In this week’s reading, the concept of audio comes into question and legitimacy. Much like last week’s visual argument, there should be no push against these modes as we move on to a much more digital setting.
In Mckee’s writing, she argues that sound is inherently integrated within everything; our entire lives are embedded in sound. Amongst other concepts and forms, she goes into different effects sounds can have when they are altered, and when they are presented to audiences. VanKooten then takes these concepts and applies them to a project a student of hers created. A project that allowed the student to show the great range and effect that sound would create to further her message. This reading then questions where pedagogy fails to understand the importance of auditory meanings. Alexander then explains that audio does in fact have scholarly work behind it, and although it has fallen in the scope of new media, there is room for its growth. This reading revolves around the artist Glenn Gould and his insight within the scope of auditory understandings. Rodriguez’s interactive reading encompasses the idea of using sonic rhetoric as a teaching tool. Sonic rhetoric is then pulled into a handful of categories that would likewise be used to recognize the full spectrum of its effects. Hidalgo’s film then puts these theories and concepts into perspective by utilizing them to create the video essay. In this video, we are shown how video and audio creates a better understanding for the viewer, the content, and the creator. Finally, we end with McIntyre and her take on the Boston Marathon Bombings. She makes a clear distinction on why and how humans and non-humans are able to work together to create a vast channel. In this channel both parties were able to work in tandem to eventually catch and coherently explain how the Boston Marathon Bombings happened.
Much like other topics in this course, I found the emphasis on audio to be interesting. We cannot escape it. Mckee points out that “As I type this essay, I hear the plasticized, slightly muffled click of the keys” (337). To understand certain messages we need audio, it is vital, whether it is specific to our message or not. I specifically found VanKooten’s reading interesting because its entirety is based off audio in the pedagogy. Of course, as a future teacher I would like to fully explore every aspect of rhetoric and how that will eventually show up in a lesson plan. This reading not only explores a student’s project, but VanKooten also recognizes that the 21st century pedagogy needs to completely survey anything connecting to digitized teaching, specifically for student to think of this concept in a critical motion.
In addition to looking at audio in a pedagogical setting, other readings explored the network in which humans and non-humans coexist. I particularly found this reading interesting due to the subject matter of the actual attack. I wouldn’t have necessarily connected the technological aspect of this attack to be rhetorical. After reading the piece I found myself understanding (not fully) yet another aspect of auditory meaning. The network that houses both humans and non-humans, would eventually show evidence that would convict the attacker, without spoken or written communication. This in turn proved the rhetorical auditory role it played during the conviction process.
Questions:
In relation to last week’s readings, which consisted of images and visual theory, what do you make of the connections between silence and auditory, as well as empty/unused space and imagery?
We learned earlier this semester that authorship is dying due to digital/online spaces. Vankooten echoes this thought by arguing that web apps like chat rooms and blogs blur lines of authorship by allowing text to be redesigned, added to, and manipulated. What are some of the benefits (if any) that have come from the unfortunate death of authorship in this online setting? Does auditory concepts effect authorship at all?
Hi Amberlynn, i wanted to address your first question! I think that silence and blank spaces are rhetorical choices for auditory and visual rhetoric. And I think that they could be compared to absence and how that affects a rhetorical argument. I thought the perspective on silence that McKee presented was super interesting and impactful. I also cannot stop listening to myself type now too. In regards to silence, how do you think sonic rhetoric would affect the way we see or hear silences or empty spaces if we tried to apply the listening techniques that Huck describes for us?
ReplyDelete