into the main point the director is trying to come across. Having this job is a necessity to everyone in this country, regardless of the reason their working there in the first place.

Up the Yangtze

I’m continuously fascinated by the texts that we are assigned to read for each unit. It’s interesting for me to see how these texts can be related to our unit in ways that don’t seem obvious on the surface. It shows me how much rhetorical theory is used around us. It’s in everything; every film, book, speech and piece of art is saturated in rhetoric.

The Terministic Screen "Women" and the Problem with Representation

Though I've compared Burke's overarching philosophies to Butler's,  his terministic screens seem to parallel with her theories more than his others. Butler is concerned with the construction of gender. She asserts that feminist theory assumes this category of identification of "women," a terministic screen that "either reveals or distorts what is said to be true about the category of women" (Butler, 2). Here we will observe how Burke's problem with representation - his idea that our symbol systems create our reality, construct the subject, and fundamentally direct the attention to something specific rather than the whole - how his ideas present a direct parallel to what Butler is saying about women in a gendered world, and what kind of problems this presents for representation.

Chang and Ong's Audiences

As Chang is of Chinese heritage but a Canadian citizen, relevant intertextuality can be considered. Chang mentions his Grandfather, thus establishing his family history as one text. The less historical and more recent China shown in the film is another text, which is juxtaposed with the former; old vs. new China. Within the film, a metaphor is used to explain China’s socialist intentions but capitalist realities, this is another dichotomous juxtaposition. Consider also the varying audiences; representation of one’s personal culture within the film might also be a text. The film has been translated into many languages, and a few nationalities are shown and discussed on the boat.

As an audience, we were invoked (Ong) to play the role of tourist, as exemplified by the tourists on the boat. But we are also another audience, one that is specifically addressed when Chang includes voice overs. At the same time, Chang might be invoking us to not be exactly like the tourists, to have a greater awareness of the complexity of the identities of those involved.

The (Mis)Representation of China

The film Up the Yangtze attempts to show representation for the culture and country of China. In an attempt to show how tourism, development and upgrades are benefiting the country as a whole and the people within it, the film also contradicts itself when it shows how these developments can also negatively affect the people of China.

Our Greatest Therapy

It is the dawning of the Millennial’s and the old heads couldn’t be more terrified. 

Up The Yangtze and Imperfect Representation

From a purely architectural standpoint, the Three Gorges Dam is an impressive feat of human engineering. The dam spans almost 8,000 feet in length and has a height of about 600 feet. In terms of capacity, the Three Gorges Dam is the largest hydroelectric power station in the world. If the above facts were all you knew about the Three Gorges Dam, you might be inclined to agree with the Chinese Government that the Dam is a triumph. However, if you watched the documentary Up The Yangtze, you might reconsider. The human cost of the Three Gorges Dam is startling: almost 1.3 million people were forced to relocate as construction of the dam led to rising water levels.

The Yangtze Jux

The juxtaposition in Up the Yangtze is very evident in many places in the film as discussed on Tuesday. People, places, lifestyles, images; everything is juxtaposed at one point or another. But this juxtaposition is done for one reason: perspective. 

When we want to look at a movie in a certain way, we have a preferable way to look at it. For instance, some people may want to look at the film through the young girl's eyes. This would show that they are sympathetic to her situation and want to share in her struggle.

Other people may want to see the film from the 19 year old boy's perspective. He is much more easy to identify with for us. He comes from a family that is well off. He can go to a school to get an education like we do currently. His choice to work is his own, which I have done before.

Perspective is everything. It affects our stance on different pieces of history or media. If we all had the same perspective, there would be nothing to unpack about anything. We need these perspectives to articulate different situations for different people.

The Representation Factor

Analogies were always one of my strong suits in elementary school, so here’s one for you. Helen’s language barrier is to Cindy’s past and lower class status. They are factors of disadvantage that held them back in ways others could not fathom. It is true that these two eventually prove wrong those who judged and pitied them at first, but there were countless struggles before Keller was able to recreate her technique for language and before Cindy became accustomed to working in a place where she knew no one and was forced to accept, even glorify, a new culture.

Is Representation Doomed from the Start?

Perhaps all representation is doomed to fail. It is a troubling idea, but seems possible, and even inevitable. Perhaps the hegemonic underpinnings of representations in their most basic form, language, prevent us from ever truly achieving objectivity in representation. That seems to be the aim of representation, after all. Accurate representation is objective truth. But perhaps this is unachievable. If this is all true, how are we to function in such a world?

Is representation ever truly possible?

Yung Chang's Up the Yangtze documents the changing dynamic of communities that are to be affected by the renovation of the Three Gorges Dam. He depicts the issue through the lives of Cindy and Jerry who work on a Western styled cruise ship that travels up the Yangtze to the dam. This documentary presents some issues with representation. It makes me question who is being represented in the film, who is being represented by China, and the choices Chang makes in representing this issue as a whole.

