Points of Praxis

My Blog Reflects on Visual Rhetorical Theory and Disability Rhetoric and their Connections to Classical and Contemporary Rhetorical Theory

Since this is the beginning of my semester-long orientation with Electronic Literature, I'm going to start my blog by discussing the relevance of Electronic Literature, particularly for a student of Rhetoric.  Of course, as the semester goes on, I hope to be able to add to this discussion as well as explore E-Lit from a genre-based perspective, since that is one of my areas of interest.  But for the time being, I think a broad examination as to "why?" is a good a place to start as any.

And, I have to admit, this is all completely new to me.  But, I am very excited--for reasons that really have little to do with studying this emerging genre.  I have always been an "English major."  I was reading and writing my own stories for as long as I can remember.  So, English studies were not terribly difficult for me in high school, college, and graduate school.  I suppose, looking at my own experiences from a genre-based perspective, I'm very good at intuitively understanding how to write academic papers; after all, if I have trouble with an assignment, usually the first thing I do is go and find a sample to read. 

However, the "man" I'm seeing currently is also an English major finishing his M.A., but he is not now nor ever really was the "typical" English major.  Writing academic prose is very difficult for him, and he always felt left out of the departments.  He preferred to read comic books to Chaucer, play Final Fantasy to reading Hemingway, and although he can pick out plots and subplots in Japanese anime, he struggled to find the comma splices in his own papers.  He was the shoe that just didn't fit.  But, after my first class, I called him immediately.  He wasn't a "bad" English major, he was in the wrong program. 

As I see it, Electronic Literature is embracing, creative, and cutting-edge. 

Electronic Literature, as I am just coming to understand it, seems to be "occupying a space" that is both visual and rhetorical in ways that have never been imagined.  Specifically, E-Lit seems to operate in a semiotic theoretical framework that also might be considered "visual literature" since it illustrates "the narrative capacity of the visual" (Blair 51).    Looking more specifically at E-Lit from a semiotic theory, I am thinking here of Gunther Kress' discussions on language practices--the emphasis on the syntagmatic relationship of signs to each other.  As Daniel Chandler explains, "Thinking and communication depends on discourse rather than isolated signs" (84).  Therefore, if discourse is operating like dominos, then discourse is often quite narrative in nature.  However, there are other syntagmatic forms "based on spatial relationships [...] and on conceptual relationships" (84). 

It seems so obvious to me that E-Lit applies these relationships.  Video games, for instance, are both visual and discursive.  Video games are visual narratives:  besides the images on the screen, they rely on spatial and conceptual relationships, just like any discourse or literature would. 

And, I'm so excited about this new "genre," if that is even an appropriate word for it.  Studies in Electronic Literature seem to open up the discipline so much more than anything I can imagine.  It seems almost democratic.  After all, if "Literature" means those works by the Shakespeares, Chaucers, and Hemingways, then most people do not study literature.  Many in our population are left out of the "Ivory Tower" of academic studies because they can't relate, they don't understand, or they simply don't like those texts deemed important.  And, just like my "man" who always felt excluded from his traditional English department, studies in E-Lit might welcome new students--disenfranchised students--who have been interested in and working with semiotics and visual rhetoric for decades, although they may not have ever known it.

Chandler, Daniel.  The Basics:  Semiotics.  New York:  Routledge.  2002.

Blair, J. Anthony.  "The Rhetoric of Visual Arguments."  Defining Visual Rhetorics.  Charles A. Hill and Marguerite Helmers, eds.  Mahwah, NJ:  Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.  2004.

posted by: rgregory at 15:25 | link | comments (5) |

Comments:

#1  09 September 2005 - 19:59

 

Yes, I think that rhetoric really has gotten a bad rap. What really makes literature the "elite"? Rhetoric is more complicated, broader, more interesting. I can't say how glad I am that Dr. Burns, like the great rhetorician he is, persuaded me to join the rhetoric program here. Thanks for asking me to comment on your blogs! Talk at you soon! Cheri

crenshaw

#2  10 September 2005 - 00:31

 

The tone works. And the references are helpful. As you engage with the work of electronic literature and with the theoretical works we are reading in the course, you will find it easier and easier to respond. In other words, the content will be3 enriched by the experience.

Good job.

Dene Grigar

Dene

#3  14 September 2005 - 18:06

 

Yes Rochelle, you are accurate. Elit provides a way to include more people. It allows people to get excited about literature, especially people like your "man."

arogers

#4  07 December 2005 - 22:45

 

It would be interesting to add up the number of words you produced for this blog to see how much is there. Have you?

--Dene

Dene

#5  08 December 2005 - 01:11

 

It came out to 21 pages single-spaced total and 9,743 words--not counting any of the comments.

Wow. That's a lotta learnin.

rgregory

Comments: