A Good Man Speaking Well? Really?

For my example, I am using the show Stranger Things, a Netflix original series. In season 1, episode 7 of Stranger Things the clip from 9:10-10:58 (can't find an actual video so here is the time of the clip) shows the Department of Energy workers at the Wheeler's house convincing the Wheeler parents they are good people and simply trying to help their son, Mike, who is hiding the Department of Energy's experiment, Eleven. Both Agent Fraizer (the female DOE worker) and Dr. Brenner (the male DOE worker) are bad, evil people, and are using their rhetoric to convince the Wheeler's they are just trying to help.

Agent Fraizer and Dr. Brenner are being very calm with the Wheeler family, telling them that their son is possibly in danger and they need to know anything about where he could be to help them. They reassure them that they are the government and just want to help their son. The Wheeler parents are extremely distressed in this moment, so they trust Dr. Brenner when he soothes them, telling them he will help, gives them his word even, saying they just need to trust him. Mrs. Wheeler believes Dr. Brenner, even though he just wants to take Eleven back because she is some sort of experiment to them and they are conducting other experiments that lead to the harm of many lives.

This goes against Quintillian's assertion, because these bad people have convinced the Wheeler's that they are actually good people. Because of the Wheeler's naivety to the DOE workers, they can come off as "good people" even though they are truly not, simply through using reassuring rhetoric and their positions within the government. If the Wheeler's knew more about the DOE, Eleven, and what was actually going on, i'm sure they would realize the DOE workers are bad people and would not have trusted their word; however, because they are unaware, the bad people's rhetoric was successful.

Wandering Pullman

For this exercise, I'm choosing to write about the big cougar statue right outside the Martin Stadium ticket office. I think the argument this piece is truly making has to do with Cougar spirt. It has always been said that anytime you go somewhere, anywhere in the world, wearing something WSU related, you will hear a "Go Cougs" at least once. With cougs all over the world, cougar spirit runs wild. The base of the statue talks about cougar pride, and what better way to show it than a large cougar jumping out at every passerby.

When the artist was making this piece, they worked with a lot of heavy metals, rock, plaques, and more. The strength of the medium is it's own message, as the strength of cougar pride is unbreakable, just like the statue. It is something that will last forever, just like the love many people experience for being a WSU cougar. I have never seen another school with a fanbase like the cougs, a school that truly becomes a part of each student that goes here.

The statue is perfectly situated right outside of Martin Stadium, where WSU plays football. WSU football is a huge deal to many WSU fans, and no matter what the season brings, cougs are always supporting their team - good and bad. This is the heart of WSU and the ethos surrounding it makes sense for the coug to be there, because it is the heart of school spirit to be at a WSU football game, so having the giant symbol of our cougar pride right out front follows the values of cougar fans.

All of this combines to create an argument that cougar pride runs strong throughout Pullman, WA and anywhere else cougar fans can be found. Coug fans will forever support our football team, so having this statue right out front is the perfect location for cougar pride. It is a statue that seems completely unbreakable, just like the unbreakable cougar spirit. Everything about this statue screams cougar pride, just like the fans found screaming for the cougs at every WSU football game.

Oh this is one of those places

Recently, I went to Disneyland for the first time. When I went, it was decorated for the Christmas holidays featuring a beautiful tree and lots of other little decorations scattered throughout the park. Disneyland is a really interesting place for this blog, as all of the workers must be held to a certain decorum that matches the rest of the park. They are all known as "cast members" and everyone is in some sort of costume, even the janitors and food vendors. This matches the whole magical theme of Disneyland, because the entire place seems magical. Each land you walk into is full of rides, shops, food vendors, walk throughs, and decorations to make the entire place seem like you are in a dream. Everyone in the park is happy, as it is known as "the happiest place on Earth". This rings right in with the ethos, as you walk into the Disneyland park and it seems like everyone is overly thrilled to be there, giving the park the credibility to claim that they are indeed the happiest place on Earth.

When in Disneyland, you must be happy. I think this is particularly important for keeping all the little kids there happy. When kids come to Disneyland, they expect they are going to the happiest place on Earth. They see all of these characters from their favorite movies, experience their favorite movies through rides and ride-a-longs, and think that this entire magical land is a real place where all of the dreams from Disney movies come true. Staying happy is incredibly important to keeping this dream alive, because while the little kids might be entranced by everything around them, if they notice unhappy people, it might break the dreamlike state they are experiencing.