Up the Yangtze, Through the Screen

What is made so clear about Up the Yangtze is the clear class distinction there is in China and what the Western perception is of China. For a technologically advanced and green project with the hydroelectric dam, China has its fair number of people who are poverty-stricken. In the film, there is a true representation of the poverty-stricken.

Helen Keller and Up The Yangtze

From looking at the film Up The Yangtze, I realized that I could not have been able to be in that situation and survive happily. It seemed like it was a very sad situation to be a part of. For instance, being forced to move out of my house because of a flood is fine. However, not knowing where I'm going to go next is another problem because if there is a flood happening my family and I would still need a place to stay that is safe. Putting myself in that situation there is no way I could have done that and not raised holy hell or argue for someone to find my family a safe place since we were being kicked out.  This all goes back to how these people were raised. It's not as if they were raised in America and then had to live an extremely rough life style from here on out. There was no adaptation; she was born into that life style therefore she does not know what it feels like to be treated a better way versus a wrong way. This is honestly the only way to be treated for her . 

I feel as if I can connect more to the 19 year old boy because he is at least trying to make a living out of something. Granted he comes from a prosperous and wealthy family  he is still trying to make something out of himself as opposed to just living off his family. I am more so that type of person because even though I know that my family will give me want I want I still feel the need to become independent and at least try to get my own. Realizing this is a nineteen year old boy  I wonder if I was in his position being a girl would it be looked as "wrong". I know in many parts of the world it is still looked at as an irregular thing to have women act independent as if they don't need the man. It is almost as if women must do what is expected of them and nothing else; going over and beyond and achieving goals that women aren't supposed to is not even congratulated. I don't mean to come off as a feminist but just imagine or even think about Up The Yangtze for a good example. Coincidentally the girl is the one who is kicked out of a home along with her family and the boy is making a living  while he has a prosperous family who is willing to give him money. I honestly feel as if the girl was to switch places with the boy she wouldn't be as successful as him in singing or porting. Not because she is incapable of doing these two thing but because not many people would be in favor of her doing so.

This also ties in with Helen Keller as we talked about her last week. Many people just knew right off the back that she wasn't able to live life the same for two reasons. One of them being because she lost her sight and hearing and the other reason is because she is a woman. Most men already feel as if women are weak because we are not physically stronger than men ,which may be true; however I feel as if Helen Keller proved everyone wrong. Although she did have to be taught different ways to communicate with others, once she learned how to do so she progressed and lived her life to the best of her ability. She did not dwell on the fact that she was different from others, she moved forward as she should, nothing was going to change. All in all this proved to me that women most certainly are  stronger than men in all ways. I am awaiting the day that men and women are put on the same spectrum in all aspects of life. 

Diaspora Up the Yangtze

Up the Yangtze is a documentary directed by Chinese- Canadian director Yung Chang. The film was inspired after he went on a Yangtze farewell cruise with his family in 2002. He wanted to capture the effect that the Three Gorges Damn has had on the nearby residents of the Yangtze River. Many families have been forced to move due to the flood that the development of the dam has caused around the area. A lot of these families were also forced to give into the cruise ship industry due to the financial situations that most of them were in due to moving and losing their jobs.

I think if I had to choose one of the concepts that we have discussed in our class this semester that depicts the situation going on in the film, it would be diaspora. Diaspora is the displacement of a group of people from a certain geographical area. Originally, the term was used to refer to Jews and their dispersion outside their homeland. In this case, of the movie, it is referring to Chinese diaspora. Historically, diaspora has been known to cause the mass dispersion of a population in an involuntary manner. So many of the times people were forced to move against their own will due to the rules of their government or because of a natural occurrence.

Some instances of diaspora in history include the expulsion of the Jews from Israel, the exile of the Messenians from Sparta, the transportation of enslaved Africans to the New World for the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, the movement of southern Chinese during the coolie trade and so forth. In Up the Yangtze, the Chinese residents of the Yangtze River were put in a difficult situation were forced to involuntarily move. The country’s selfish development of the dam puts many families in an uncomfortable situation in which they have to leave behind their homeland and oftentimes their loved ones if they are called to the workforce, which is what happens in the movie.

The Speech of the Blind

Both George and Butler’s texts, dealing with the issues of representation and misrepresentation, provide insight into how exactly hegemony and alterity interfere with, or rather shape, experience, and by examining such normative claims inherent within these constructions, one can attempt to transcend their existing order.

(Re)presentation and (Dis)Identification

An idea that was brought up last class that really stuck out to me was the idea that in order to represent someone, we must "other" them. It reminded me of Burke's idea of identification, but applied it to the issue of representation. According to Burke, identification occurs when a person is persuaded to see themselves as like or similar to another person or object. There must be an opposite outcome to this theory as well where, in the process of identifying with one person or thing, a person dis-identifies with someone, something, or some group. The process of identification, and thus di-sidentiication, can be directly observed in Up the Yangtze.

Up the Yangtze

The biggest issues surrounding Up the Yangtze are the ideas of identification and (mis)representation. In exploring the hydroelectric dam as a contested Chinese symbol of their "economic success", it is difficult to see this symbol as only a means of success as a viewer of the exploited characters in this film.

Up The Yangtze: Alterity + Privilege + Representation

Up the Yangtze is a documentary that attempts to unpack the concept of privilege and representation. The director, Yung Chang, establishes dualities of juxtaposition that are meant to bring our attention to such concepts. The film also brings to light how privilege and alterity function in the complication of representation.

Up the Yangtze and the LCD

In my first critical discussion, I criticized Campbell’s article about agency and explored the relationship between the term and power. I ultimately concluded that Campbell’s article did a tremendous job of characterizing agency but did little more than describe what we already knew. It seems that agents must have a reason for engaging in agency, and I propose that is to gain power. From Burke, agency is loosely defined as the ability to influence or sway an audience. Power is actually exerting that influence successfully. I see a relationship in which actors utilize agency for some sort of social gain, associated with Burke’s studies in symbolic action. After writing my first critical discussion I thought I had somewhat of a mental grasp on agency and its relation to power but my world came crashing down when I started writing critical discussion two.

Politeness Shaping Representation in "Up the Yangtze"

Representation in Up the Yangtze:

Politeness and social norms

Yung Chang presents everything in his movie through complex and bold juxtapositions. This is especially true for the contrasts between Western and Eastern societies.  Chang uses the small river cruise ship as a microcosm for, well, the world. Westerners are presented as naïve, deep-pocketed, and inappropriately jolly people while the Chinese, in comparison, are poor, dedicated workers who bend over backwards to make sure that the passengers have a good time. The Chinese people on the boat are constantly in a state of pretend, putting on an act to keep hidden from tourists the true reality of their lifestyles and the state of China’s  people.

This act made me think of not only how the East tries to present itself to the West but how everyone represents themselves in the West. Politeness and social structures play a huge role in interaction and communication. We all take these things into consideration when we approach and interact with others, and usually it is an unconscious habit.

Up the Yangtze

  After viewing this documentary, I realized there are still so many things wrong in the world today. This documentary was about China's economy changing due to the Three Gorges Dam. To the government, the dam acts as a symbol to how their country is growing and developing, to the people who live there, it acts as a barrier to them living their normal lives.
  The characters in this film are struggling and there is not much they can do about it. These people are struggling with its new consumer capitalism. Throughout the film we get to see how this change affects millions of other people. The film does an excellent job at giving the audience an insight into these people's lives and really made the film more emotional to the viewers. Not many of these families decision, were truly in their control. They did not have much say in where they could afford to live or what to do in these situations.
  Another thing I realized during this documentary was the issue of identification. I felt as if these people weren't able to identify with their true roots. The manager on the ship, for example, was trying to make these people something they weren't and I think this confused many of the natives that just wanted to be themselves. These poor people had to be, and live, and work as different people then being able to enjoy themselves at times. Self- identification seemed to be a big issue throughout this film. Also, I think that post colonialism was shown throughout this film as well as diaspora. People were being displaced and uprooted.
  This film was able to shine a new light on how I live my life and how thankful I should be for the country that I live in. I really do feel bad for the way that these people had to live their life and had to be ordered around just because the country wanted to "make things better". The people who run these projects and these countries do not care about the lives of others, only themselves.  

Identifying With The Yangtze

While watching the movie Up The Yangtze, I noticed that many of the characters a a struggle with their identification. Some were based on being accepted to a friend and work group. And the other was based identifying with a country, or how this specific person labeled himself or herself. The reason I bring identification into light is because I have a second-hand experience, of what its like to be accepted or feeling like you belong. My sister, Mei, was adopted when I was 5 and she was around 18 months. Also from China, like the some of the main character, she grew up in an extremely poor orphanage outside of Hong Kong.

Up The Yangtze

I have never been on a cruise before, but I've met people who have been and told me of their fun experiences while on the ship, how there are many people from other parts of the country or world and that it's sometimes difficult to communicate with other passengers depending on where they are from as well as where you are headed. But, in the film, Up the Yangtze we are introduced to a teenage girl whose family is poor and are struggling to keep their home because of a flood that takes place as a new damn is being built within the area. However, although there were some interesting aspects to analyze, I noticed some things that stood out to me, that made me feel frustrated.

