Respond to Jeff Rice's "rhetoric of cool" by analyzing what it is and how it functions. Then I want you to finish this sentence: "rhetoric of XXX". Basically I want you to come up with your "rhetoric of XXX" by using Rice's rhetoric of cool as the framework for your "rhetoric of XXX". This means I want specific and direct connections made back to Rice's introduction.
Guidelines are same as always.
This is due by Thursday, November 4, 2010.
Simply put, the rhetoric of cool is cool. The shear presence of “iconic representation, juxtaposition, and nonlinear reasoning” buttresses the idea of new media, because digital natives are all about the expansion of strange ideas and non sequitur perpetuations (3). Rice presents through Derrida that “communications are established, through the play of language, among diverse functions of the word and, within it, among diverse strata or regions of culture” (3). The technologically aware digital natives are just the group to establish communications through these manners and shape language to fit their genre, mediums, and audience even if unintentionally.
ReplyDeleteIn Rice’s exploration of cool, he gives us that the “usage of the word ‘cool’ has its roots in jazz culture of the early 1940s” where the word did not have the same meaning as today (4). The word was meant to describe calm feelings, not the general awareness of something cutting edge and in fashion that it does today. Yet, how can cool “mean everything and nothing at once?” Like Liu, however, many fail to make the connection between the word and the society in which the word is so frequently and ubiquitously used. Liu understands cool to have nothing “to do with rhetoric or with writing’ it’s a throwaway term best left for popular culture, teenagers, consumerism, and anything else Liu finds antithetical to what he calls ‘knowledge work’” (5).
However, popular culture, teenagers and consumerism define the language of the time and cool is a term that “implies a complexity, a complication of expectations […]by introducing unfamiliar elements into writing instruction” (6). Cool isn’t the superficial term that Farris poses that it is. The structure of cool defines it as an example of culture getting “more demanding” and partaking in new media (7). I agree with Rice when he states that cool “consists of a variety of rhetorical gestures and moves” that implicated “pedagogical justifications” (8).
Like the rhetoric of cool, however, other terms can be placed in the position of cool and redefine the meaning, but still tie into Rice’s general theory. Take, for example, the opposite of cool: hot. The rhetoric of hot is multifaceted and complex, just as the rhetoric of cool is multifaceted and complex.
Hot is not just the temperature and it has a similarity to cool there where the word is redefined for popular culture outside its original intent. Hot describes what is sexy, in fashion, and appealing. Just like cool, hot “implies a complexity” that pushes the limits of writing to the unfamiliar. Like the advertising material for Broward County Community College that implies that the school is a cool place to learn, and that if it is cool it is better than other schools, things that are hot are more appealing as well.
Dentyne Ice from the mid 2000s is an example. Why chew other gum that has the same effects and quite possibly is better for you physically when the commercials and advertisements depict those who chew Dentyne Ice makes you sexy and more appealing. It’s hot. Its values and basis for superiority is not visible, but its hot. The “new electronic rhetoric” is the offspring of the cultural output and technology of the age that inspires the formation of language to the modern person (3). Why settle for something suitable or appropriate when you can be cool or hot?
Jeff Rice introduces the term “rhetoric of cool” as a way of changing the teaching of composition and how we compose in the modern age. By analyzing ‘cool’ and its meaning, Rice makes an effort to point out that he is not referring to it’s common meaning of being hip and using slang, but more to its rebellious features that have seen it burst onto the scene of today’s society and can change the way we view rhetoric. He highlights this with the noting of ad a community college ad he sees that he believes is “rebelling against traditional instruction” (Pg 1). This is where Rice takes his belief in “rhetoric of cool” and applies it to ways of composing in the modern age, yet remains confident that his take on ‘cool’ stems from its rebellion against the status quo, but in a fashion that is productive rather than destructive.
ReplyDeleteRice begins to discuss the rhetorical facets of ‘cool’ and points to its correlation with standard rhetoric, being “a choice of iconic representation, juxtaposition, and non-linear reasoning.” (Pg 3) He further discusses this when he mentions that ‘cool’ has come to be reflective of other rhetorical gestures, such as chora, appropriation, commutation, and imagery, specifically when comprising of ways of writing for new media. (Pg 8) Rice works to point out that he is channelling the meaning of ‘cool’ towards a new kind of composition pedagogy and inventing a new media rhetoric compared to that of print. He is offering “a” new theory of writing and new media rather than claiming it to be the sole definition of his “rhetoric of cool”. As DJ mentions, Rice’s attempt to define “rhetoric of cool” and its relation with writing revolves around the demands of the digital natives our generation has become. In reference to cultures demands in the media, Rice is quick to point out how “cool’s rhetorical complexity” can satisfy these requirements.
