40 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2018
    1. he next stage of this agenda, that is, development on the quality of embodi-ment, needs to push embodiment in the direction of gender commonalties and differences, gender identity, human sexuality, pleasure and desire, and emotion.

      Qualities of embodiment -- how technology interacts with emotion, sensations, physical presence, and identity

  2. Oct 2018
    1. embodiment

      "a tangible or visible form of an idea, quality, or feeling"

      "the representation or expression of something in a tangible or visible form"

      These two definitions of embodiment are different in that one refers to a physical connection and the other as more of a metaphorical connection. Thinking about this difference in reference to the authors repulsion by the thought of "separating mind from body," it seems as though is may be thinking too literally. In a solely physical conversation, the human brain cannot be removed from a body without it dying, but is our brain actually our "mind"? Can the "mind" simply be a metaphorical representation of our brain, and can a "soul" be the metaphorical equivalent to our body? Maybe a human's mind can live on, separate from the body, at least for people who choose to believe that there is more to a human than our physical form.

      Last statement reference to survey assignment... my subject automatically thought about her body as what she thinks, feels and believes in (mental emotional and spiritual), not only just physical.

  3. Aug 2018
    1. phenomenologically-basedapproach to trust, one that stresses precisely that‘‘...the bodily presence in the encounter appears to beessential for understanding the relation of trust.’’ Hemakes this point in part by way of reference to thework of K. E. Løgstrup,1E. Levinas,2and others –and thereby takes up trust as an ‘‘irreducible human
  4. Oct 2017
    1. His mother is a very anxious woman, very very anxious....

      When Rabbi Dov talks about Yosef’s mother, he presents a possible embodied experience made by Yosef being raised by his “anxious” mother. For the rest of Rabbi Dov’s dialogue, he describes Yosef’s unorthodox and introverted behavior – including features like not having his hair trimmed, not wearing a hat, not wearing the cloak, and just overall the seemingly lost disposition Yosef carried as he developed. A good way of thinking about the concept of embodiment is the “social body.” The body that is influenced by the culture we are raised in or by the role models we situate ourselves by. In this case, since it seems like Yosef was constantly being pestered by his mother due to her anxious nature, he might’ve adopted that kind of behavior and grew to be how he is today. He embodied her mannerisms and insecurity and transferred it to himself – now it affects his behavior as a disciple or a follower of this religion and, Rabbi Dov believes, it is the reason why he is so obsessed with the “woman,” even when there is no logical way that he could’ve helped that woman survive.

  5. Apr 2017
    1. “Humans” do not simply assemble different apparatusesfor satisfying particular knowledge projects but are themselves specific localparts of the world’s ongoing reconfiguring

      I'm looking at this in the context of McLuhan's argument for technology as an extension of the human being. It seems to me that Barad also sees the "human" as extended beyond the materially contiguous body, but also in terms of reverse, humans as an extension of worldly processes, extended through us. The "person" stops being a discrete, immiscible beings, but "specific local parts" operating in "mutually implicated" elements of the world.

    1. My body is experiencing events.

      After byrons first comment I find myself following the unique embodiment sections of this reading.

    2. I write the myths in me,

      As Byron is saying above, this is a really interesting new spin on embodiment and the connections between language and imagination. This feels a lot like Cixous' impassioned speaker.

  6. Mar 2017
    1. commodious

      Definition: comfortably or conveniently spacious.

      This word choice is definitely on point here given the bodily implications of his argument -- we must make literal space for other bodies in the process of arguing (living).

    2. face the flushed, feverish, quaky, shaky, angry, scared, hurt, shocked, disappointed, alarmed, outraged, even terrified conditio

      The abstract comes up against the material, here, and is found wanting. This is a starkly physical concern, in comparison to the very lofty discussions of emotions and abstract narratives. "This life or none" is a very real danger, and the method above does not seem quite so urgent.