West of the Yangtze

     Yung Chang's documentary film Up the Yangtze offers a stark look into the lives of many people who live and work on China's most important river. Though often overlooked, rivers are still an incredible resource for sustaining human life, as they provide an efficient means of transport, food, and an infinite and completely green energy source. Much like the Mississippi River to Americans, the Yangtze river represents a way of life and is a cultural staple, and is often represented in a manner that is nearly gone from today's world.

   The Mississippi River is nearly ubiquitous in the culture of the American south. I grew up in the Florida panhandle, which is still a good four hour drive from it and still I could find it mentioned in so many places. The word itself was fun to spell, and I remember singing the little nursery rhyme song with many of my friends. The river exists in the legends of Tom Sawyer and the ever-present happenings of William Faulkner's novels. As a child I began to think of the river almost as a legend; not in the sense of it being fantastic, but it had just become so much larger than life. Having been to New Orleans, Baton Rouge, and other cities on its banks, I can say that it definitely lives up to this status. There is something about it that draws your eye to it and it seems to give off this aura of importance that you can not help but be impressed. 

   This is what I saw while watching the film. Cindy's family has lived near the river for years, and they see it as a way to help them out of their financial troubles through Cindy's job on the cruise ship. The fertile soil from its banks help to grow the vegetables they eat. This is just the perspective of one family, though. Throughout the film, we get to see how the Yangtze impacts and astonishes countless other people. The tourists on the ship are experiencing the river from a vacation standpoint, so they are having a great time exploring where the river takes them. The workers on the ship know that the river and the ship will bring them money they can then use to better their lives. The citizens of the country know that the river can bring them a useful energy source to improve their lives. And yet, when the Three Gorges Dam is shown, it is viewed as a triumph. Why? Even Cindy's father, who does not truly understand why the river was dammed, makes a comment that he is surprised the government succeeded in constructing the dam. The Yangtze, much like the Mississippi, is truly larger than life.

   The film did a fantastic job of showing how representation plays a key role in our perception of people and cultures that we are familiar with. When comparing these two rivers, the way they are each viewed by their culture is represented by the rich way of life that has been built up around them.

"Do What You Have To Do" : Marlee Matlin, the Modern Day Helen Keller

“But I always sign in my books that courage + dreams = success. And I think it's an equation that should be taught in every single institution of learning.”

–Marlee Matlin

Cruising and Representation

            While watching the film, Up the Yangtze this past week, I encountered many personal mixed feelings and made many connections to things in and around my life.  During the summer of 2012, I went on an Alaskan cruise with my family. Similar to the film, the cruise goers were primarily white, older and western - minus my Hispanic family and a few others - and we were all taking a voyage to see something that was slowly disappearing: glaciers and nature. I’m not entirely sure what the personal expectations were of many people on that cruise; however, I know I didn’t really have any expectations. I knew Alaska was supposed to be beautiful and that we might encounter some whales, but I really didn’t expect to experience “raw” “authentic” “natural” America.  But saying those things after having seen the film this week makes me severely uncomfortable. I never felt like I was exploiting the land as much as I was exploiting the small towns we visited. And maybe some would argue that we aren’t exploiting as much as providing tourism and boosting economies for otherwise lower income communities with deep rooted Native American ancestry and tradition. However, those communities are suffering or struggling or exploiting themselves for tourism because they have exhausted other options. Like Cindy’s family in the film, only so many of their decisions were truly in their control and due to the hegemonic upper /middle class systems that are in place.

Did Helen Keller Practice Agency?

We’ve all heard of the infamous blind and deaf woman, Helen Keller, throughout our time in elementary school. But we are now observing her achievements through a more intricate lens. I’ve recently discovered through George’s text that Keller was indeed an active rhetorical theorist, despite her gender and medical setbacks. We’ve already explored the feminist role of rhetoric through theorists such as Campbell and Heilbrun earlier in the semester. While they essentially question the role of women as agents in society, I think George’s text, “Mr. Burke, Meet Helen Keller” and also Butler’s text, “Gender Trouble,” bring this argument even further into perspective. They both continue to question both agency and power of women writers in society.

Burke and Helen Keller's Construction of Radical Change

      From Ann George's  Mr. Burke, Meet Helen Keller an audience  perceives a correlation between Helen Keller and Burkean ideology. Instead of focusing on the pure miracle of Helen Keller, Ann George states "I want Burke to meet one whom surprisingly few have met-the radical Keller, a feminist, early advocate of birth control, and lifelong socialist who supported leftwing political candidates, marched in socialist parades, and cheered on strikers" (George 340). For purposes of this blog post I want to briefly analyze the similarities between Burkes' and Helen Kellers' philosophy and then discuss the challenges Helen Keller faced as a rhetorician. 

