Public writing, to an extent, involves a sort of compartmentalization. We have been conditioned through all our years of school to understand how we speak to our fam, our homies, is not how we would speak in a more formal setting. We’ve been conditioned to understand how public writing should look, so much so it may be a bit difficult to illustrate it into words. As Bowdon and Scott mentioned: rhetoric can be taught and developed. For example, I would not be writing “issa call to assemble” for the white paper assignment. However, rhetoric is situational. Let’s take this past presidential election as an example. Hillary Clinton changed how she acted, the words she said, to become more likeable with a younger, largely minority-filled voting group. The only difference between me using more academic language and her utilizing slang words and teaming up with Beyonce was the situation. This brings us to one of the concepts discussed in the reading: kairos. The idea that you are saying the right words at the right place and at the right time. We must, as rhetors, be able to read the dynamics of our audience and adapt. I’ll call on my own personal experience and the topic of my group project for class: food deserts. Now I have personally experienced being in a food desert in my hometown and was privileged enough to only see it as an annoying hassle, not a dire situation. Yet, I have experienced numerous forms of racism (internalized and external) and sexism. How, as a woman of color, can I take my emotions and transform them into professional writing, especially when I am so passionate about it? How can I become the next public face of the people of color while appealing to white people? How can I make them understand my struggles as an immigrant from the Dominican Republic?
Well, I can start by using what classical rhetoricians have created: the five canons. These canons are invention, style, delivery, memory, and arrangement. I will preface this by saying by no means are the colloquialisms of minority youth somehow less academic than how white youth speak, it is merely a language that is understood almost exclusively by those surrounded in urban areas. I have to switch up my style, my slang because it isn’t viewed by the majority as academic. I will never let that part of me go, but I have to compartmentalize myself for now until my language is seen as important by all. With that being said, I can use this concept to turn my experience into something that everyone can digest. Even as a person of color, I may not have fully experienced the extent of food deserts but I must use my experience and privilege to illustrate the effects of it along with my partners. I can specifically focus on accessibility, a subpart of the arrangement canon. I have to make the audience feel what those plagued by food deserts feel every single day.
I must also focus on clarity and voice/tone which are subparts of the style canon. I can’t “go off on people”. I have to remain composed even if every inch of me wants to start yelling and throwing things. Unfortunately, it will only deter my group from reaching our goal of educating. While people of color understand “the nod”, the unspoken gesture of “Duh, c’mon. We’ve been dealing with this crap forever. This is nothing new to me”, not all white people understand our struggles. Even if it pains me, even if it angers me, I need to step away from myself and reach the masses and not preach to the choir.
That’s the amazing thing about rhetoric. It takes practice. While I may be naturally gifted with eloquence, speaking from my rear end won’t always get the point across. I can and will become more persuasive as time goes on. Because “Issa call to assemble” will have to be at another time, in another place. But this is right now, right here.
I agree that compartmentalization is somewhat tied to the success of any rhetorical campaign, and it is definitely expected. Awareness of your audience is one of the most important considerations to make before writing. However, I would argue that pushing past the boundaries of this closed-off rhetoric can allow for an overall improved rhetoric, if done correctly. The potential for code-switching (the rapid shift from one rhetorical style to the next) in one text, and for allowing different styles and sources of rhetoric in a relatively small body of work, to inform and expand a text has yet to be explored in this blog post.
It was hinted at with Hillary Clinton. She injected some slang into her rhetoric to give her a more casual, likeable air in the public eye. The success of this tactic was debatable here; many would argue she came off as cold as ever. One way of looking at this situation is that she took advantage of the kairos of the situation, but did not, as Bowden said, “make [her] audiences aware of [the] situation’s exigence.” In other words, she did not properly adapt the context for her rhetoric shift.
Slang can be brought into any text — an academic text, for instance — as long as it is provided sufficient context. While drawing the parallel is imperfect, it is similar to discussing foreign words in academic historical or cultural texts. the word is introduced, contextualized, explained. Then used. Then contextualized again. In adapting this language to fit her needs and her rhetoric, she was essentially using foreign words. However, she did not allow enough time for this rhetorical shift to be made, and did not pull it off in a genuine manner. Then, the kairos was not strong enough the support her and she came off as false and pandering. Complete compartmentalization is not the only rhetorical strategy, but a departure from it must be taken with care.