Reidler+Rough+Draft

Estelle Reidler Dr. Archibald ENGL 340.01 February 29, 2012

Image 1:

Image 2: 

Visual Rhetoric Rough Draft, Paper 1 The classic representation of someone raising their hands up in joy serves to establish with the viewer a sense of victory, a resemblance to religion, or a moment of utter happiness. The 2 images that have been chosen from a series done by Life photographer Arthur Rickerby (Page 1) depict moments of small and large victories(Rickerby). Yet while they both represent victory these images resemble different stages of success, the process and the final result. Both images shown are from a series taken for the 1966 World Cup soccer tournament and they both focus on England’s national team. The first photograph is from a quarterfinal game in which England played against Argentina and managed to pull out a 1-0 victory after Geoff Hurst (number 10, he is the one holding player number 7) scored. The second image was taken after then championship game when England beat West Germany 4-2; the image shows captain of the England team Bobby Moore being lifted by his teammates with the Jules Rimet trophy. When looking at the first image it is important to start with the analytical tool the Rhetorical Triangle; the triangle consists of the maker of the image being the Rhetor, in this case Rickerby, the read visual text is the photograph itself, and the audience of the image being those who viewed and still view the image as part of Life magazine (Hesford). After the implements of the Rhetorical Triangle are understood the image can be looked at with more detailed observation. The context, the spatial and temporal locations of a photograph, of the first photograph would be the stadium that the game took place in and the historical time when the event occurred (Hesford). For this first photograph it was taken during 1966 at Wembley Stadium in London. After looking at the context of the photograph observations can be made about what is in the image itself, the most helpful analytical tools for viewing this image come from Roland Barthes. Barthes explains 3 messages that are conveyed in images in his article “Rhetoric of the Image”, these messages are: the Rhetorical or “symbolic” message, the linguistic message which involves text that is incorporated in the image, and the denoted image which is the image in its literal state with no interpretation (Barthes). Since this image is not accompanied by text there will be no focus on the linguistic message, but there will be on the rhetorical and the denoted messages. The denoted message is explained as “We never encounter (at least in advertizing) a literal image in a pure state. This is "message by eviction," constituted by what is left in the image when the signs of connotation are mentally deleted. Only the photograph is able to transmit literal information without forming it by means of discontinuous signs and rules of transformation” (Seilers). This means that you look at the photograph as it is and you assess what is literally depicted without adding any sort of interpretation to your viewing of the image, this is similar to the notion of Logos which is an appeal to reason, a logical argument; “Logos (Greek for 'word') refers to the internal consistency of the message--the clarity of the claim, the logic of its reasons, and the effectiveness of its supporting evidence. The impact of logos on an audience is sometimes called the argument's logical appeal” (Bean). So when you look at image 1 it is clearly evident that something has occurred which made these players come together, the player with his hands in the air is smiling so it was a good event that occurred; and from the way the players are dress, the type of goal depicted and the stadium it is clear that it is a soccer match. Specifically the England national team, which can be seen as clearly evident due to the jerseys the celebrating team is wearing. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">The rhetorical message as explained by Barthes is <range type="comment" id="942275">“A portion of the symbolic plane (of language) which corresponds to a body of practices and techniques. This is the case for the different readings of the image each sign corresponds to a body of "attitudes" - tourism, housekeeping, knowledge of art—certainty of which may obviously be lacking in this or that individual” (Barthes). This ideal of the rhetorical image can be associated with the Greek concept Pathos which is an appeal to the emotions of the audience; “Pathos (Greek for 'suffering' or 'experience') is often associated with emotional appeal. But a better equivalent might be 'appeal to the audience's sympathies and imagination.' An appeal to pathos causes an audience not just to respond emotionally but to identify with the writer's point of view” (Bean). The reason that these two can be coupled is because they symbolic nature of the photograph is able to play on the emotions of the viewer, particularly at the time that the photo was displayed to the public. Image 1 when viewed symbolically it is first important to think of how the audience of the photograph would have been impacted when the image was shown. When viewing the context of the image the viewers who were rooting for the England team during the 1966 World Cup would have know that the England and Argentina game was very close to being a loss for England but it was the impressive playing of Geoffrey Hurst, number 10 for England, who was able to pull a goal and save the team from elimination. So when viewing Hurst in the image those who were supporting England would have felt a sense of pride in their team; and the player to the side with his hands in the air would have enforced that sense of victory that was felt for the nation. The same can be viewed from those who supported the Argentinean national team; they would have viewed the image negatively because their team was knocked out of the championship due to the goal that the players are celebrating in the image. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">The second image, depicting the outcome of the World Cup final game, does not infer to what is truly represented when you look at it because there is linguistic message that tells you what the image is. So when viewing the second photograph with a denoted view you can see that they are soccer players, deductible because of the way that the men are dressed, and that they are happy because everyone is smiling in the image. When you look at the image with the idea of the rhetorical message there is much more that can be seen. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">In the photograph the men are holding up one member of their team who is triumphantly holding a trophy above his head in victory while his teammates are holding their hands up in celebration. The sky behind them is a brilliant shade of blue and the clouds are fluffy and white symbolizing a beautiful day, which adds to the ethos of the fans and players as the result of the game as being a beautiful moment in time for them individually and for England as a nation. Symbolically this image can be viewed in a temporal context when a fan of the England national soccer team views this image because they will know that this moment was a pinnacle for England, because this photograph represents the only World Cup win that the team has won (July). <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">When looking at the two images together in a series there is one particular analytical tool that can applied and it comes from two authors Blakesley and Brooke, and the concept is the nature of spectatorship. “The nature of spectatorship is a visual interpretation in the complexities of a picture. Visual imagery becomes like a text that can be read, decoded and interpreted” (Blakesley). The series of photographs viewed with the idea of spectatorship can be broken down into the three different components that are described in the definition of spectatorship. After looking at or “reading” the images they can be decoded and interpreted. The images together can be decoded as firstly the spectrum of the competition with the playing of the games and then the final victory that can be seen in the second image. Then they can be decoded and interpreted as moments of national pride. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">The two photographs can then also be interpreted as the national heroic status that was bestowed onto Geoffrey Hurst after he first kept England in the competition during the Argentina game; then he scored a “hat-trick” which is three goals in one game, during the championship game to give England as solid 4-2 victory over the West Germany team. <range type="comment" id="397481">When someone would have viewed these images in Life magazine they would have known that Hurst was such a pivotal piece to the overall meaning of the series because of the work that he had done; they also would have associated the fact that the player that is being hoisted on his teammates shoulders was the captain of the team, so he was considered the leader, the one that everyone looked at so the idea that he was being lifted about everyone while raising the trophy in the air played on the emotions of the audience. They were able to identify him and realize that the entire picture was not an example of a John D. Ramage readymade pose, “includes those identities that we have not ourselves constructed, that have been prefabricated by others and are on offer through the workplace, the marketplace, and the cultural space we occupy” (Ramage). The photograph was not posed but was rather a raw, emotional, real moment that was captured by the photographer. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">The effectiveness of these photographs to emphasize the victory of the English national soccer team became <range type="comment" id="351664">a pivotal moment in history. These images can still be found for sale of different websites from Amazon, E-Bay, and many other places. They represent the triumph of the team that still has yet to be duplicated by another England World Cup team. Works Cited Barthes, Roland. //Theorizing Communications: Readings Across Communications//. Sage Publications, Inc. 2007. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. Bean, John C., and John D. Ramage, John D., //Writing Arguments//. 4th Ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998, 81-82. Print. Blakesley, David. And Collin Brook. “Introduction: Notes of Visual Rhetoric” //Enculturation.// Vol. 3, No. 2. Fall 2001. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. Hesford, Wendy S., and Brenda Brueggmann. //Rhetorical Visions: Readings and Writing in a Visual Culture//. 1st Ed. Prentice Hall, 2006. Print. “July 30.” //On This Day//.BBC Witness. 2005. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. Ramage, John D., //Rhetoric: A User’s Guide.// Pearson Education, Inc. 2006. Print. Rickerby, Arthur. Photographer Page. LIFE. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. Seiler, Robert M. PhD. //Roland Barthes//. University of Calgary, California. Web. 26 Feb. 2012.