“Rhetoric of cool”, after reading Jeff Rice, can almost exist as “rhetoric of innovation” or “rhetoric of new media”, a term Rice himself points out. However, Rice believes that “rhetoric of new media” is supplied or supported by the features he gives towards “rhetoric of cool”. Due to media’s lack of substantive rhetoric, Rice discusses how the invention of “rhetoric of cool” can take the pedagogy of new media and refashion its outlook to exist in the world of composition. (Pg 9) He is drawing the connection between ‘cool’ and ‘writing’, something that was said to have not existed.
While at first I was a little confused about what Rice was trying to do in the “Rhetoric of Cool” article, after a couple read-throughs I found his notion of what “cool” really is to be quite interesting. He is not trying to define the word cool specifically but rather show us how cool has defined us. “Communications are established, through the play of language, among diverse functions of the word and, within it, among diverse strata or regions of culture. Cool, I contend, is one such chain.”
ReplyDeleteOur culture is constantly changing and with these changes words come and go from our vocabulary—like “groovy” in the 60’s. Like DJ said, when the word “cool” first entered into our vocabulary it only had the one ‘definition’ which described a feeling. Today the word “cool” can be used to describe the weather, an expensive car or a person. More often than not “cool” is in some way associated with high status or even elite, but because it is so overused in our culture the word almost doesn’t mean anything anymore. It’s just another word we throw around.
Rice believes that the word “cool” today really applies to the ways we use and define new media. “With cool, I find that chora, appropriation, juxtaposition, commutation, nonlinearity, and imagery are rhetorical moves that comprise a specific new media writing I am inventing.” The word “cool” is not the only word in the English language that has this ability, though.
In my opinion, the same argument can be made for the “rhetoric of sweet” that can be made for the “rhetoric of cool”. The word “sweet” in today’s society can describe and define so many different things. A person can act sweet; a food dessert can be sweet; even something that could be describe as “cool” can be “sweet”. It’s more or less just another word that can be used to describe just about anything that is better than average or has a higher status.
As Jeff Rice puts it himself, the rhetoric of cool is not about what is hip, in style, or cutting edge today, it is “’a state of mind’”, a kind of zeitgeist, if you will (4). It is stimulating and attractive, not superficially so as Farris would have us believe, but thoughtfully. Rice asserts that, as Jacques Derrida demonstrates, one must convolute everyday discourse (such as the idea of cool), and work with it for “purposes of invention” (3). This is precisely what Rice attempts to with cool: he aims to penetrated the complexities brought up by the societal interpretation of cool in order to examine its rhetoric, and how that can bring about a new “composition pedagogy, a pedagogy whose focus stems from a word popularly believed to have no connection to writing (8). Rice tells us that he does not “profess to be cool” by teaching about how to write about cool. He claims that “such status is irrelevant because… there does not exist one single signifier we can acknowledge as cool” (7).
ReplyDeleteAs DJ points out, the fundamentals of cool link it to the idea of a more demanding culture, one which constantly demands us to partake in new media. Cool is no longer just an attraction to the latest trend, it is now an interaction with the constantly-increasing complexity of our society. Rice uses Johnson and the examples of video games and television making us smarter as a way of demonstrating this. Ignoring the violence and nudity, we come to see that the “form and rhetoric” of these media challenge us to employ “multithreaded thinking, interactivity, complexity, and other features” to change “how we structure and generate information,” and, similarly to video games and television, Rice claims that cool “generate[s] new rhetorical moves,” is a new rhetorical move (7).
Now, take the idea of fun. As with DJ’s rhetoric of hot, the rhetoric of fun may be interchanged for Rice’s rhetoric of cool. Just like the common concept of cool, that of fun is something stimulating, lively, interesting. Fun is attractive in the sense that people want to have it, do, be it. Fun is spontaneity. Fun is getting together with your 20-something-year-old friends and acting like you’re all twelve again. We see fun all the time in television commercials, whether it’s a kid sliding off a water slide and splashing into the pool on a cruise ship or it’s riding on horseback along a beach with your gorgeous Italian lover. Like the Nike adds one sees all the time, Just Do It!
Fun isn’t so much a definite way of being. Fun goes in and out with the times, just like cool. What is considered fun this fall maybe be considered the ultimate drag three springs from now. But fun as a state of mind, or a spirit of a time, is ethereal. You can’t put your finger on it. It’s just there.
Jeff Rice’s “rhetoric of cool” refers to his theory of writing and new media which includes being reflective of concepts like juxtaposition, nonlinearity, and imagery and more. He says, “The cool writer…is cool for the ways she uses specific rhetorical practices to make meaning in electronic environments.”
