Both Killingsworth and Daniel present unique ideas in this
week’s readings, both conflicted with social and cultural norms. Killingsworth
battles with our universal acceptance of tropes and why humans feel the need to
use them. He analyzes the connection between abstract and concrete, our
inherent need to “express the emotional quality of our relationship to the
world” (Killingsworth 122). Daniel’s project is profound and moving,
questioning the social norm of turning a blind eye to public secrets. Daniel’s
project includes visual and audio elements, with descriptions and first hand
accounts of this issue (specifically dealing with incarcerated women). As both
authors tackle these huge social issues, it is important to dig deeper into the
discourse presented here and work through some of their most profound thoughts.
Killingsworth, like Daniel, presents ideas questioning our society as a whole, but why is he so concerned with tropes? Why not accept them as they are, as a form of discourse meant to enhance language? But no, that would be too easy. For Killingsworth, tropes are not merely “embellishments of language, but ways of thinking” (Killingsworth 122). He describes a metaphor as identification, compared to a simile or analogy, which Killingsworth describes as a “cautious” attempt to link two things.
So, why does it matter if a trope is a way of thinking?
Killingsworth sees the four tropes as functioning almost as stereotypes and is
very clear in his belief that they corrupt the discourse of our society. Tropes
do not only explain our need to put abstract ideas into words, but our need to
associate different ideas in our heads.
Daniel implements the use of tropes in his hypertext essay,
which I think Killingsworth would not approve of. I personally can understand
why Daniel chose to use them, given her overarching goal to bring justice to
the justice system. Using language to connect the women’s tragic experiences to
ones that an average (never incarcerated) citizen would understand.
Killingsworth addresses this tactic in his description of the metaphor, stating
“that rhetoric itself is all about identification, finding common ground among
persons, places, things and ideas,” exactly what Daniel is striving to do
(Killingsworth 123). There is also a slight irony in a few of Daniel’s
statements in his hypertext, but not for the purpose of humor or wit, purely to
make his audience think twice. The statement “I was in beauty pageants, than a
ballet dancer, then I just made a mess of my life” displays irony, that this
lady is just like them so many beautiful women in our country, making them
imagine being in her place. Another example from Daniel’s text is the metaphor,
“they have you locked and you will never have access to the control panel.”
Daniel’s use of these tropes supports Killingsworth’s argument that tropes are
essential in the crafting and appeal of social discourse.
Daniel’s blatant critique of the corporatized prison system
functions as a living document, shedding light on an issue that may not have
otherwise been heard. She implements Bahktin’s fundamental ideas of heteroglossia
into her hypertext, including real life examples and audio clips from members
of society. By using these emotional and personal accounts, Daniel presents her
case in a way that appeals to the public and to a generation/society that
believes in justice and human rights.
Bakhtin, Mikhail M. “Discourse in the Novel.” The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: U of Texas P, 1981. 259-331.
Daniel, Sharon. “Public Secrets.” Vectors 2.2 (Winter 2007): n. pag. Web.http://www.vectorsjournal .org/projects/index.php?project=57
What's interesting about this is the idea that tropes are taken at face value to be extremely important to language. I think the analysis of the culture they reside within is much more important to their use than the physical connections people within that culture may draw from the experience of using them or having them used on them. I think it's easy for people to forget that they are not just used to enhance language. When someone says "I'm feeling down" they might actually think they are feeling down. Killingsworth is attentive to that when he speaks of how incorporated they have become in people's ideas about themselves. There are, of course, fancy ways to use metaphor like in public speeches but a lot of the time people use metaphors almost reflexively. I was talking to my friends at a Mexican restaurant last night about figures of speech in Spanish and Portuguese. Apparently, in Portuguese they call rollercoasters "Russian Mountains" which of course made no sense to Americans. When my friend asked why they called it that, they had no explanation for him because it seemed weird than anyone would ask. He laughed about it until I reminded him that "cat's got your tongue" or "climbing the ladder of success" or "the pot calling the kettle black" or "he ran like the wind" seem like things that are so obvious to us, we wouldn't know how to explain them to a foreigner if they asked either. We had a particularly long conversation about the expression "grass is always greener (on the other side)" where we deconstructed what that meant. You ask someone to put themselves in the symbolic position of a cow or a goat or some farm animal. Then you ask them to be staring at a field opposite of them longingly as a symbolic gesture of wanting something you don't have. Then you ask them to cross over to that field symbolically and realize that it now appears worse than the thing you had before. All of this places a lot of pressure on someone to take your culture's considerations into account. What if in that culture, they just don't place that much importance on other things. Or they don't want to be considered a cow. Or they just don't understand the connection anyway. I think it complicates the idea of the signified + signifier = sign thing way too much to involve tropes at a ground zero part of your thinking, but most people do anyway. Do you think that it truly gets the point across, or do you think it is actually more divisive than inclusive?
ReplyDeleteI find this blog post interesting because while writing my post, I found the constant struggle of trying to figure out if a trope was a way of thinking or separate from a way of thinking. And you have many great points on how and why it is a way of thinking, For Killingsworth, tropes are not merely “embellishments of language, but ways of thinking” (Killingsworth 122), but my only concern, is his reason why he believes they corrupt the discourse of our society. When I was younger I never understood the reason or “need” behind metaphors and similes, and the only time I came across them was when dealing with poetry and even till today I don’t use them. You stated, “Tropes do not only explain our need to put abstract ideas into words, but our need to associate different ideas in our heads.” Is it really a need? I understand that tropes create images for the readers, and allows some to connect two different situations and/or scheme and paint a picture, but is someone doesn’t understand the meaning of the trope then it’s a lost cause and only causes more confusion. Is it really a way of thinking, or is it really a technique that can be taught and mastered.
ReplyDelete