viz.
Rhetoric - Visual Culture - Pedagogy
Tags
advertisement
advertising
architecture
art
assignment
Barack Obama
Comics
design
fashion
film
Hillary Clinton
Humor
In-class Exercise
information design
Iraq
Maps
news
Pedagogy
pedagogy examples
photography
photography
photography
Political Propaganda
politics
Propaganda
video
visual art
Visual Rhetoric
Writing Exercise
youtube
DisclaimerThese blog entries represent the views of their authors, not necessarily those of the CWRL, the University of Texas at Austin, or any of its affiliated entities. |
Reply to commentReplyYour contribution to the blog: Please Read Before PostingThe viz. blog is a forum for exploring the visual through identifying the connections between theory, rhetorical practice, popular culture, and the classroom. Keeping with this mission, comments on the blog should further discussion in the viz. community by extending (or critiquing) existing analysis, adding new analysis, providing interesting and relevant examples, or by making connections between that topic and theory, rhetoric, culture, or pedagogy. Trolling, spam, and any other messages not related to this purpose will be deleted immediately. Comments by anonymous users will be added to a moderation queue and examined for their relevance before publication. Authenticated users may post comments without moderation, but if those comments do not fit the above description they may be deleted. |
Recent comments
|
Well, to an extent I do
Well, to an extent I do agree with you (I certainly don't think Dean's outburst was representative of his candidacy, and I do think that his ensuing treatment by the media was unfair). But, to put all my cards on the table, I do not think it is unfair to take this speech (not to mention the video it spawned, which the campaign did not create but from which it has not distanced itself) as representative of what I take to be a central component of Obama's appeal and his candidacy: his rhetorical prowess and his ability to inspire people and bring them together. And I don't think doing so means focusing on the slogan over the substance: in this case, the form of the message itself, and the candidate's ability to bring the message well, are foregrounded as substantive reasons to support him (as important, if not more important, than his policy positions). For what it's worth, in principle I'm not opposed to such a sell--it's just that in this case I'm not particularly convinced by it.
It's also starting to feel rather lonely over here, casting my cold, Hope-disparaging eye Obama's way. They always told me I had an old soul; this clinches it. But I'm not totally alone in blogland:
Opinionator
The Caucus
Trailhead
XX Factor
Wonkette
But then there's this, which is just...so bad: