Blog #5

Select one of the rhetorical terms we have use in class and describe how McCain
and Obama use this effectively or ineffectively in their websites.

On John McCain's website, he makes the following statement:

Wherever there is a hungry child, a great cause exists to serve.
Where there is an illiterate adult, a great cause exists to serve.
Wherever there are people who are denied the basic rights of Man, a great cause exists to serve.
Wherever there is suffering, a great cause exists to serve.

McCain uses anaphora to make a pathetic argument about public service. Anaphora is the repetition of the same word at the beginning of a series of successive clauses or verses. In this case, it is the word wherever, which is then matched with one of society's shortcomings, and is then finished with "a great cause exists to serve."

I feel that this is an effective use of anaphora because it helps McCain's ongoing argument that he has dedicated his life to public service. He continues to plant the suggestion that his career as a politician is about the people he serves, rather than having to do with his own ego and ambitions. It's an effective argument because in these uncertain times, with the massive economic meltdown we've seen in the past couple weeks, the war in Iraq, and the current president who has proven that he is almost completely without morals, the people are looking for someone who puts their interests first. Joh McCain is trying to convince people that he is that person.

John, McCain. "Why John McCain." JohnMccain.com. Republican Party. 30 Sep 2008 .

1. Define warrant in your own terms. Why does argument work better when
warrants are shared by the arguer and the audience?

Warrants are often unstated beliefs, values, and principles that are part of arguments. Argument works better when warrants are shared because the disagreements of warrants can lead to different interpretations and therefore different outcomes of the argument.

2. Provide an example to support your claim.

People who know me are well aware that I have done a great deal of work in the roleplaying game industry. There are those who are only passingly familiar with this as "Dungeons and Dragons," or that weird game with books, paper and pencil, and miniature heroes and monsters. Someone who is not overly familiar with roleplaying might make the claim that this hobby is not mainstream. One of the supports they might use is that its players are not "normal" people. This taps into the warrants that the game it is commonly played by nerds, geeks and other social outcasts.

The support that these "not normal" people uses the warrant that players are mostly geeks, nerds, and outcasts. That is further broken down into the notion that nerds are socially maladjusted but incredibly intelligent people. A geek is a "peculiar or otherwise odd person, especially one who is perceived to be overly intellectual". Outcasts can be a catchall that covers everyone else who doesn't act or dress in ways that are consistent with popular culture.

This argument is flawed, however, by the demographics of gamers. While the stereotypical gamer falls into the category of geeks and nerds, the truth of the matter is that most people who play the game are average people. This is backed up by surveys that have been conducted by people within the roleplaying game industry. These studies have shown that the average gamer is likely in college or has a college degree, they are just as likely to be married as the rest of the population, and they hold down ordinary and wide-ranging jobs. The only commonalities between most gamers are a high level of intelligence and a certain enjoyment for works of fantasy and schience fiction. Anecdotally, I am a game designer and a gamer myself, and the people I game with on a regular basis include someone with a degree in communications, a researcher at the vet clinic, and a guy who is very athletic as well as a doctor of genetics. I would further argue that of the four of us, only oneof us fits the classic definition of a geek.

The fact that the warrants are unspoken and not necessarily agreed upon leads to different conclusions among different audiences. The average, non-gaming audience might agree with the stereotype, and therefore agree that the hobby isn't mainstream. Those, like myself, who have inside (and not public) knowledge on sales figures, demographics, and a background of meeting actual gamers at conventions, know that the warrants are simply incorrect. Their characterization of gamers as being outside the norm isn't consistent with the facts because it isn't just nerds, geeks and outsiders playing these games.

Blog #3

1. What is the most important feature of visual argument you learned from EOA? Why? (140-50 words).

According to Essentials of Argument, "Visual argument is immediate and tangible and pulls you into the picture. (237)" This seems like the most important point because to me, it does the best job summarizing the difference between a visual and written argument. A written argument relies on abstract symbols to convey a message, and while images are also symbols, they're not as abstract and they have the potential to draw a person into the message with a simple glance.

Just for fun, I've constructed my own visual argument that features certain people and events from this country's history. Anyone reading this blog, this is your chance to judge whether or not I've managed to convey my point. What is this argument about? Is it successful or not?




2. What is the most important feature of visual image you learned from McCloud? Why? (140-50 words).

The most important thing I learned from McCloud is the relationship between the reader/watcher when they see a cartoon face as opposed to when they see a real face. When the person has a face-to-face conversation with another person, they have an image in their mind of the person they are speaking with which is accurate based on their perception. However, at the same time, they have a perception of their own face which is not as vivid, and contains more of a general "sense of shape..... A sense of general placement. (207)" Because a person doesn't see themselves in a photo-realistic sense, when they see a cartoon image of a face, it is easy for them to view the cartoon as a representation of themselves.

1. Wood, Nancy. Essentials of Argument. 2nd. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc, 2009.

McCloud, Scott. "The Vocabulary of Comics." Visual Rhetoric in a Digital World 195 - 208. 10 Sep 2008 .

Blog #2

1. What did you think of when you encountered the word argument as you began reading this chapter? What do you think now? (150-200 words)

The first thing that normally comes to mind when I think of argument is "To make a case for." This is my own personal definition, and it really comes from that fact that as a writer, a father, and someone who likes to go online and engage in unmoderated messageboard debate (meaning that sources are rarely cited, unless I'm trying to move in for the kill on a particular topic), I am frequently called on to justify my point of view on a given topic. For example, when I tell my oldest child that she cannot go over to her friend's house to play for the day, in order to seem like a fair parent, I need to make the arguments that we might be leaving the house soon, her friend's parents said that they would be busy for the day, and that she's still grounded for cutting the cat's hair with the scissors. Of course this is a very easy argument to win because I am the final authority in this case.

According to Nancy V. Wood, in Essentials of Argument, "Argument classes are taught in college because they improve the students' ability to read and think critically and write or speak about signifficant problems and issues that have social consequences. (5)" In my experience in the real world, a number of people end up in careers that have nothing to do with the field in which they earned their degree in college. The fact that they have a college degree is often enough to earn them the opportunity to fill various positions based solely upon the fact that they are able to think problems through critically and then act upon them competently.

When properly used, argument informs us of critical things, such as the best candidate to vote for in an election based upon their stance on the issues rather than whether or not we simply like them as individuals. Critical thinking helps us watch a movie and then evaluate it based on the artistry of the film making as well as the message it is trying to convey. For instance, is a war movie trying to expose the horrors of war by showing the plight of a soldier, as in Saving Private Ryan? Is it a propaganda film that is meant to influence the audience to support U.S. interests abroad, as I would argue that the third Rambo movie does? Critical thinking allows us to determine which products are the best to buy based on its features, benefits, and consumer reviews as opposed to relying on the hype of salespeople.

When faced with a complex problem, how do we deal with it? We must be able to come to decisions and then present arguments to explain why we took the actions that we took. We must also be able to analyze the arguments made by others to decide whether we agree or disagree with what they are saying, and sometimes offer up counter-arguments in an attempt to change a proposed course of action.

Honestly, my opinion about argument isn't any different now than it was before the reading. Argument is everywhere in our society, and it makes us better and more useful individuals if we recognize it when we see it and analyze it to determine the best way to process it.

2. Why did you choose your magazine? (75-100 words)

I chose Discover because of all of the magazines that were listed, it was the one that appealed to me the most. It is the one magazine from the list we were given that is most likely to have articles that I'd be interested in reading. I enjoy science articles, yet not coming from a background in hard science, I fit perfectly with this magazine's target audience. Discover is a science magazine for lay-people. In other words I like to read about all of the neat new developments in science and technology, but I'm not particularly interested in trying to make sense of the complexity of the actual science since I lack the background.

1. Wood, Nancy. Essentials of Argument. 2nd. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc, 2009.

Blog #1

How does Foss define rhetoric? Describe in your own words what this means to you and offer a few examples from your experience.

I read the twenty page introduction to Rhetoric by Karen Foss with a specific eye for a definition of rhetoric, and while the subject matter tended to meander from theoretical to the historical, the key statement seemed to be "For us, rhetoric is the human use of symbols to communicate" (1). Symbols are the expression of our reality through language.

Foss talks about two key ideas relating to symbols, the first being that "Humans construct the world in which they live through their symbolic choices" (2). While symbols could just as easily translate to a number of different modes of communication, including art or music, the most appropriate type of symbol is language and words. The idea is that words, or symbols, that we choose may contain positive or negative connotations. For example, if I am describing a new version of an intellectual work with the pejorative term "dumbed down," I am using that specific term to voice disapproval. Likewise, if I were trying to cast it in a neutral or positive light, I might choose the term "streamlined" or "simplified."

Symbols can also be a representation of physical objects. Foss uses the example of a tree. "For instance, a tree standing in the forest is not a symbol; it does not stand for something else. It is simply a tree, although the word chosen to represent the thing standing in the forest is a symbol" (3).

A rhetorician who is conscious and intentional with their use of symbols is able to craft an argument that is intended to accomplish a goal. The nature of that goal might be to convince people to adopt your way of thinking, come to a consensus on a difficult matter, or settle a dispute. Rhetoric may include writing, oration, physical, multi-media.... Being new to the world of rhetoric, I would simply interpret it as communication.

Google defines rhetoric as:
* using language effectively to please or persuade
* grandiosity: high-flown style; excessive use of verbal ornamentation; "the grandiosity of his prose"; "an excessive ornateness of language"
* palaver: loud and confused and empty talk; "mere rhetoric"
* study of the technique and rules for using language effectively (especially in public speaking)

What this means to me is that rhetoric is a way to convey meaning and expression, persuade others, raise awareness, and otherwise communicate through the use of symbols.

In the past, having never actually studied rhetoric, I have used it for a variety of purposes, including debating political issues, particularly around election time; incorporating it into my roleplaying game writings; and I have used it for the purpose of marketing the roleplaying games I have been involved with.