Living in Diaspora

Up the Yangtze is a documentary about the building of the three gorges damn and the impact it had on the people of China. Many of these people were forced to relocate their homes due to the building of the damn on the Yangtze River. The film focuses on these people transitioning from a rural farming economy to a consumer capitalist area. Initially I did not see the connection between this film and some of the things we discussed in class, however after our discussion on juxtaposition I was able to form some connections.

Rivers of Diaspora and Hegemony

Up the Yangtze is a documentary that focuses on the people affected by the building of the Three Gorges Dam in the Yangtze River within China. These individuals find themselves on a boat traveling through river and exchanging their own cultural experiences. The major theme of consumer capitalism arises when individuals must adjust to accommodate the norms set by New China, which has primarily western influences. In order to understand the movie on a greater scale, I have decided to further unpack the terms: diaspora and hegemony. I plan on using these terms to better relate to theme of consumer capitalism found within the movie.

"That Poor Chinese Girl"

I, myself, have unfortunately never been on a cruise. No matter how many times I beg, I am told no. No matter how many times I try to find a good price and time to go, it doesn't work out for the accompanying "cruiser." With that being said, I was unaware of the implications that went along with cruises, such as the one we viewed in the film Up the Yangtze.

Race Up the Yangtze

Up the Yangtze is a masterfully done documentary about the three gorges dam and its affect on the people of China. The director, Yung Chang, brings up issues of race and creatively analyzes how it is represented through the overarching example of the employees and guests on the luxury cruise ship. As I watched the documentary, I started to put the film’s issues into conversation with Henry Louis Gates Jr.’s, “Writing ‘Race’ and the Difference It Makes,” in order to better understand one of the film’s many underlying messages.

Burke’s Terministic Screens & Up In The Yangtze

At first glace, one would not think there to be any sort of relationship between Up In The Yangtze and Kenneth Burke’s Terministic Screens. But because of this documentary’s themes, which involve many juxtapositions, the two have many correlations in relation to the concept of identity as well as alterity and hegemony, which we have recently discussing during lectures.

Audience Construction is to Plot as Terministic Screen is to Experience

While I was watching Up the Yangtze, a few of the terms we have discussed in class came to mind and were apparent. If I am being completely honest, a lot of the terms we unpacked this semester were challenging for me in terms of applying them to literature because the readings just attempted to explain rather than show true application. While I was watching this film, I actually found myself applying some of the terms to the movie. I know that some of the others from class who have blogged so far mentioned audience construction, hegemony, alterity, identification and diaspora, but I also kind of had an epiphany about terministic screens and audience construction, which I think these other terms kind of influenced the clarity of. In short, I think that my definition of what "audience construction'" and "terministic screens" are was solidified through my viewing of Up the Yangtze. 

Living in Rhetorical Diaspora

I must admit, when I first finished watching Up the Yangtze, I couldn’t figure out how we were going to connect it to the theorists we’ve been reading in class. I could see some of the terms we’d discussed in action, but I was confused as to how the film was going to deepen our discussion. After Tuesday’s class, however, I was struck by the juxtapositions we discussed, and I realized that some our discussion of those terms in class over the past couple of weeks may have been a little flattening when it comes to those terms. Diaspora, for example, refers to people who are living outside of their traditional homeland. But is that all it entails? Is there any other definition, other than the geographical one? I would argue that there is. In Up the Yangtze, we see—several times—evidence of a rhetorical diaspora. That is, a group of people separated not from their traditional homeland, but from their traditional rhetoric.

Up the Yangtze Without a Paddle

The film Up The Yangtze provides juxtapositions of feelings, actions, belief, and character, paralleling between what is often being said and expressed with what is being physically shown or presented. This is not an incidental way of framing the narrative. Director Yung Chang actively chooses to create frames of narrative that work to present the audience with more than just what is being expressed. Instead, he encourages his viewer to think critically and unpack information that is encoded into the everyday lives of those being filmed. Many of these moments in the film focus on race and class. So where does Chang begin to frame his own audience in the film? Some of the ideals unpacked in Henry Louis Gates Jr.’s, “Writing ‘Race’ and What Difference Does it Make,” will help explain how these methods of framing both character in the film and audience perception are directly tied to racial biases and Chang’s ability to play into the work that he is analyzing.

Up the River of Alterity, Diaspora, and Hegemony

Up the Yangtze is a film about the people of China who are being affected and forced to relocate their homes due to the building of the Three Gorges Dam across the Yangtze River. This film talks about how parts of China are now transitioning from a peasant based economy where most of the people farm for a living and how its expansion of rural areas and falling of tradition is rapidly affecting many of the locals and their families. While watching this film I started to think about the terms we have learned about in this unit and found many instances in the movie where these three concepts are depicted: Alterity, Diaspora, and Hegemony. 