ReplyDeleteRice talks about the power of the word and concept of “cool,” like in the Broward Community College ad. I can see exactly what Rice is talking about because, being from South Florida , I really understand how the beach is definitely “cool” and the people there are completely sure of this. You can pretty much put anything on a beach background and people will go for it. Rice explores what makes the actual school “cool” by talking about public schools that have received awards for their “cool” technological and innovative ways of teaching and learning. So far we know for sure that “cool” is something being integrated in schools.
But not everyone thinks so. Like DJ says, Rice traces “cool” to its jazz roots, when people used it to mean relaxed or calm. According to Liu, cool is “a throwaway term best left to popular culture, teenagers, consumerism…” Rice’s experience teaching “cool” writing classes at UF shows that he doesn’t feel this way because he used the word in the name of his courses and throughout his syllabus. This demonstrates what Zack says Rice is trying to do, which is connect “cool” and “writing” like it hasn’t connected before. Rice proves Liu to be thinking too small when he calls cool as only a commercialized consumerist word.
Rice makes an important point by letting readers know that he isn’t trying to be cool or sound cool- he’s trying to show that there are many signifiers of cool and that cool has something to offer the rhetoric of writing, not just the words used (slang, cursing).
Staying in the weather theme, a concept similar to the rhetoric of cool is the rhetoric of shady. In popular culture, “shady” refers to someone acting suspiciously or strangely. An example is your roommate texting all day but she won’t say who she is talking to, and then she leaves and won’t tell you where she is going. Shady refers to ambiguity and mystery. The rhetoric of shady can be seen in ambiguous advertisements like those of many liquor companies. A lot of times they don’t include anything in their ad except for an image of an attractive man and woman that obviously just met and are, um, bonding, over the liquor.
The behavior of the people in these ads is shady- they don’t know each other, you don’t know who they are, everything is mysterious, but you’re attracted to it. Shady can also have a negative connotation, like used in anti-drug ads. In those Above the Influence advertisements, they show kids sneaking off behind their parents backs to smoke.
This past week, or perhaps it was two weeks ago, we had to read an article of sorts from a multimedia website. This website contained images, varying fonts in a variety of colors and shapes, as well as links and side messages that made the information seem altogether spacious (and not in a good way) and uneducated. At first, the very idea of this website as a new form of “composition” in the rhetorical world seemed vastly inappropriate (in my literary sense) and it frustrated me to watch this disaster unfold; however, after reading Rice’s article on the Rhetoric of Cool, I’ve come to a new understanding of the genre.
ReplyDeleteI will begin by saying that my initial impression of Rice was not one of admiration. In fact, I find that a majority of the things he says were annoying or (in my opinion) pretentious, but as I continued forcing myself through the article, I stumbled upon a few things of interest that left me with a better impression of the man.
His claim that “cool shapes an emerging technological apparatus” came off as a strange concept to me. Aspects of the Rhetoric of Cool seem to contradict the established rhetorical genre. It has nothing to do with form, but with a mindset. So what does that mean exactly and how does this idea of cool rhetoric come into play?
Rice goes on to explain that “non-linear reasoning” serves as one of the main principles of the Rhetoric of Cool and that the idea is not to create something that is foreseeable or regular, but to inspire a different mode of thought. The Rhetoric of Cool suggests that we “write against the status quo by arguing” the identity of cool by “the [use] of rhetorical practices.”
By this, he simply means that what makes something cool isn’t whether it is fashionable, has a modern exterior, fits in with the crowd, or any of that nonsense, but that it goes against the natural order of something. Cool works in and creates new aspects of media, which therefore inspires change; it uses “juxtaposition,” “nonlinearity,” and “imagery” to create a completely new writing concept that “differ[s] significantly” from media “within print.”
All this to say, Rice’s main argument boils down to the fact that we shouldn’t disregard new forms of rhetoric simply because “of its unfamiliarity” or because the idea doesn’t “fit what we assume writing should entail.” Instead, we should embrace these new genres, this Rhetoric of Cool, and use it to our advantage – to promote greater ideas than before.
Overall, I found Rice to be somewhat overwhelming in his introduction (perhaps overconfident), but his ideas, when picked apart, can add immensely to our understanding of the rhetorical world. New ideas are everywhere, waiting to be hatched, which is why I can introduce my own rhetoric – the Rhetoric of Swag. I know, the concept seems strange, just like Rice’s, but the idea is basically the same. In my group of friends, “swag points” are given out whenever someone “has swag.” In other words, it is completely biased based on the person giving out the points, but that is the glorious thing about it. Opinions are so incredibly different, and what one person defines as “swag worthy” could completely oppose some else’s. One doesn’t have to “go with the flow” in order to do something extraordinary. I think that is what Rice was trying to say in his introduction. The concept in itself is so contradictory that it just fits. Swag, like the idea of cool rhetoric, doesn’t “offer writing its instruction” but challenges the author to do something unexpected.
