Language for Today

Laineys Repertoire, flickr

Laineys Repertoire, flickr

I just read “Is Language A Window into Human Nature” on Space Collective, in which the author argues that language must be reinvented in order to address our new technological age and the obstacles of this age. I find this interesting, because I’ve been having a difficult time describing what exactly Harlot is in the minutiae. Yes, we publish articles (and mighty nifty ones, I might add), but we’re not just another journal. Heck no, we’re specifically geared toward interactivity and community–through comments, the blog, the wiki. We’re a “place” and a “space” for dialogue. So, why is it that I can’t stop using those two words?

The hesitation I have to use certain words (ie publication, journal, magazine) stems from the connotation of those words. I’m not a big fan of the word “forum” either, simply because I don’t want it confused with bboards or message boards. We are online, after all, and that could easily be misinterpreted by the web savvy.

I wonder if we require our own special word. Hmm. We’re a publication and a community, so we’re a publunity? We’re a journal and a space, so we’re a jourace? Oh, I know, we’re a mag, a blog, and a wiki, so we’re a mogi. Ha, sounds like a band name.

None of these are going to catch on. First of all, they’re terrible, and secondly, they don’t carry any context for readers. That’s what makes creating a new language so difficult. If it doesn’t happen organically, then it’s hard to force on anybody, because no one knows what you’re talking about and they don’t really care to.

Do I wish for one perfect word to encompass all that Harlot is and will be? Absolutely. It’d make my job easier, but at the same time, isn’t it my job to try and attain that–to be active in the movement that is Harlot and push for the convergence of multiple forms of contribution. To encourage the amalgamation of top-down and bottom-up voices in this community? So, what do we call it? Other than a “place” or a “space” or simply Harlot. An interactive online publication? A web-mag and community? A rhetorical realm for the populice? How do you describe all that you are in one simple, understandable word if that word has yet to exist yet?

Available Harlot Positions

Want to show Harlot some love? Think you can show us how it’s done? Ready to play?

We’re looking for new recruits and fresh ideas — not to mention skills. Work with super-cool contributors and reviewers. Enter the exciting world of HTML. Be a magnanimous zenith of greatness. Er, help keep Harlot‘s feet on the ground.

If you’re interested or want more information, shoot us an email at harlot.osu[at]gmail[dot]com.

Open positions include:

Managing Editor

  • Guide Submissions through Review Process
  • Assign and Recruit Reviewers
  • Correspond with Contributors

Layout Editor

  • Prepare Accepted Submissions for Online Publication

Editorial Assistant

  • Manage all of Harlot‘s Interactive Spaces
  • Promotion

Tech Assistant

  • Improve and Update Harlot with HTML, CSS, and working knowledge of PHP and Javascript
  • Ability to Learn and Adjust to Changing Technologies

You can also find this information in our Announcements and on our Project Page. We encourage you to forward any of these pages on to people you think would be interested. Help us out by posting it around the blogosphere and passing it on to your friends.

We look forward to hearing from you!

Mikey is Listening

Since we at Harlot love the multimedia approach toward our articles as much as the text-based, I thought I might pass along something that might help you get that multi-modality a little bit easier. I know it can be difficult to get into hardware, when all you want to talk about is, say, the rhetoric of a dog park, but the technological aspects of things are important considerations.

Blue microphones has released a new mic recently, duly dubbed Mikey, which connects and allows you to record directly to your ipod. Super cool, no? Supposedly, it’s supposed to be some high quality hand held recording. I’d love it if Blue Mic would give samples of how the audio sounds, but, alas, it seems I’ll have to trust their ethos. Get this, though, it doesn’t require any software, which is always a selling point for me. (Really, you get enough hardware that requires software and you end up having more software on your computer than Steve Jobs.)

I carry my ipod around with me enough as it is and I wouldn’t be opposed to grabbing some cool audio out on the streets either. Unfortunately, though, it only works with iPod nano, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, and iPod Classic, so that leaves ipod touches and iphones out of the mix.

It is an $80 drop, but I do think it’s worth looking into. People create entire documentaries out of flip-cameras, I think someone could do just as well with little Mikey.

via Popgadget

going public

This morning I’ve been reading some of Mike Rose’s work, especially his arguments for teaching academics to write for public audiences (something he’s notoriously good at).  Mike Rose is a Professor in the UCLA Graduate School of Information Studies and he’s well-known for his research on workplace literacy, remediation, and reconsidering our understandings of intelligence in relation to work.

In An Open Language: Selected Writing on Literacy, Learning, and Opportunity Rose points out that though rhetoric and composition as a field is “deeply connected to matters of broad public interest–literacy, teaching, undergraduate education” and we’ve been seeking connection with the public through service learning, courses in civic rhetoric, and work with workplace and community literacy projects, the field “offers little or no graduate-level training for public writing or speaking.”

Rose has been creating opportunities for graduates students in his program to learn more about and get more practice writing for public audiences (See his article with Karen McClafferty, “A Call for the Teaching of Writing in Graduate Education”).

Among the benefits of public writing, Rose says, are that “it can lead to a questioning and clarifying of assumptions,” it forces precision and “a honing of argument,” and forces you to think about what evidence is most persuasive.

I was struck by his comments, of course, because Harlot was started based on the recognition of a disconnect between academic considerations of rhetoric and persuasion and public deliberation of these matters.  Rose’s summary of the benefits of public writing also moved me.  Personally, I have struggled to write blog posts because of the kind of reflection writing for a public audience forces on me.  I agree with Rose that such reflection will only make my writing better, and I aspire to become a better blogger–and a better public writer.  Much like Rose noted above, though my dissertation research is directly concerned with public issues, I have not felt more removed from the public than I have writing my dissertation.