Honestly, the entire feeling of Disneyland makes everyone happy. Disney persuades people to be happy with overly friendly staff, people making you smile for pictures everywhere you go, things like fastpasses so you don't have to wait in line as long, goofy decorations that make it so you can't help but laugh, and even bringing adults back to their childhood memories. My dad for example, is one of the most manly men I know, he spends his whole life outdoors skiing and biking and shooting guns, he even played football for Oregon; however, if you ask him if he wants to go to Disney, he is always game, and when he is there, he seems so incredibly happy to be there. Disneyland seems to bring out the best in people, making everyone happy through their persuasive decorum and particular ethos that surrounds the entire park.

Zhuangzi, K Burke

Zhuangzi (Trans. Burton Watson). (2003). In the World of Men. Zhuangzi: Basic Writings, New York: Columbia University Press 49-62.

Zhuangzi's, In The World of Men (2003) argues the importance of paradoxes in language. Zhuangzi starts with a story involving Confucius and one of his students to move through the importance of language and how paradoxes are relevant through conversation. Through this piece, it seems Zhuangzi is trying to convey the importance of paradoxes and how they can be used in language, along with how common they are in our world, in order to give people a better understanding of the basic writing and rhetoric skills. This piece is written for anyone studying language, the use of paradoxes, and Confucian thought. 

"Do you know what it is that destroys virtue, and where wisdom comes from? Virtue is destroyed by fame, and wisdom comes out of wrangling" (50). I really enjoyed this quote because I feel like it is still so true today, and gives people an understanding of the meaning of virtue and wisdom. 


"It's a worthless tree - make boats out of it and they'd sink; make coffins and they'd rot in no time; make vessels and they'd break at once" (59). This wordplay works into paradoxes and the confucian thought, giving a strong presence in this piece.

Burke, Kenneth. Language as Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley: U of California, 1966. Print.

Kenneth Burke's, Language as Symbolic Action discusses how terministic screens play a role in our society. Burke starts by discussing a few important concepts that will come up throughout his writing and then moves forward to discuss terministic screens, what they are, and how they show up in society. Burke is attempting to get readers to look at screens differently in order to understand how the world around them works and how they see things differently than others. This piece is meant to speak to an audience of rhetoricians, people interested in learning more about the world around them and how they see things, and anyone interested in language in general. 

"A 'scientistic' approach begins with questions of naming, or definition...dramastic, stressing language as an aspect of 'action', that is, as 'symbolic action" (44). This is the basic definitions of the important concepts Burke will be using in his piece. 

"In brief, 'behavior' isn't something that you need but observe; even something so "objectively there" as behavior must be observed through one or another kind of terministic screen, that directs the attention with keeping its nature" (49). This quote gives an insight to terministic screens and the importance they play in who we are and what we see. 

Role Playing

Being a customer at a coffee shop is a common rhetorical situation people find themselves in, and one in which they must play a role. The exigencies of this role commonly include knowing what you want to order, going up to the counter and ordering your drink with the name of the drink, size, and deciding if you want it iced or hot. After this you tell the barista your name, pay, and then walk to the other counter to wait for your drink to be called. It is also expected that you take your drink and your drink only, in order to avoid grabbing the wrong drink so somebody else doesn't get theirs.

If you perform all of these functions, you are the playing the role correctly, and as long as you do this, you can ad-lib some parts. You don't have to know what drink you want, you could just randomly pick one off the menu. You can get creative with your name and tell them whatever you want. The decorum of the coffee shop does a play a role in how far you go with your own role playing. Most coffee shops have a very laid back type of feeling, so if you are in a Starbucks you could be conducting a business meeting, doing homework, reading a book, or meeting with a friend to catch up. Most coffee shops typically have kids in them, so it is important to keep things family-friendly, and stay mellow. If someone is yelling in a coffee shop that could be really distracting to the others in the coffee shop who went there for a quiet environment.

Your role in the situation serves the purpose of keeping the coffee shop in business. Without customers coming to order and spend their money, coffee shops wouldn't have the profit to stay open. The customer also serves to create the vibes going on in the coffee shop, for example, if everyone is yelling, it is probably not a very calm coffee shop where people want to do business or homework. However, if everyone is being really quiet, it creates a place of relaxation and great for working.

Gee, Tang, Lu

Gee, John Paul. (1999). Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. New York: Routledge 1-39.


John Gee's, Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method argues the distinctions between discourses and the importance of how they fit into our life. Gee explains what a discourse is, how we use them, and the difference between discourse and Discourse. The argument about discourse is meant to give people a better understanding of who we are in order to better know ourselves and why we use the rhetoric we do. Gee created this piece for audiences of all people, in order to learn more about the human discourse and how it effects our lives. 

"Rather, they are meant to be “thinking devices” that guide inquiry in regard to specific sorts of data and specific sorts of issues and questions. They are meant to be adapted for the reader’s own purposes" (Gee, 6). I like this quote because Gee gets across the true meaning of discourse, and tells that is is different for each person. 