The rhetoric of XXX is somewhat of a slap in the face to some, strangely intriguing to others, and maybe to the remainder, simply roman numerals for the number thirty. XXX, is an example of Derrida’s pharmakon (3), or chain of significations as in Rice’s Rhetoric of Cool.
ReplyDeleteWhen you hear XXX, little parental advisorys start to pop up from nowhere, what that’s really saying is pornography. This is the common thought process with this three super imposing letters. But to my own surprise, when you put in those three letters into a google search, the first several results are actually related to other elements of pop culture, mainly being ‘extreme.’ To name a few, some applications to mathematics, XXX Racing Athletic Co. an amateur motorcycle racing team out of Chicago, and the 2002 action movie with Vin Diesel featuring Diesel as an extreme athlete recruited by the government for a special mission.
Aside from the first, these things seem to take on a special theme, ‘being extreme.’ To go back to Rice’s cool rhetoric, he defined this term as “iconic representation, juxtaposition, and nonlinear reasoning.” DJ as well mentioned the origins of cool in the 1940’s with jazz culture (4). It started out as something meaning “I’m cool, calm and collected” as opposed to it’s modern connotations meaning, more or less, “popular” or “against the flow.”
We see essentially the same things happening with XXX. Starts out extreme enough, being synonymous with pornographic imagery, according to wikipedia it was supposed to be the ending of pornographic websites having their own web domain, then further progressing to other areas of extremism such as sports and films. Liu’s criticisms of Rice’s pedagogical justification of cool rhetoric are also essential to this argument. The phrase “too cool for school” coined from the Ben Folds Five song “That’s Robert Sledge,” further defined the meaning of rebellion associated today with ‘cool.’ Rising above education, or as Rice would put it, “too good to be involved” or “school’s not the place for me” (6).
Micheal’s example of Dentine Ice also tells of an interesting parallel ‘cool’ has with being ‘hot.’ Very telling of how far rhetoric is willing to go.Who knows where the rhetoric of cool will be in the future, or for that matter, the rhetoric of the infamous XXX.
What does it mean to be cool? Rice approaches this question from a few, unconventional angles. Zach discusses the fact that Rice pays particular attention to the “rebellious” characteristic of coolness, and I think this is worth paying attention to. It’s true that what is “cool” has always gone hand-in-hand with rebellion. Think bikers, rock stars, and the sort. They’re cool because they’re rebels, and they do things unconventionally. So, it only makes sense that “cool rhetoric” would combine this aspect of coolness with “the increasing attractiveness of technological influence” (2). So how does “cool” function as a rhetorical act? Rice explains that cultural studies, technology, and visual writing equate to a new electronic rhetoric. In other words, examining the way our culture uses new technology to express visual writing. To me, visual writing is expressing an idea visually, whether it be through words, pictures, or symbols. The appearance of graphics in any medium can express an idea just as easily (sometime more easily) as written words. Furthermore, “cool” rhetoric seems to rely heavily on NEW cultural practices. It takes not only new technologies, but also innovative and creative ideas and presents them in an entirely new way. I disagree with Liu when he says that engaging in the cultural dominant makes you “cold, remote, and impersonal.” I think that by engaging in something that is a dominant part of culture, you are embracing it, and bringing yourself closer to those who also embrace it. Many people put their own personal spin on popular trends, expressing individuality within a greater whole.
ReplyDeleteMichael defined what he called the “rhetoric of fun,” as something “stimulating, lively, and interesting.” I don’t know if the words fun necessarily correlates to what Rice was getting at. He was not focused on the stimulating or “hip” aspect of the word cool. I feel like maybe the term “rhetoric of the new age.” The rhetoric of the new age focuses on new technology, new developments in the way we communicate. Rice tells us that “cool” involves “considering rhetorical gestures relevant to new media practices.” The newest developments in communication (such as Tweeting or Skyping) require a certain set of skills for them to be used successfully. Because they are new, they seem interesting and quickly become “trendy,” which (by today’s definition) makes them cool. Those who are most adept at using new technologies will almost always be those from a younger generation, like digital natives. Today, rhetoric and communication has gone digital. Kids learn how to use a cell phone or computer almost as soon as they can read and write – they are digital natives. Everyone knows that teens and young adults pretty much decide what is “cool.” Because they are users of this technology, and the older crowd isn’t, it seems young and hip – it’s cool. Being a part of the new age is using all the newest, most up-to-date things. Rhetoric doesn’t have to be excluded from this. The rhetoric of the new age can only be understood after its structures are.