Check out Rose’s blog at  http://www.mikerosebooks.blogspot.com/.  The philosphy of his blog, in his words, is “a deep belief in the ability of the common person, a commitment to educational, occupational, and cultural opportunity to develop that ability, and an affirmation of public institutions and the public sphere as vehicles for nurturing and expressing that ability.”

An Inconvenient Tangent

I’m teaching a course on documentary this term, and today my students were watching/analyzing An Inconvenient Truth. I picked this doc because we’re talking about the use of personal narratives in/and public rhetoric, and I’m kind of fascinated with the “Al Gore Show” woven throughout the film.

an-inconvenient-truth

For the most part, of course, we see Gore’s slideshow presentation and listen along with his (rapt) audiences. (As one student suggested, the director lays the prophet robe on Gore a bit heavily.) But every so often, that lecture is interspersed with Gore’s reflections and anecdotes about how he came to be offering that slideshow. And at those junctures, his voice changes, becomes low and intimate, the footage becomes soft-focus or creatively aged, and the pathos becomes a bit heavy-handed.

… as a student’s sudden snort made abundantly clear. It was the snort of a burgeoning rhetorical critic, and it confirmed my hunch about some of the risky, even reckless rhetorical choices Gore and the director made in that movie. And the personal quest angle isn’t the only one. I wonder whether the warm fuzzy fatherly feelings would work on audiences alienated by his Bush jokes? Or are we to assume that no one who voted for Bush (that’s a lot of people) belongs in this doc’s audience?

More as my students figure this all out…

Harlot Symposium: Presidential Rhetoric

Check out Harlot’s latest call for contributions for a symposium on presidential rhetoric:

Presidents and Presidential Hopefuls of 2008/2009
Presidents and Presidential Hopefuls of 2008/2009

Throughout a heady election season, the conclusion of a divisive administration, and an inauguration that attracted a record 1.8 million people to Washington D.C., American presidents and presidential hopefuls have performed a flurry of persuasive acts, some stilted, some eloquent, some mangled, some unintentional, some iconic. What have been the most pivotal moments in American politics in the last year? What stood out, made you laugh, made you yell, made you think? What conversations should the nation — and the world — have as we move forward?

We welcome short contributions of 500-750 words or video/audio productions of 1-2 minutes (or any combination thereof) that explore an issue or phenomenon you think is stimulating, amusing, or uncomfortable — as long as it is insightful. Submissions are due by Monday, March 2, 2009.

Submission Information

We’ve been getting some questions here at Harlot about our submissions. Not to worry, we have and will answer to those askers directly, but for as many people out there who actually ask, there are more who simply wonder. So, if you’ve been wondering the same thing, hopefully I can answer some for you right now.

I’ve heard that you’ve been calling for submissions, but can’t find anything on your site.

Hmm, indeed. Our initial inclination to simply announce this through our blog seems to have been a bit misguided. Well intended, perhaps, but there are obvious flaws with this logic. So, we have updated the homepage to show our call for the second issue. It includes the graphic version and the text version as well as instructions on how to submit.

I can’t figure out the submission process.

We do recommend that you check out the For Creators page as well as the information about Online Submissions. We’ve recently added step by step instructions on how to submit.

I can’t find any information about actually submitting through the system.

This information is now located on the For Creators page, the call for submissions on the main page, and here. More in depth instructions of the system which include going through the Five steps of the Submission process are available here:

http://pkp.sfu.ca/files/OJSinanHour.pdf (opens in pdf)

There’s also a video from Open Journal Systems about the process at this address:

http://pkp.sfu.ca/files/video/ojs_author_submission/ojs_author_submission.htm

What are the Submission Instructions?

How to Submit
1. Register as a creator.
2. When logged in, there will be a link in the right column called “user home,” which will show the roles for which you’ve registered. Click on your role as “creator.”
3. This will take you to a page titled “Active Submissions.” Underneath, there is a smaller heading that says “Start a New Submission.” Click on the link that says “click here to go to step one of the five step process” link.
4. From there you can work your way through the steps by entering information into the fields and clicking “Save and Continue.” You may submit the work in step five.

What do I do if I’m still confused?

If you still have questions, then you can email the editors at harlot.osu@gmail.com or the tech team at harlot.tech@gmail.com.

Call for Submissions: Issue 2

Harlot is getting around. Our October launch issue prompted visitors from around the globe, with over 13,000 hits on our first day — from the UK to Hong Kong, Italy to Oman, Argentina to Tanzania. The first issue contained a rich and varied set of creative and critical reflections, including interactive digital collages, queer theory provocations, ekphrastic poetry, and rhetorical analyses ranging from Disney to Christmas carols. We’ve received fascinating feedback–glowing, glowering, helpful, and hilarious — that will continue to shape Harlot‘s future, with your help.

Here’s our challenge to you for the next issue: take it to the streets. Harlot is looking for submissions that take a smart and savvy look at everyday persuasions. Mess with the mundane. Question the quotidian. What messages do your shoes send? How does that graffiti mess with your mind? Do you find guilt trips compelling? What makes you stop and stare (or fight or flee) on your way to work? Do you like rhetorical questions?

We welcome contributions of all sorts — no observation too pointed, no style too random. Submissions for the spring issue are due February 2. So, get out there and analyze the everyday, critique the common, and bring the banal to Harlot.