    3. have to start searching that person's history until we begin to understand what led him or her to speak just so. Sometimes we do less well: if the history isn't there for us, we don't learn it, but instead make it up to suit ourselves.

      This is an excellent view of the relationship with Others who do not fit the schema we hold. We can probably relate this back to embodiment and how a disagreement of ideas turns into a disagreement between (and because of) bodies, but I'm going to wait and see where Corder goes with this before wandering down that road . . .

      Later update: I like his very embodied, lengthy chain of descriptions (flushed, feverish, quaky, shakey" etc.) to the heart of competing narratives.

    1. Your body must be heard
    2. What woman hasn't flown/stolen?

      Damn, Cixous, you're giving away all our lady-secrets!

      (But seriously, this idea of women-in-flight seems closely tied to the animated speaking/writing we discussed a few pages earlier.)

    3. Cixous is said to advocate women's "writing their bodies."
    4. Who am I? I am "doing" French history.

      This is fascinating! What an excellent articulation of the self. I'm willing to bet that I'm going to be using the "embodiment" tag a fair number of times in this text, and this is a great place to start.

      Here, Cixous is already recognizing that her "self" is at least partly a racially, historically, and politically situated body. Simply by being the rhetor she is, she is actively "doing" French history by participating in the public sphere. It may not have been as dangerous for her as it was for Douglass or Palmer or Stewart, but much of what she had to say was still revolutionary, and her body is an important part of that revolutionary performance.

    1. sexuality and politics;

      He is here discussing the prohibitions around the very topic, but of course there were doubly taboos on who could talk about the taboo subjects, and whose accounts of the matter were considered downright dangerous.

    2. ites

      Although Derrida uses "sites," this sounds a lot like our conversation about spaces, particularly regarding the difficulty certain rhetors face in trying to access a public platform in a literal way.

    3. who is speaking? Who, among the totality of speaking individuals, is ac-corded the right to use this sort of language (lan-gage)? Who is qualified to do so?

      The return of a question we've been asking for the past few weeks . . .

    4. discourse i1, a form of social action

      This seems to link us back to the problem of embodiment, and those rhetors for whom the very fact of public speaking was an urgent political problem and social action. (Douglass, Palmer, Stewart, Grimke(s), etc.)

  7. Feb 2017
    1. It is true I am a woman; it is true I am employed; but what professional experiences have I had? I

      This reminds me of Iris Young's "Five Faces of Oppression." Young argues that we often neglect to see the many faces of oppression, and that we misrepresent reality by comparing dissimilar experiences of oppression as existing under the same general umbrella of subjectivity. Anyone who experiences even one face of oppression is oppressed, but many individuals and groups experience oppression differently because they may experience different combinations of the faces of oppression. One face of oppression which often goes overlooked is "powerlessness."

      Powerlessness is a distinction between technical freedom and actual self-possession and choice. Examples Young gives are that although we are technically allowed to choose our employer, many employees are placed at the bottom of the totem pole, where they are dictated to, rather than consulted about their own work. Those who work menial jobs, for example, in which the minutia of their jobs (what to do and how to do it) are strictly controlled are powerless. In contrast, professionals such as doctors, teachers, managers, etc. are given a degree of freedom and choice about how to best go about their work, and they might even have employees working under them, whose work they get to control. This freedom gives one "respectability" in the eyes of society and one's own eyes. If someone does not have access to professionalization, they are denigrated for this lack of "respectability," by the implication that they are inferior to professionals. This, of course, becomes a vicious economic and psychological cycle.

      This system of oppression through powerlessness is what Woolf is referencing here. Although she is employed, society has denied her the freedom allotted to most literary professionals, most of whom are men. She is employed, but she is not a professional because she is denied the freedom and respectability that being a professional connotes.

    2. find new audiences-es

      I like this idea of finding a new audience, rather than converting an old one. This seems to imply that the a rhetor is not necessarily obligated to sway those who are opposed to the very fact of their speech. Instead, they can simply find a new form and a new audience to "get a hearing," since that's apparently a phrase now. I mean, it seems a little idealistic, but less likely to expose the rhetor to violence.