The word cool means everything. The word cool means nothing. In “Rhetoric of Cool,” Jeff Rice gives insight into the rhetoric of the catch-all word “cool”. Like Alissa, I was confused after first reading. However, I now understand that the word cool which Rice explains began as a term used in jazz culture to mean calm and relaxed or even indifferent feelings toward something, now is a word used to describe things that are in vogue, things that are in fashion or are especially savvy or trendy. Michael explains just what Rice does in this article well when he says, “[Rice] aims to penetrate the complexities brought up by the societal interpretation of cool in order to examine its rhetoric, and how that can bring about a new ‘composition pedagogy, a pedagogy whose focus stems from a word popularly believed to have no connection to writing.’” Cool has become such a versatile term that it almost doesn’t have a meaning anymore… As both DJ and Zack have asserted, Rice’s attempt to define “rhetoric of cool” and its relation to pop-culture and meaning based on connotation surrounds the demands of the digital natives of our Generation Y. Our generation as Zack said, has high demands in the media and, “Rice is quick to point out how ‘cool’s rhetorical complexity’ can satisfy these requirements.” Cool has been stretched so far across media and pop-culture that it very literally means almost anything!
ReplyDeleteI think a similar rhetoric of ________ example is the word “love”. Love is patient, love is kind. Eminem loves his lady like a fat kid loves cake. “I love you” is one of the most meaningful phrases a person can say to their partner in a relationship, and yet we say we “love” New York, our blackberries, our pets, Starbucks, our friends, and on and on. There are fourteen different definitions listed for “love” on Dictionary.com alone! Love, like Rice says that cool is in his article (page 4), is not really a definable word but a state of mind. Love can be sexual passion or feelings of warm commitment and deep desire. It can be a commitment and a choice or it can be a fleeting emotion. “To Write Love On Her Arms” is a massive teenage movement across the internet and other digital media that demonstrates love by affirming self-worth of people at risk of suicide. Love is plastered across movies, magazines, books and television in our culture. Love, like cool has been so stretched out across the media that is means everything and nothing at the same time.
Rhetoric of cool is pretty cool in my opinion. There are countless words that we could use in the “rhetoric of XXX” scenario (and in fact we’ve proven that with all of our postings about different words that were really interesting to read!). Our media absorbed generation places an increasingly difficult task for writers to be able to decide how to best portray meaning in their writing when so much of our language is being turned, well, cool!
It’s a term we use often, if not daily. “Cool” can be a description of anything ranging from a baby being born to a new cell phone. Cool can identify anything and nothing at the same time. What signifies cool from un cool is completely arbitrary and up to you. Cool can be changed daily, and the meaning gets shifted as often as the wind blows. Think back to elementary school when all you wanted was to be cool. You’d do anything to fit in, change your clothes, change the way you acted, change the way you treat people… the list goes on. But by the time you changed your outfit and changed your attitude, it was no longer cool. The creators of “cool” were the ones who had the power to change it, and if you could not keep up, well then you were just not cool.
ReplyDeleteOne concept that struck me as interesting was Rice’s depiction of school associated with coolness. “So you’re the one who teaches cool?” (3). “Cool” teachers are… what exactly? In the opinion of some it would be not giving tests, not having class sporadically, and allowing a chaotic free for all. On the other hand, some would signify a cool teacher as interesting, provides pertinent feedback, and can relay information not otherwise attainable. Again, all arbitrary. The funny part though, is seen looking at websites such as ratemyprofessors.com. You will see descriptions of teachers both bad and good using the word “cool” both positively and negatively, often only stemming from a positive or negative reaction of a teacher in the past. The meaning of the word cool becomes almost meaningless, because the definition applies to only one person’s opinion and taste of the person from the 6-12 weeks they “knew” them. The idea is absolutely ridiculous if you ask me, and completely “un cool”.
After reading the rhetoric of cool, I decided to analyze the rhetoric of happy. Like cool, happy is arbitrary and always changing. One defining feature about “happy” is that it is the most sought out emotion I can think of, because everyone wants to feel happy. However, happy is arbitrary in a different respect. Happy can be faked, happy can be destroyed in a matter of seconds, and happy can be created just as fast. Like cool, happy is important. When one is happy, everyone around them is meant to be happy. If you are unhappy, you expect others to be brought down as well. Logistically this seems false, that we would never destroy another’s happiness in replacement of our own, yet we have all done it. Happiness is taken for granted, and denotes the same reactions and desires as cool: one wants to be happy, one is pressured to be happy, and one sees happiness and longs for it. I agree with Sammi, that happiness, love, and coolness have been flooded throughout the media, portraying unrealistic notions of what each term should bring to an individual. Terms such as cool, happy, love, and other important qualities of life cannot be taken lightly, nor can they always be present. If we were always happy, cool, loved, entertained, compassionate, and anything else the media deems pertinent, we would all be robots. Happiness is ideal and learned at a very young age that is something to be proud of, seen even fairy tales with their customary “happily ever after” ending. Unfortunately, however, life doesn’t always have a happy ending, and life isn’t always cool.
