Here’s Andrea L’s video of her review of Jeff Rice’s The Rhetoric of Cool: Composition Studies and New Media
Recent Comments
- Angie on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Cristin on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Ashlee Wolfe on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Angie on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Angie on So, any peer review wrap-up questions? Questions/comments on the wiki?
- Angie on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Steve K. on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Andrea Larsen on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Gloria Shirey on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Gloria Shirey on So, any peer review wrap-up questions? Questions/comments on the wiki?
- Judy Wycoff on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Dave on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Ashlee Wolfe on So, any peer review wrap-up questions? Questions/comments on the wiki?
- Cristin on So, any peer review wrap-up questions? Questions/comments on the wiki?
- Cristin on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
Nicely done, Andrea. It certainly seems problematic that he would not define “cool” or the “rhetoric of cool” for the reader. It seems that if you are going to make an assertion that the history of composition and perhaps rhetoric need to be rewritten, defining the concept that underscores this idea would be important.
Dave, that is so “not” cool:-P *jk*
Cool is one of those terms that means something different to everyone. What is cool today is not cool tomorrow. I like that he really complicates this word, and that you try to define the word and it is not easy to do. It is cool, yes a pun, that he talks about there not being one way to produce rhetoric and that is so important to note. I like the idea of open verses fixed.
I like what Cristin has said here. I like that we have an opportunity for meaning-making, to decide for ourselves what cool means. The art and metaphors in the beginning grabbed my attention instantly! I was like “whoa, look at the guts and blood” and then hearing about the guts and blood with a cool, collected tone just put the icing on the cake.
You did a great job!! Nice tone. The volume seemed a little low.
I’m with you, too, Cristin. I like how “cool” is left rather ambiguous and allows for the meaning to be assigned differently or in new ways. After all, what is cool does change from person to person, community to community, generation to generation, and so on. It isn’t stagnant and should allow for some philosophy to leak in there. (Sorry, Dave.) This book seems interesting and I might have to check it out if I can ever get a big chunk of spare time… theoretical books are kinda scary but can be good when you have the brain power. Andrea– you did a great job.
Nice job Andrea. Great use of the Rembrandt at the beginning to illustrate the quote. From the excerpts you read, I got the impression that the book has a fun prose style. Also, I read a piece by Rice for my research project and I get the impression that he would be a pretty fun, edgy and “cool” teacher. On a side note, I don’t think he’s at Wayne State anymore.
Yeah, not really on the “fun prose style.” The book is pretty dense and theoretical. He uses quotes at the beginning of the chapter to spice things up, but, otherwise, not so much.
I agree with Dave and Cristin concerning the meaning of cool. It has meant different things for different generations. Maybe the fact that it is outdated goes with the way literature has been dissected is outdated. Great job Andrea. I liked your visuals because they helped the heavy duty topic that you are discussing.
Thanks for the review, Andrea!
I think that by “cool,” Rice wants it to be somewhat ambiguous, and really, defining it too much would create a whole different problem, as in readers saying “oh yeah? Well, why did you not say that ‘x’ counted as cool?!” I also think he is referencing (directly or indirectly, I don’t know since I didn’t read the book) McCluhan and the idea of “hot” and “cool” media.
By the way, Jeff has moved on from Wayne State to the University of Missouri, and he is apparently moving from there to the University of Kentucky next year.
Great job Andrea! I like all the fun touches you put on your video, especially the typing as you talked, very *cool* IMO! I think it sounds like a really great text and your point about why composition classes hasn’t refocused its narrative to the postmodern! Postmodern really is the quintessential cool
Text is indeed layered and I think that’s where the postmodern part comes in, I can’t imagine not using Pomo. People who do believe in one “right” answer, not with texts, life, or even technology!
Echoing what others have said, I think your review is very good, Andrea! You def got the conventions down (I kind of had a hard time with that, I think), and your typing and images are great!
Some of the ways Rice uses the word “cool” sound appropriate, while others seem kind of cheesy. I think I would probably have your impulse, too, and want Rice to define the term at least semi-explicitly. Showing how the concept is multifaceted and widely applicable in different contexts seems like a good idea, but if he’s really just ambiguous, that seems kind of problematic to me. Just my two cents, though. Anyway, again, well done!