Ong and Burke's Relation to Chung

The film we watched this week, Up the Yangtze, was one filled with many juxtapositions, as we discussed in class yesterday. Moreover, Up the Yangtze highlights many of the key terms that we have covered and unpacked in our quiz and in class, such as identification, and even post-colonialism, which I will dive more into later in this post. But Up the Yangtze is more than just a real-life tale about the negative side effects that are a cause due to the river’s rising level; it relates to and can stimulate discussion with some of our other rhetoricians and authors of texts that we’ve read throughout the semester probably more than we, and I, initially thought.

The Internet and Benjamin's "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction"

I’m regressing back to our discussion on representation and re-presentation in this blog post. After reading Benjamin’s “Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” I considered how digital reproduction has also changed our idea of art and its introduction to the Internet. What does this mean for the concepts of authenticity, authority, and agency? What does this mean for representation of things?

Concerning mechanical reproduction, the authenticity of a mechanically reproduced piece of art is diminished because it loses the history attached to the original piece of art. As Benjamin says, “The authenticity of a thing is the essence of all that is transmissible from its beginning, ranging from its substantive duration to its testimony to the history which it has experienced” (1235). But, the concept of authenticity is completely abolished when a piece of art becomes a digital image. Authenticity seems to apply primarily, if not exclusively, to physical objects. So, because of this, the digital image merely becomes an image of the art, detached from any physical historical context.

So, since authenticity is lost when art becomes a digital image, does it ultimately lose its authority as well? Benjamin says, “What is really jeopardized when the historical testimony is affected is the authority of the object” (1235). The key word in this quote is “object”. Art, as a physical object, holds a certain authority because of place embedded in history and tradition. But, when separated from its physical form it is just an image. But, this doesn’t mean that the image doesn’t have a kind of authority or agency. Instead, our focus shifts from the entire agency of a physical object to the agency of a certain image. The authority may lie within its meaning, interpretation, and historical context. But, its physical form no longer provides authority.

The detachment of the art from its physical form allows us to examine and criticize it in a new way. It is indeed more about politics as a digital image than it is about ritual. Art becomes a cultural statement for to interpret freely. And the possibility of critiquing art becomes open to almost everyone. Benjamin says, “the adjustment of reality to the masses and of the masses to reality is a process of unlimited scope, as much for thinking as for perception” (1236). New technologies release subjects from their physical forms and make them accessible to the masses. When Benjamin says “perception”, I believe he means the perception that art belongs in a physical form that few can access and interpret. The shift in perception occurred when technology allowed art to be materially reproduced, and then computers and the Internet allows art to be digitized.

By releasing art from authority that rested in its physical form, maybe it is removing unnecessary distractions from interpreting the actual image. Digitizing images gives the art a new kind of authority and agency, one that belongs to every human being.

Why Should I Have the Right to Speak?

I am twenty-one year old female college student. So why should I have the right to speak? Why should I have the right to proclaim my opinions and ideas? In what way does my identity give me the justification to have a say in the world? These are just a few of the questions that arise when considering whether or not our unique identities gives us the capacity to make claims about the world we live in.

Beyond miracle work: Difference and strategy in Helen Keller and Kenneth Burke

Both Kenneth Burke and Helen Keller may feel sentimental about the Wobblies, but according to Ann George, in “Mr. Burke, Meet Helen Keller,” the two differently-abled theorists share more in common as rhetorical theorists than mere leftist ideology and the “desire to encourage radical social and political change,” though such a desire is greatly emphasized in each of their writings.

Identification

The strength and weakness of identification is its ability to group. Identifying with people can be a great thing that fosters belonging and understanding. Identifying does not just happen though; it is a conscious choice, which means that while identification is taking place so is the reverse.

Keller / Burke / Butler

Mr. Burke, Meet Helen Keller immediately got me thinking about how language is viewed as social action. As we’ve learned throughout our time as EWM students, Burke deeply studies and theorized how we use language. He has referred to humans as “symbol using animals,” butting much emphasis on the fact that we communicate through symbolic sounds. However, in this text from Argument Reason and Rhetorical Theory, he, and his epistemology, is being compared to Helen Keller, who was mute, deaf and blind.

Gender & Racial Trouble

Within Judith Butler’s Gender Trouble, she attempts to disrupt gender as a means of identity. She argues that politics complicate this identification further by acting as a facet. Politics are a result of cultural imposition, and is used to signify gender. Furthermore, politics confuse Butler’s gender when split into various categories, such as ethnicity, sexuality and class. Similar to Butler, Louis Gates Jr. critiques the effects of politics and ethnicity through displays of biological and social oppression. Butler and Gates discuss the significance of politics in disrupting gender and racial identity.

Hermione Granger is a Feminist Too!

