Pickens 7/4

1 – In her third scene Royster describes a situation in which she makes use of a different voice in an academic setting and is told “how wonderful it was that you were willing to share with us your authentic voice” (36). She immediately turns around and identifies how “all [her] voices are authentic” but she does not clearly or authoritatively correct the person who failed in their attempt to compliment her (37). How can we understand the relationship between performance and voice through the larger concepts of hearing in Royster’s article? Going into the classroom how can we try and foster the kinds of discussions that Royster identifies us as missing? Does our performance as teachers help or hinder us to do this? How are we to understand the idea of “an appropriated academic language” in relationship to ourselves as teachers (37)? Do we teach our students’ academic language or do we perform and appropriate it? At what point can one claim to have adopted and not appropriated some of their many voices?

2 – In Bitzer’s article he says that “a complex but loosely structured situation” might involve a speaker “actually looking for an audience and for constraints” (12). He considers a reflection of this to be “many contemporary civil rights advocates who, failing to locate compelling constraints and rhetorical audiences, abandon rhetorical discourse in favor of physical actions” (12). It seems here that Bitzer is alluding to the power that a rhetorical situation can have on the one who is attempting to become the writer. Do we agree with his idea that a lack of an audience that can be moved can be a cause for strong advocates to move from peaceful to violent protests? How does this idea interact with Royce’s concept of a voice gaining authority and power from its being heard just as much as its being spoken