"When “little d” discourse (language-in-use) is melded integrally with nonlanguage “stuff” to enact specific identities and activities, then, I say that “big D” Discourses are involved. We are all members of many, a great many, different Discourses, Discourses which often influence each other in positive and negative ways, and which sometimes breed with each other to create new hybrids" (Gee, 7). This is the description of the difference between discourse and Discourse in a thorough yet to the point way. 

Tang, Patricia. (2012). The Rapper as Modern Griot: Reclaiming Ancient Traditions. Hip Hop Africa: New African Music in a Globalizing World. Ed. Eric S. Charry, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press 79-90.

Patricia Tang's, The Rapper as Modern Griot (2012) argues the similarities and differences between modern day rappers and historical griots. Tang starts by explaining a griot and then explains the modern day rapper, connecting them through what they are. Tang connects the modern day rapper and the griot in order to show the way ancient literature and argument style recycles itself into today's world over and over. This piece is meant for people studying how language and history repeats itself, where rap comes from, and many others. 


"Due to their ability to praise or critique individuals with their oratory skills, griots have traditionally held an ambiguous social status, both revered and feared" (80). This quote gives an introduction to griots, and it is clear just from this quote alone how you could compare the modern day rapper to a griot. 

"Both Senegalese griots and rappers work to connect rap to taasu, but this connection seems to be oversimplification" (86). This quote begins to show the differences between griots and rapper and how Tang sees the important aspects that make these two things different. 

Lu, Xing. (1998). Conceptualizing Yan and Ming Bian: The School of Confucianism. Rhetoric in Ancient China, Fifth to Third Century B. C. E: A Comparison with Classical Greek Rhetoric, Columbia, S. C.: University of South Carolina Press 154-194.

Xing Lu's, Conceptualizing Yan and Ming Bian discusses the importance of Confucian thought. Lu does this by going through different key aspects of Confucian thought and important works that came out of the School of Confucianism over time. This importance of this piece is to make readers aware of Confucius' works, in order to understand how rhetoricians under him worked. This piece is vital to anyone trying to understand historical rhetoric, Confucius, Yan, and Ming Bian. 

"Confucianism has lost its place as a state ideology and Confucian texts are no longer taught to schoolchildren in mainland China" (154). This quote is interesting because it shows the way history has changed recently in the importance of such a key rhetorician.

"Confucian philosophical views are essentially moralistic and humanistic in nature" (157). This gives a broad description of the way Confucian thought works and what people will be getting when looking into the school of Confucianism. 

Baake & Halliday

Baake, Ken. (2003). Metaphor: Constituting or Decorating Theory in Science.Metaphor and Knowledge: The Challenges of Writing Science, New York: State University of New York Press 43-78.

Baake's, Metaphor: Constituting or Decorating Theory in Science argues that language is a tool and is transformational for the audience to understand what is being said, which sets him up to describe how metaphors can define speech in everyday life. Baake develops this idea by stating how we use language as a tool and then explaining how we use metaphors to transform language to make things more relatable. Baakes purpose is to show the use of metaphor in the human language in order to allow his readers to understand how important the tool of metaphors are to making people understand messages we attempt to convey. Baake is speaking mostly to rhetoricians, but also anybody studying language, or people wanting to know more about how to create solid rhetoric. 

"Hence, the only way we know anything is through language" (45). I like this quote because it is so powerful, and creates such a deep thought in the mind. 

"Of course, one could argue that a metaphor of the sun as a furnace today hardly advances the science of solar energy, even for nomads" (57). This sentence argues that we must connect metaphors to things that make sense in order to correctly explain something, without simplifying it into a way that leaves out too much important information. 

Halliday, M. A. K. (1999:2004). The Grammatical Construction of Scientific Knowledge: The Framing of the English Clause. The Language of Science, New York: Continuum 102-134.

Halliday creates an argument that learning to use clauses to create metaphors that work for specific audiences and understanding audiences is one of the most important parts of the English language. Halliday does this by explaining how discourses are important in language and then looking at how the clauses of a metaphor work to create a statement that makes sense to specific audiences. The purpose of this is to explain how people use clauses in language in order to use language as a tool for audiences. Halliday is speaking to all rhetoricians, to help people with language. 

"If we interpret something as a metaphor, we are setting up a semantic relationship between two linguistic variants" (104). This sets up the definition Halliday uses for metaphor, which shows the difference between Halliday and Baake. 

"The notion of grammatical metaphor also implies a history: there must be a (congruent) construal meaning first, before any further meaning can be construed by departing metaphorically from it" (114). Halliday uses this statement to show the importance of the audience understanding the relationship you are trying to form before forming it as a metaphor.