    1. he public sphere has become drmnatically more open to the rhetoric or women and minorities, whose practices, coming from struggles lo get a hearing, have materially marked contem-porary rhetoric

      Again that phrase "to get a hearing." What does this mean, in context? I feel like I'm missing something important about this super-weird phraseology.

    2. that writers cannot address an actual audience, but rather project the kind of audience that will be receptive to their work. Reading thus involves a kind of ne-gotiation between the actual reader and the role that the author projects for the ideal reader.

      Hmmmm, so how would this apply to our hostile audiences from two weeks ago? Those were audiences for oral arguments, rather than readers, but presumably the relationship would be similar. Essentially, I suppose I am asking what Ong would say in response to an author who is deliberately writing to an unreceptive audience.

    1. Phil9sophy is .i!1~ep¥Uble fyom Jang4age, and no self-consciousness will alter or transcend tqat circumstance.

      The important thing seems to be the self-consciousness. Nietzsche (swear to God, if the quiz asks us to spell that name, I swear to God) is trying to avoid the "I identified the problem, and thus, I've solved it." The image of unmasking their pretensions has the dangerous risk of thinking that the mask is something outside the norm, and that there's something stable underneath it that's been revealed.

    1. little legal recourse, given that married women's property laws ~~-...-~\ often still gave everything, even a wife's wages, to the husband

      We've had some discussions over when does Feminism start/proto-Feminism end, and it reminds me of Mary Wollstonecraft, who's generally considered to be the last woman to found feminism with her book Maria: The Wrongs of Women at the end of the 18th Century. The central focus of the book is a woman's legal non-entity and how a man's wantonness can abuse that. The history of the legal construction of a woman is something that should not be overlooked here.

    2. with an introduction comprising three letters from male

      Another example of white male testimony being necessary for Othered bodies to be taken seriously, connecting us to Palmer, Stewart, the Grimkes, and Douglass last week.

    1. did not yet enjoy this supportive reaction

      This seems like quite an understatement, given the last sentence of the next paragraph. Do we have any historical info regarding the ways the hostility of the audience manifested itself? I imagine it must have been fairly extreme to force her to leave the city. For example, was it heckling, attempts to speak over her, jeers and boos to drown out her words, perhaps even a dramatic attempt to pull her from the stage? It seems like the reactions of such hostile audiences offer important historical information, as it should be kept in mind when we consider how women and people of color first needed to shape a type of rhetoric that would quell a hostile audience.

      As an example from a different historical moment, there are conflicting reports of Sojourner Truth's reception at the Seneca Falls Convention. Some reports imply that she was heckled, or at least that there were interjections from the audience, while other reports offer an opposing narrative that present Truth as largely supported by the audience and not decried at all. The hostility or receptivity of the audience (and the way such information is mentioned in accounts) shapes the way we can interpret Truth's oration and its effects.

    1. under the influence of slavery

      Keeping in mind his audience, Douglass here demonstrates that the evils of slavery are not limited to the harm visited upon slaves (which is the type of harm white abolitionists wanted him to represent by showing the damage his body had sustained as a slave).

    2. Douglass made no attempt to retain a plantation accent in his speech or a trace of the slave's servility in his manner.

      This is a significant decision on Douglass' part, and it was a decision that had to be faced not only by other free blacks who spoke publicly, but also by those who recorded and reported such speech-making. A dialect (or lack-thereof) could influence the audience's perception of the speaker, and there are those who would (and have) edited dialect back into the public speeches of black rhetors. For this reason, it's always best to be cautious when reading a text with heavy dialect. Consider to whom such a dialect would appeal, and the political choice such a dialect represents. In this case, white's desire for Douglass to portray himself with a "plantation accent" and "slave's servility" serves the interests of those hoping to appeal to a white savior complex, and their desire to turn Douglass into a mere character rather than an abolitionist thinker in his own right.