Currently, for those who haven't notices, the country I live in is in the final months of a presidential campaign. I have engaged in conversation with others on various messageboards where I have sought to gain information and opinions about the candidates. I have mainly been in information gathering mode up to this point, and I have only recently made a decision about which candidate best represents me and my interests. The goal of these debates has not been to inform other people's views, but rather, to try to come to a consensus among other similar-minded individuals of what the issues, strengths, and weaknesses are surrounding each candidate. Now that I have picked one, my rhetoric in these place will likely change to a stance where I will try to persuade others to vote with me.

The rhetoric in the professional writing I have done is a little harder to spot. Roleplaying game material tends to be escapist, so people don't appreciate it when it becomes too preachy. Nevertheless, there are a few jabs at modern political figures and organizations, though a person would have to read the material carefully to find the parallels, as well as the commentary I'm making. There is much to be said about understated allegory.

Finally, I have used rhetoric on this very blog to promote the book I released in June called Reign of Discordia. Unlike most of my other writings, this one was released through a much smaller publisher, so I tried to help that publisher as much as possible by promoting the book myself through my blog and messageboards. My goal was to be informative and make it sound appealing without being so assertive about it in high traffic areas as to make myself annoying in the eyes of the other people who visit these sites. Obviously, continuously bumping the same thread over and over on a messageboard and talking about it in every unrelated conversation would become irritating, while it is far more appropriate to pimp the book to a much higher degree in my own online space.

I feel that professional writers should possess an understanding of rhetoric because such knowledge helps them more effectively convey meaning and promote their message through their various works.

Foss, Karen, Sonya Foss, and Robert Trapp. "An Introduction to Rhetoric."Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. 3rd ed. London: Waveland Press, 2003. 1-18.

28 Aug 2008 <http://www.aml.wsu.edu/facultysites/Muhlhauser/FossFossTrappsm.pdf>

And Now For Something Completely Different

If you happen to be one of the 2.5 people who have been following my blog for the past few months, you might be in for a surprise as the content starts to include some things that are very not gaming related.

You see, I have this dirty little secret I've been hiding for a number of years now. I attended college back in the early nineties, but I never finished. I may have gone on to manage a retail store, work at WotC, and write some gaming books, but the fact is that in the real world, employers generally tend to treat you like an uneducated schmuck if you don't have a degree. This was somewhat true a decade ago, but it seems to be more true as time goes by because nearly every kid who manages to graduate highschool is now going on to complete their college degree.

While that begs the question of how a degree gets a person ahead in life if everyone has one, that doesn't really address the question of what happens to the people who don't have one. My experience is that it leaves them looking at the options of perpetual retail or fast food hell. You know, I've done my time in those trenches and I'd rather be standing on the corner hustling random strangers for their spare change than go back to it.

What's sad is that when I decided that I wasn't going to go back and finish, oh something like thirteen years ago, I was only three semesters from graduation. That's one and a half years. Back then that seemed like such a long time, and I was so burned out, and I assumed that by demonstrating competence, I could be successful without that expensive piece of paper. Frankly, I have been successful in many areas, but not as successful as I should have been. What's the reason I didn't land any upper management jobs, or get the editor positions I applied for, or even be interviewed for some jobs that randomly applied for and still feel are beneath me? My work references were good.... Its that lack of a degree.

So I'm going back to school to finish my degree, and I'm not giving up until I'm successful. I might even try to go on to grad school if I can figure out how to fund it.

One of the classes I'm taking is an introduction to rhetoric. Based on the classroom discussions and the reading I've done so far, I really think I'm going to learn a lot in this class (and I'm not just saying that to suck up to the professor, who will be reading this blog). Part of my grade for the class will be to keep a blog that addresses some of the subject matter we will be studying. I've decided to just merge it in with my regular blog to keep things easy for me.

So if you happen to be one of my very few regular readers, prepare to learn something that has nothing to do with games. If it seems a little esoteric, don't give up, there will also be gaming related ramblings posted here whenever I feel the need to post about it. In fact, I'm not turning my back on the gaming industry. I have some small projects currently in the works that will be manageable with my class schedule, and then I have some hopes for where I might end up after I have my degree. I'm not done with gaming. In fact, after my eight years in the industry, I'm just getting started.

Making a Con Appearance

There are some really outgoing game designers who thrive on making public appearances. That's never been me. Sure, I ran some demos at Gen Con 2003, but I usually shy away from them because I'm not crazy about the public speaking. This changes this weekend.

I've been invited at the last minute as a guest for SpoCon 2008 where I will be sitting on a panel and running some games on Saturday. The panel will be on, of all things, 4th edition. They were very interested in having me on it for a couple reasons. First, I'm published, second, I told them that I'm more interested in what Pathfinder has to offer than 4th edition. So I'll be at that event talking up Pathfinder while trying not to dwell on the aspects of 4th edition that I'm not so crazy about.

I will also be running a few games. First will be a session of True20 with the Reign of Discordia campaign setting in the morning, then a couple blocks of the Pathfinder RPG using the Alpha 3 rules in the afternoon and evening. Revenge of the Kobold King should be just the right length to fill the block of time.

If anyone lives in or near Spokane, come check out the Con. The website is located here: http://www.spocon.us/programming and no, you won't see my name on the web site's guest list because my appearance just came about over the last couple of days, but I'll be there fully immersed in gaming goodness.