Like Alissa, it took me a few reads to be able to fully grasp the concept that Rice was trying to make in his rhetoric of cool argument. I think Rice definitely came up with an interesting concept of how to view and teach composition.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of the word cool, I think of a variety of things. As Rice said, the word has multiple meanings and can refer to a person, a car, a certain type of style, etc. and it can become quite overwhelming. I think the way he uses the word to refer to rhetoric and media is interesting, because he is not talking about the slang term itself that refers to a variety of topics but he is talking about how that term influences us and the way in which we compose. Rice gives an excellent example in the beginning, when he describes the Broward Community College ad about the surf board, which draws the attention of South Floridian students who coin the beach “cool”. There is nothing “cool” about the actual ad itself, but the fact that it incorporated something that is considered cool, now the ad will be called that as well. I think that Rice picked this term because it is so difficult to define. As Rice points out, there is not one single definition for the word “cool”, just like there isn’t a set style in composition and rhetoric.
When thinking of what I could model my rhetoric as, I decided to do a “rhetoric of whatever.” Like cool, whatever has so many different meanings in our culture, and it all depends on the tone or context in which it is said or read. Like Rice said “the rhetoric of cool is meant as a first step toward inventing new media rhetoric by recognizing that the terms that shape writing differ significantly….” (p. 9). When you tell your friend “No problem, whatever” you really do mean there is no problem, but if you are upset at someone and reply “whatever” then they obviously know something is up. At the same time you could be saying it to use it as a filler, to pretend/show that you do not care about something, or because you are annoyed. I believe rhetoric is similar to the concept of whatever (and in this case, cool) because rhetoric and composition are defined by their genre and the context in which they are portrayed. One work can have a variety of different reactions, whether it is an adaptation or not, just like the meaning changes as others say it.
These days, going to school and getting a degree is cool. Those people who didn’t attend college are look down upon in these modern times. Colleges use this to entice people into attending their school, which is trendy. The internet is also a very trendy aspect of life, when a school connects, it entices the students to want to connect. Jeff Rices rhetoric of cool studies all of these connections between school and cool to gain understanding of its relationship with rhetoric. Rice states, “…communications are established, through the play of language, among diverse functions of the word and, within it, among diverse strata or regions of culture.” from Derrida. This here is evidence of the rhetoric of cool. Cool is reaching out across mediums, the new and diverse cultural community of the internet is being invaded by colleges. The reasons for attending school are all there, we all know the benefits, it then comes down to the matter of what school to go to. Which takes learning to a level that is now. It is one that incorporates new media.
ReplyDeleteThe “Rhetoric of Invention” is a title I could relate this concept of the rhetoric of cool to. Schools have re-invented themselves over time. They have gone from men only colleges, to co-eds with strict curfews and dress codes and now are a haven for party animals. The school has to appeal to the crowd of people there at a certain time. They must change rules and ways of teaching to accommodate the changes in society. My “Rhetoric of Invention” is based upon a school trying to appeal to what the students want. It is like recruitment. What school has the most benefits? What school can I have the most fun at? Students see this as they go on tours to choose the college that best suits them. FSU has a liquor store on campus, a club, a bowling alley and a theatre just to name a few amenities. They also house some more “productive” venues like sports facilities, incredible dining halls and too many libraries to count. The university has an enrollment of over 40,000 students. This way, they are covering all of their bases. Registered student organizations are also of appeal to those who have niche interests. If you can not find one of the hundred clubs that suits you, you may simply invent your own and receive student government funding. Invention is key to a schools success. If they do not build upon the foundation they have built, we would all still be walking around with skirts down to our ankles, but not after 9PM of course, since that would be curfew. Invention is not just staying with the times, it is being ahead of them. A club on campus is definitely ahead of the times, I don’t think it is the norm yet, but it may very well be one day. Someday soon there will be another mind blowing advancement to the school that will make more students want to attend. It is part of being a venue and attracting customers.
“Cool” is a term so flexible that the definition varies from person to person and changes from generation to generation. What you might find to be “cool”, I might find to be “lame” and vice versa. I liked what Alissa said: “I found his notion of what “cool” really is to be quite interesting. He is not trying to define the word cool specifically but rather show us how cool has defined us.” According to Rice in the Rhetoric of Cool the word means so much more than what is considered “hip” and “groovy.” To Rice it is “iconic representation, juxtaposition, and nonlinear reasoning.” I completely agree with Jenna when she says: “It’s true that what is “cool” has always gone hand-in-hand with rebellion. Think bikers, rock stars, and the sort. They’re cool because they’re rebels, and they do things unconventionally. So, it only makes sense that “cool rhetoric” would combine this aspect of coolness with “the increasing attractiveness of technological influence” (2).” Rice incorporated the word “cool” into the titles of his courses when he taught at UF, and the classes were based on the “rebellion” against the conventions of writing, basically taking composition and lacing it with technology and modernism. Like Zack said: “Rice remains confident that his take on ‘cool’ stems from its rebellion against the status quo, but in a fashion that is productive rather than destructive.” I really liked that Rice did this and agreed with his concept. Change is good and composition is something so completely traditional and structured that it is hard to have it evolve alongside the times. Rice says: “The cool writer…is cool for the ways she uses specific rhetorical practices to make meaning in electronic environments.” Unlike Liu, Rice believes that actively participating within new cultural practices is a good thing.
