Rhetoric in Culture: Texts & Critics

In this portion of Rhetoric in Popular Culture (chapters 3 & 4), Barry Brummett explores the deeper idea of what “texts” are as they pertain to popular culture, as well as the essential role of critics in bringing out its relevance for life. Texts, as he describes, are sites of struggle over meaning. They can be anything from works of literature, songs on the radio, a presidential debate or painted advertisements on the side of a bus. To the trained eye of a critic, texts reveal the values that particular cultures hold. Therefore, it is the job of the critic to extract various possible meanings from a text, interpret the subtle messages and to display the effect the text has for certain groups of people in society. They dig to find intertextuality, or swallowed text that may be adapted from an old context (that may no longer hold explicit meaning though it may be been successful in the past) in order to serve the current agenda. Critics give their two cents for, or perhaps on behalf of, those who either cannot articulate its meaning themselves or are unaware of it. In the overall scheme of things, critics are concerned over the distribution of power-- how it may be held, lost, or transferred, all through texts. To top it off, critics make a judgement call regarding a way to address the issue at hand. They have the power to encourage people to a movement or a change in lifestyle. Most importantly, Brummett says that that power is not reserved for, say, your university Communications professor. It lies within reach of anyone who is willing to thoroughly scourge through a text, behind the direct and implied meanings, and towards the deeper structured (yet common) patterns of culture.

The focus shifts in chapter 4 towards the possible messages that texts could have. Here, they are examined through 1) culture, 2) Marxist philosophy, 3) Visual methods, and 4) Freud’s psychoanalytic theory. Culture is vital in that it contains artifacts (also sites full of meaning) as well as the keys involved in understanding them. Different cultures provide a different outlook on the same events, and this acts as a framework for making judgement calls appropriate to the circumstance. However, one must be careful not to encroach on an ethnocentric view, whereby foreign cultures are evaluated through the eyes of one’s own culture. It is also important to note that it is not solely the text that should be studied, but in accord with the response that follows-- for this makes the whole meaning of a text. The Marxist’s philosophy believes that everything to do with ideas and concepts has “grown from material conditions and practices”. In effect, it follows that every aspect of life can be correlated to economics, such that values are bought and sold like commodities according to individuals’ personal socioeconomic needs. It parallels these thoughts to an interpretation of the Wizard of Oz, where Dorothy, the sole lazy worker on the farm wishes to live a richer and more pampered life. However, when a tornado whisks her away to a faraway land, she spends her time finding (or earning the solution to) a way back. Marxists would say that this story reeks of isolationism and anti-foreign entanglement propaganda, promoting the value of “home” where one is economically stable, if even though the work and difficult it may not be the preferred position. 

Source: image

(cont...) 

Because the Wizard of Oz could have possibly been a response to the people’s climb out of the Great Depression, the meaning of the film has changed.  Through the psychoanalytic view of Freud, Brummett believes rhetoric in popular culture satisfies unconscious desires. Films, especially, create the illusion that the characters are speaking directly to the audience, “suturing” the viewer to the storyline in the film. The viewer is then able to relate to the characters in the film who may be acting out on desires that may be socially inappropriate in reality. This then fulfills a sense of self-maintenance and completion for the viewer. The same goes with images, or visual texts. Because of its more ambiguous and flexible nature, images are made more dynamic and meaningful with a context. Brummett uses the example of Hurricane Katrina, a devastation that elicited the sending of thousands of aid packages from all over the nation. Why does this not happen when war and destruction is aired from third world countries, displaying the terror that happens everyday? We Are The World (25 For Haiti) is another example of how much power a text (in this case, a song) can hold if there are enough forces and context for it to move people towards action. (It is also an example of intertextuality-- it is a remake of the original song from artists that banded to help the African famine in 1985).

Related articles/topics:

• “How Fox News is Killing the Republican Party and Other Things I have No Business Talking About” (--just the title is subtly amusing too--)

• Student research article about the effects the promotion of Apple products has on the values of youth. Reinforces Marxist “economic metaphors”, or the philosophy that values are like commodities to be put up for bargain and sold to those who “buy [into]” them.

Discussion questions:

• Brumett warns against cultural hegemony, where an empowered group enforces their preferred (so it benefits them) meaning of a text so much so to the point where it begins to be accepted even be disempowered groups. Are there any instances of this today?

• According to the Marxist philosophy, what are some of the values that you (or people that you know) have supported or "bought" recently?