After reading Judith Butler's Gender Trouble I immediately thought of Emma Watson. If you're a Harry Potter freak like me, you'll know her as the one and only Hermione Granger. These past couple of years Emma has been speaking out on what it is to be a feminist, and how important it is to have equality. On September 20th 2014, Emma delivered an inspiring speech about feminism at the United Nations Headquarters. She discusses the ideas on how she wishes for not just women but for men to join the fight in gender inequality. Her "HeForShe" initiative aims for men and boys to help to pledge to join the feminist fight. Emma makes the very important point that in order for gender equality to be achieved, harmful and destructive stereotypes of and expectations for masculinity have got to change. Above is the entire speech, which I hope everyone who hasn't seen would take a look at. It's worth every minute!

What might this have to do with Butler's idea of feminist theory? I think just about everything. In her first chapter Butler discusses the controversial terms politics and representation. "On the one hand, representation serves as the operative term within a political process that seeks to extend visibility and legitimacy to women as political subjects; on the other hand representation is the normative function of language which is said either to reveal or to distort what is assumed to be true about the category of women" (2). This statement that Butler makes perfectly exemplifies Emma's speech at the UN. She discusses that feminism, by definition is the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. It is the theory of political, economical and social equality of the sexes.

Butler discusses the ideas of differentiating "man" and "woman" with the terms "sex" and "gender" and how in reality there is more that is connected between those two latter terms. She continues by stating, "this radical splitting of the gendered subjects poses yet another set of problems. Can we refer to  a "given" sex or a "given" gender without first inquiring into how sex and/or gender is given, through what means?" (9). How does one even identify what "sex" is? Butler asks if it is either natural, anatomical, chromosomal, or hormonal? Therefore, "gender ought not to be conceived merely as the cultural inscription of meaning on pregiven sex" (9).

During her speech, Emma Watson explains this idea perfectly by referencing back to a speech by Hillary Clinton in Beijing and how less than thirty percent of the audience was male. She continues and asks how one is supposed to expect change when only half the world is invited? And finally says:

"Men, I would like to take this opportunity to extend your formal invitation. Gender equality is your issue, too. Because to date, I’ve seen my father’s role as a parent being valued less by society, despite my need of his presence as a child, as much as my mother’s. I’ve seen young men suffering from mental illness, unable to ask for help for fear it would make them less of a man. In fact, in the UK, suicide is the biggest killer of men between 20 to 49, eclipsing road accidents, cancer and coronary heart disease. I’ve seen men made fragile and insecure by a distorted sense of what constitutes male success. Men don’t have the benefits of equality, either."

Overall I think her speech is a perfect example of how everyone should be willing to help in the fight against this inequality. No matter what "gender" because, in truth, what difference does it make if you are a man or a woman. Differentiating people by their bodies should not even be the case. Everyone deserves to be treated equally, and every little bit of help counts. 


- Kayla Gonzalez 

Mr. Burke meets Ms. Keller

The beginning of Mr. Burke, Meet Helen Keller gives us a good point. The extent of my knowledge of Helen Keller is the idea instilled upon me primarily from the pop culture - she was an inspiring blind (and deaf?) woman. It was a completely different perspective to suddenly see Helen Keller from a rhetorical standpoint and what she did as a radical feminist. I suppose the blind aspect is more compelling than the woman aspect of her story.

The Issue of Experience

In Mr. Burke, Meet Helen Keller, Ann George discusses the criticisms that Helen Keller faced when she wrote about experiences people viewed as outside her realm of understanding. They assumed that Keller could not have true knowledge of things such as poverty and war, and expressed complaints when she wrote of visual or aural experiences. These criticisms brought a question to my attention: is first-hand experience vital to our understanding of the world?

Rhetorical Soulmates

It seems strange to me that most of my peers (myself included) learned about Helen Keller in elementary and/or middle school, but all that was taught to us about her was in regards to her disabilities. We learned that she was blind and deaf and bravely learned how to read and write. But that was it. Throughout those school years we were taught how much of a prominent figure Helen Keller was by being able to overcome her disabilities. But now I know there's so much more that she did. She wasn't this important figure solely because she learned to read and write. Helen Keller was a blind and deaf feminist and rhetorical theorists. Saying that now I realize that those aren't exactly terms that elementary/middle school kids are familiar with, so I kind of understand why we only learned the basics, but it's important for everyone to know just how intelligent she was and what she did for society.

Interestingly enough, it seems that Burke has found his rhetorical soulmate. As pointed out by George in "Mr. Burke, Meet Helen Keller," Keller, as more than just the miracle girl, "matches him [Burke] rhetorical move for rhetorical move" (George, 344). As a political activist and radical theorist, it shouldn't come as a surprise to hear that her discourse is strategically planned. Following the same method, both Burke and Keller would push for a leftist agenda by identifying with their audience and following these three strategies: boring from within, translation, and perspective by incongruity.

