place/nonplace

Auge, in “From Places to Non-Places”, breaks down on what he sees as a non-place. One of the ways in which he defines a non-space is, “ If a place can be defined as relational, historical and concerned with identity, then a space which cannot be defined as relational, or historical, or concerned with identity will be a non-place.” This may seem like a hard concept to grasp an in certain ways it’s hard to accept a space that does not entail any of the elements in his definition. He makes sure to let us know that places and non-places are like opposed polarities, where neither one nor the other are completely erased. There is an overlap with both and sometimes some non-places can be turned into a place with something as simple as movement which he also mentions in his article. If I was walking down the street and all of a sudden on an intersection where I would just be waiting, in what can be considered a non place, there appears a man painted in silver and making robotic movements with techno music coming out of his little stereo. If this were to occur the gaze of the people waiting with me at the intersection would most likely focus on this man and create a place. Gaze is something that Auge points out as important and I didn’t really think about it. I chose the lobby in college library as a non-place but if someone were to be yelling at the information desk clerk because they didn’t keep her book reserved, I’m pretty sure there are going to be a couple of gazes in his/her direction and then for that brief moment it could have created a place because of the attention and the gaze the situation is creating. So can someone creating a scene be enough to change a non-place to a place? One of the things that Auge mentions is that a non-place distances the spectator from the spectacle There are constant distractions that can be present like a billboard but there is a certain distance from the spectator where there isn’t anything really engaging the spectator.
In Lost In Translation the characters Charlotte and Bob Harris are both in a place where they do not understand their surroundings and everything is just noise and lights. When they both are at the bar they both experience an empty experience but it’s not until they interact that where they are actually feels like a place. Sounds to me a little simplistic, but it has some sustenance where supposedly,” non-places create solitary contractuality.” If one goes to another country and you don’t understand the language are you more likely to be in a non-place than a place? I’m not sure if the experience of one person would be enough to determine it as a non-place or a place. In end I find non-places pretty fascinating and I’m not sure if I’m the only one that does this but I enjoy to people gaze in these non-places.

Rhetoric

I can’t say that I have thought too much about what rhetoric really meant. I thought it was a way of relaying the information given efficiently. When it comes to the business world that I am about to enter in a few months, this is a bigger word in my world than I thought.
Herrick further supported of what I thought rhetoric was and really broke down the dynamic that revolves around what rhetoric is. “The study of how we organize and employ language effectively..” Rhetoric, he is defending, is a huge factor in which we use in our everyday life and is simply just a part of who we are as human beings. The way we communicate and take part in his terminology of response making and response inviting is essential in today’s society. We respond to an already existing rhetoric, which could be a conflict between dissimilar interests but that we shouldn’t only apply rhetoric in this scenario but that we should also invite discussion towards a topic or issue as well.
Herrick mentioned that there are disagreements with what rhetoric entails and I didn’t like that he didn’t include a strong point from the opposing side. The biggest issue that he stated was using rhetoric with its association with persuasion. This could be contradictory if the motives of ones rhetoric is elusive or clearly evident, “hidden or openly admitted”. Persuasion is recognized as being an powerful tool and its misuse can string along academic stipulation but I think this can apply to many things.
Silva Rhetoricae layed a different issue on rhetoric which brought up another dynamic not discussed to much in Herrick’s article. She puts on the table the issue of how through rhetorical examination the methods can be discounted as something concerned more with style and appearance and not with the “quality or content of communication.” This is how she breaks rhetoric down into content and form. The form or delivery is a huge part of how the content or information given is absorbed by the audience at hand. The delivery is crucial and these two factors to overlap but which one is more important? The issue that she sees with this is that sometimes thoughts and ideas have been prioritized over language and the importance of the actual content can be overlooked.
Both Herrick and Silva made great points and what I got out of it is that you have to be careful when using rhetoric to its full potential that one has to keep track of ones motives and that there is much more that one should keep in mind like, your audience, your content, and your delivery when dealing with rhetoric.

NON-PLACE

College library is a really busy library and you can say that they are going to a certain place to study. A section of the library that I would call a non place would be the first floor/lobby of the library. People don't really stay in that area but they are deciding where they need to go or wish that they can find a space to study in the library. At night time it is especially hard to find a place to study. It's almost impossible to find it in the common areas and it's still hard to find a table in the quiet areas at times.
In the first floor there are many people coming in with a sort of music device wether it be an ipod or other MP3 players. The students are coming in with their back packs full but who knows how many books they will actually get through. You can tell when some students have had a long day or are planning for a long night because it is the constant starbucks, sodas, or anything with caffeine. Those that have learned their lesson a little better are dragging along some water bottles as well which will keep them hydrated throughout the night.
People head in many directions in this first floor. They choose one of the three study areas, the computers behind the front dest are rarely approached, the computers up front are quickly approached and 3 out of the four people i saw signed into Facebook. The other choises are the elevator, the information desk or one of the two stairways. This little first floor area is almost like a terminal where people decide where they need to head to and people don't hang out in this area unless they are speaking on their cell phones or chatting with a freind they ran into.
Another thing that I observed is the look in certain people. You can see how some students are looking up or to the side and even mumbling to themselves of what they need to get done. You can tell that they are trying to figure out what they need to do first. The message board that is by the east wing doors also serves as a directory to let each other know where they are in the library which I can't say that I have used myself.
The quick pace of college life can be observed in this lobby and my roomates passed me coming into this library and didnt' even notice me and I think this shows on how quick paced this little area really is. This non-space will hopefully lead them to an area where they can study but as many of us know after a few years of going to college--it doesn't usually happen.