ReplyDeleteJust like the word “cool”, the word “ill” has undergone quite an evolution over the past generations. In the Encarta Dictionary “ill” is defined as: not in good health, harmful, unkind and unfriendly, unfavorable, and morally bad. Those definitions were the roots of the word in the past. Now thanks to the technology, the media, and evolving slang terms, “ill” can basically be used in any way. It can be used as praise like, “That was an ill track by Kanye West!” or “Will Smith is an ill actor.” But, it can also mean bad things or be added to a sentence as a means of exaggeration. Examples are: “I’ve got the ill headache” or “He got the ill haircut.” It’s mostly popular within the hip-hop culture, but it’s a word that I’ve seen change in meaning before my eyes. There’s even an album by The Beastie Boys called “License to Ill”. I’m anxious to see what the next generations Rhetoric of Ill will be.
Everybody has a different definition for what “cool” actually means. As Janice said, the definition of cool varies from person to person. Some people might think something is cool, while other people might think that the same thing is not cool at all. Who’s to determine what is cool and what isn’t cool? Some people might think that being a rebel is cool, such as the people at Broward Community College, while other people, such as Katie, think that going to school and getting a degree is cool. To Rice, cool is the “iconic representation, juxtaposition, and nonlinear reasoning (3). Rice is more concerned with how the term cool affects us and how we use it, how it functions as a rhetorical act. Like Kimi said, back when we were all little kids in elementary school, all we wanted to do was fit in and be cool. This meant being popular and having the best clothes, the best hair, the best friends. As time went on, being cool wasn’t just about having the latest trend; it went hand in hand with the increasing complexity of society, as Michael said. Rice provides a quote about how the term cool did not have the same meaning as it does today. “The word cool has its roots in the jazz culture of the early 1940s”. During this time cool meant calm. It didn’t mean everything that it does today.
ReplyDeleteWhen Rice taught at the University of Florida, he incorporated cool in his work. His classes were based on rebelling against the conventions of writing. “So you’re the one who teaches cool” is what accompanied Rice around campus (3). That is just one of the remarks he received and Rice believes that they suggest his interest in cool fixates not on rhetoric, but on status symbols (3). Symbols such as how you walked or talked was how you were considered cool. These are the easy things that people refer to as cool. Rice came to discover that cool consisted of a variety of rhetorical gestures and moves (8). Farris’s essay “Too Cool for School” demonstrated how not going to school or not being involved was cool. “The phrase materializes in contemporary rock music”(6) Rock stars would always sing about how not going to school was being cool.
A word that has transformed into a synonym for cool is the term “tight”. Typically this term refers to being firm in place, secure, fixed. Now this term has evolved to mean cool thanks to the evolving technology and slang used today. People use it like “that’s a tight watch” or “that concert was tight”. It is the perfect substitute for cool. I’ve seen the use of this word change as I’ve grown up. In high school was I think the first time I heard someone call something tight instead of calling it cool. Just as DJ Wik referred to the rhetoric of hot as being multifaceted and complex, so too is the rhetoric of tight. Being tight means being close with your friends or having the hottest new styles. There are plenty of other ways to say cool without saying, tight is just one of the many.
It’s apparent that Rice is not “too cool for school.” In fact, he’s taken that phrase and turned it inside out. Rice introduces a new idea of “cool,” one that society at large might disagree with. The example he opens up with is Broward Community College in South Florida. They advertise their campus as a “cool” campus. “Featuring a surfboard on the beach covered in descriptive text, the advertisement contrasts fun (surfing) with promised educational benefits. (1)” He later points out that there is no “Surfing 101” offered at the school. As a matter of fact, there’s really not much to differentiate Broward from Hillsborough Community College, or any other community college for that matter. The lure in set by the traditional values of what’s “cool.” Surprisingly, Hewlett Packard took it upon themselves to redefine the word… well, at least in a scholarly setting. Rice points out that schools who have an exceptional show of technology on their campuses can compete for a Cool School or CS award (2). Cool Schools would gain the benefit of enticing a larger number of students by promising a higher level of education.