    3. led audi· ences to doubt that he had ever been a slave, or, contrariwise, to doubt that he spoke his own words

      How appropriate after we had a class on conspiracy theories.

      Those of you who've never checked out archconservative internet communities like Free Republic or The Blaze haven't seen the staggering litany of accusations against former President Obama's oratory. Ranging from teleprompter/empty suit accusations to accusing him of near-supernatural trickery or hypnotism to explain his popularity.

    4. (his right hand was broken in a brawl at a meeting in Indiana and never healed prop· erly),

      One of the things I note with embodied rhetoric is that Douglass and the abolitionists weren't the first movement to face physical violence for their beliefs, but they were a movement where physical violence could not be distanced from their advocacy. Douglass not only uses his scars as a rhetorical tool, that scarring is significant to the construction of his own identity. I'm looking to Harriet Wilson's Our Nig, particularly at the end where the protagonist, Frado, contrasts herself against her husband, a fugitive slave who's touring the abolitionist lecture circuit, and notes his "back showed no marks of the lash, erect as if it never crouched beneath a burden." The scars of slavery aren't just a demonstration of his condition, they're a part of how his identity was formed.

    1. Sarah Mallet first preached while convulsed by a sei7Ure. She was unable to remember any or her words upon awakening.

      Wait, what? Are we just . . . not interested in looking into that? This feels like it moves on too quickly . . . are we to assume it was a deliberate, strategic claim to demonstrate the will of the Holy Spirit? It seems strange that so many people want to closely examine "miracles" of all sorts, yet this one was easily accepted. It certainly puts a new spin on the importance of the rhetor's body, though.

    1. persuade only by seduc-tively employing their sexuality;

      This is a great example of how embodiment effects the audience's perceptions of the rhetor.

    2. male hecklers who threatened violence,

      This is a partial answer to my concern about Stewart's speaking experiences. I wonder whether heckling (and its consequences) was better recorded against the Grimke sisters because they were white women (and therefore viewed as more fragile and worthy of protection).

    3. which wa.'i burned to the ground by an angry mob shortly after she spoke.

      A second example of a well-documented consequence of women speaking to a mixed crowd. (Though, to be fair, it would be sort of difficult to overlook this one/fail to record it. It's pretty dramatic.)

    1. heterogeneous and hostile audi-ences, lo claim a hearing that their very appear.ince would often seem lo deny them, and thus to add entirely new elements lo the Western rhetorical tradition

      This is a historical moment in which the body of the rhetor must be taken into account, as well as the bodies of the audience.

    2. von Humboldt ar-gues that language use reHects one's inner state, in two senses: the personal and the national or cultuml. Language is a tool for studying both personality and culture

      This sounds like it is dancing around the issue of embodiment, as well.

  8. Jan 2017
    1. His quantification of variation under the influence of the Aristotelean ‘Golden Mean,’ developed by the latter in the second volume of the Nichomachean Ethics whereby virtue is the desirable mean between deficiency and excess.

      Ah, so here (and in the highlighted portion below) is the first moment when we see the bodily "mean" or "average" being connected to virtuosity and societal ills. I mean, we have not yet jumped to "if you have a birthmark you must be a witch," but I think Lemos is identifying the scientific/historical moments which later devolved into such trends. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sglyFwTjfDU

  9. Jul 2016
    1. The body matters to learning.

      PhysEd teachers have a lot to teach us. We may mention this, paying lipservice to the notion of embodied learning. But it’s remarkable how “heady” we all remain in pedagogical spheres.

  10. Jun 2016
    1. writing scenes are overwhelmingly populated by bodies: shocked, angry, delighted, and feeling-full bodies. Although many models of composition focus upon the signifying dimensions of writing, they often fail to account for writing's experiential aspects.

      Affect theory emerging in Rhetcomp

  11. Oct 2015