Brandon Lalli Dr. Archibald Visual Rhetoric Engl 340.01

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 16px;">Estelle Reidler Evaluation: Paper 1 RA

> > -I believe that the writer understands the concept of a rhetorical analysis and the paper does demonstrate this. The use of the analytical tool, the Rhetorical Triangle<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif;"> early on is a clear indicator for this. > > - The two pictures show the celebration of the English soccer team at different points in time, but how it is still the same. > > > -The use of Barthes, Blakesly and Brooke are used very well. Also the use of the Triangle is mentioned. Barthes use of the "three images" is used and is effective. While the use of spectatorship from Blakesly and Brooke is also used well.
 * 1) ** Does the writer understand the concept of a rhetorical analysis and does the paper demonstrate its application? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **
 * 1) ** What argument / communicative purpose does the paper describe for the photographs it uses. Is it appropriate? **** Effectively presented? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **-I am going to say that the communicative purpose of the photographs is the thrill of victory in soccer. I think that it is used well and is appropriate.
 * 2) ** What is the argument claim put forward for the photograph(s) under analysis in the paper? Is it appropriate? Effectively presented? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **
 * 1) ** What did you like about how the various visual/rhetorical theorists (Berger/Faigley/Ramage/Blakesly&Brooke/Barthes) were used in the paper? What could be improved about how the paper uses these theorists? What suggestions do you have for the writer? Be as specific as possible by discussing each theorist one at a time and how the paper uses them. Also, give suggestions of theorists that the writer does not use but might be useful in his/her rhetorical analysis. **

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Amanda Charles <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Dr. Archibald <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Visual Rhetoric <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Engl 340.01

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Estelle Reidler <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> Evaluation: Paper 1 RA

> > <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> I really liked the use of the rhetorical triangle. I think that the writer understands the concept of analysis but could make it clearer with a stronger and more defined thesis.
 * 1) <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">1. **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Does the writer understand the concept of a rhetorical analysis and does the paper demonstrate its application? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">I think the writer is saying that the photographs express the joy of victory. I think it was presented will overall. However, I think the comments made would have been stronger if they were tied to a stronger thesis. > > <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> She was showing how even though they were from different times they were both showing the same happiness. I think it is appropriate and I liked that she had a separate paragraph looking at the two of them together. > > <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> I think she used the authors at good places and for good arguments. I think it’d be a lot stronger if she did more paraphrasing of what they said instead of so many direct quotes.
 * 1) <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">2. **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">What argument / communicative purpose does the paper describe for the photographs it uses. Is it appropriate? Effectively presented? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **
 * 1) <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">3. **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">What is the argument claim put forward for the photograph(s) under analysis in the paper? Is it appropriate? Effectively presented? Why or why not. Give suggestions. **
 * 1) <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">4. **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">What did you like about how the various visual/rhetorical theorists (Berger/Faigley/Ramage/Blakesly&Brooke/Barthes) were used in the paper? What could be improved about how the paper uses these theorists? What suggestions do you have for the writer? Be as specific as possible by discussing each theorist one at a time and how the paper uses them. Also, give suggestions of theorists that the writer does not use but might be useful in his/her rhetorical analysis. **