At first, when I said that Burke has found his rhetorical soulmate, I was going to say he found the female version of himself in terms of rhetoric, but nor after reading Butler's "Gender Trouble." It's clear to me that we can't ever reach equality until we stop using anatomical characteristics to identify someone. We're at the point where not even the obvious is so obvious. In other words, just because someone might have breasts doesn't mean they're female. With the emergence of transgender and merely just your choice of how you want to be, it's become more difficult to categorize. That goes the same for not only gender but for race as well. Once we stop using the words 'male,' 'female,' 'white,' 'black,' etc., then we can start to reach a degree of equality.  

What is Feminism?

I think that Feminism is a very popular topic in our present day society. Feminist Criticism is something that is highly debated by people all over. I feel like especially recently this topic has been at an all time high of popularity. Everyone has their own opinions about it, but for the most part, women are feeling subjected by men and thinking that they should have their own voice when it comes to their bodies and themselves. While there are many topics and sides to debate regarding feminism, let’s take a look at some of our theorists.

Helen Keller and Authenticity

Of course I learned about Helen Keller at a young age; the trials she faced being both blind and deaf, and they way she overcame them through her teacher, Anne Sullivan Macy. I must honestly report that I never knew she was such a left-wing political advocate or a writer. Last class, when discussing how much of our histories are visual rituals and/or habits, the question was raised of whether authenticity is outside of the technical. On Tuesday, I believed that it was possible for something to be authentic without all of the specifics included. Now, after reading George's article on Keller and Burke and pairing that with "Rome Reborn", I have to say no, it is not possible. The technical must be included to see the authenticity of a subject.

Disability Speaks, But No One Is Listening: Keller, Burke, and the Autism Speaks Campaign

Autism Every Day is a short documentary by the group Autism Speaks that helps to communicate to neurotypical people what it's like to have a child with autism. It shows parents in various stages of distress and depicts various children stimming, screaming, and scratching in the depths of their disability. Autism Speaks is known for their charity fundraisers, walks, and selling of puzzle piece jewelry to raise money for finding a cure for autism, however, this organization tends to draw a lot of criticism. People have held issue with Autism Speak's goal of finding a cure for autism, and they have threatened to sue autistic children in the past. The video above has received criticism for seemingly displaying the troubles that the parents go through instead of the experiences of the children. This closely relates to Judith Butler's Gender Troubles and Ann George's Mr. Burke, Meet Helen Keller in how they display how disability is appropriated by able bodied and able minded people.

Comparing Butler's Argument to Gates, Jr.'s and What Words Are At Stake

As I read Judith Butler’s “Gender Trouble” I couldn’t help but compare it to Henry Gates, Jr.’s “Writing ‘Race’”. At the center of both Butler’s and Gates’ respective discussions is the argument that modern discourse and language inhibits full understanding and equality. Butler focuses on how generalized terms like “gender”, “sex”, or “woman” create boundaries of discourse and analysis because they presume that those terms encapsulate a group defined by one feature or idea. Gates says that the language we speak in is dominated by our Western traditions that have inherent ideas of race, reasoning, and humanity attached to them. For Gates, the word “race” became a word of classification overarching a larger group, much what like what Butler says has happened to the word “woman” or “gender”.

Both theorists are arguing against the words that are used as markers of difference. In their presumed connotations they are binaries, two-sided and limiting. But, both Butler and Gates say this is not how it should be. The terms “race”, “gender”, “woman”, among others should be such vivid symbols of distinction, because they are not. A person cannot readily identify with a rigid, solidified definition of the word, because each person’s experience is different. But, there are key differences between the two essays. Gates seems to delve more into how modern language and discourse has been constructed, and therefore explains why we attach certain assumptions to words. But Butler explains what we should do differently, why rigid definitions limit discourse, and why we should expand our definitions of words.

Of the words that Butler says need to be reconceptualized in her essay are “gender”, “woman”, and “sex”. But, “construction” is one that holds special significance to her argument. Butler questions what it means to be “constructed”. Choice and destiny have become defining characteristics of the words she says are at stake. This explains why a rigid definition cannot be used to cover a broad group. These words rely heavily on personal experience and choice.

So, to answer another question for today’s class, I think Butler would argue that conveying one’s personal experience is the ultimate discursive power. She wants us to remove presumptions made about words that are used to define wide and varied groups of individuals. That’s because we can’t apply rigid definitions of the words to every single person. Instead, the words should become more varied in their definitions so that they can then be used in discourse and analysis. Individual experience needs to become a part of their definitions. To apply a rigid definition is to restrict understanding of the broad nature of a group and consequently create markers of difference.