ReplyDeleteZack has a great way of explaining Rice’s definition of cool. “This is where Rice takes his belief in “rhetoric of cool” and applies it to ways of composing in the modern age, yet remains confident that his take on ‘cool’ stems from its rebellion against the status quo, but in a fashion that is productive rather than destructive.” He’s absolutely right. Rice takes a subject that would normally be perceived as boring or un-cool and makes it interesting. “In this book I’m attempting to write against the status quo by arguing the cool writer as not cool for her identity…but rather how she is cool for the way she uses specific rhetorical practices. (6)” Isn’t that what cool’s all about? Being different, exciting and interesting? Rice explains the parallels between what he’s presenting and what’s accepted by the whole of society as cool: “Cool, in its definition, is something to be avoided for how it hinders the production of information. (5)” He argues that just because something can be progressive and educational, doesn’t deprive it of its “cool factor”
I love Kimi’s “rhetoric of XXX” because she draws a relevant correlation between the ambiguity and subjectivity of the rhetoric of happy and the rhetoric of cool. What works for one doesn’t always work for another. Ultimately, what I got from this introduction is that, by utilizing rhetoric properly and making it work for you, you can deviate from the boring and enter into a world of fresh, new ideas. I think it’s be cool to study the rhetoric of love. Some people may examine a relationship and say “that’s not love,” but they may be wrong. Standard or accepted definitions of love don’t apply to some people. Some people feel and express the emotion differently. That doesn’t make it any less valid or any less genuine, it just makes it different. And like “cool,” you don’t always have to know exactly how to explain it, you just have to know it’s there.
Before reading through Rice’s Rhetoric of Cool, I was a bit confused as to how he was going to tie in “cool” with composition. After treading through Rice’s examples, such as cool Jazz and fashion trends that are normally addressed in the topic of “cool,” I began to realize his point. I believe introduces these typical examples to prove a point that cool can be anything, but still people limit its definition to what they already know to be true. I find it interesting how Kimi explains cool in her first paragraph,” Think back to elementary school when all you wanted was to be cool. You’d do anything to fit in, change your clothes, change the way you acted, change the way you treat people… the list goes on. But by the time you changed your outfit and changed your attitude, it was no longer cool. The creators of “cool” were the ones who had the power to change it, and if you could not keep up, well then you were just not cool.” This is a good point to make. “Cool” is whatever is cool at that point in time. Cool changes all the time, everyday. To know what is cool, it is important to open to knew ideas and concepts.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting when Rice discussed that, “ For out of difference, we invent. For out of “missed moments,” we find completely new possibilities.” He introduces a good point that it isn’t what we know that creates great ideas, but what we discover. He goes on further to say,” Those possibilities are, however, sometimes difficult to identify or to work with in terms of disciplinary work because of our dependence on familiar texts and ideas.” It’s important to keep in mind past texts as guidance, but not to hinder your mind from traveling new places. Rice’s whole idea of Rhetoric of Cool is to open up people to new media-based writing practices by creating a new way of approaching “cool.” Alex makes a good point when saying that, “Rice makes an important point by letting readers know that he isn’t trying to be cool or sound cool- he’s trying to show that there are many signifiers of cool and that cool has something to offer the rhetoric of writing, not just the words used (slang, cursing).”
I would like to introduce my Rhetoric of Beauty. Many things come to mind when defining beauty. To me, beauty lies in the eye of the beholder, therefore beauty just like the rhetoric of cool can be many things. Naturally when the word beauty is brought to someone’s attention, there are many typical images that come to mind. Things such as a beautiful tall, skinny woman with just the right amount of curves, long silky blonde hair, piercing blue eyes, olive skin, pearl-white teeth, big boobs, and a perfect smile. To some, this may be far from what they define as something beautiful. To some, it could be the crooked smile of a lover. If you dig deeper than the surface it allows you to see past the norm, and opens you up to endless possibilities.
Rice's Rhetoric of Cool is at first extremely confusing because I felt like while trying to throw of the traditional meaning of the word he was simply furthering the meaning by extending it to a new field. Upon closer inspection I realized that this was not the case. I particularly like what Alissa said about Rice discussinf how cool has defined us as a society, moreso than how cool is defined.
ReplyDeleteHe takes the concept of "cool" and turns it on its head. People approach his concept with preconceived notions of hip and awesome attitudes. When in fact his theory is not meant to be seen in this manner at all. Actually, rhetoric is something that most people would find extremely boring and uncool.
It really struck home with me that the word cool has come to mean everything and nothing at the same time. So many words, phrases, and ideals are cheapened in this way. People throw them around in an attempt to seem fresh and ahead of the times. Unlike the other examples given, I think that Kara is asking us for more than just another overused word to create a theory out of.
My theory of rhetoric would have to foucus on