LBCC Choirs to Showcase Terms Work

“…Come join us in singing the praises of Zion…” the LBCC Concert Choir sings during a rehearsal for this weeks performance. The song is “Zion’s Walls” written by Aaron Copland, and is one of many the choirs of LBCC will be performing Thursday night, March 11, at 7:30 p.m. Along with the Concert choir, the Men’s choir, Women’s choir, the men’s quintet “Blue Light Special,” and the Chamber choir will all be performing in the Russell Tripp Performance Center located in Takina Hall.

“Heaven is Music’ is the theme of the concert.” said James Reddan, Director of Choral activities and member of the music faculty at LBCC. “There will be about twenty one songs performed. Some representing the good, and some the bad,” he continued “pretty much something of everything.”

Cameron Graham, a student here at LB and a member of all but the Women’s choir, is very excited for Wednesday's performance. “Music and singing have been a life long passion of mine,” he said. “This concert is a chance for us to show our stuff before we head to New York City,” he added.

The choirs always hold an end of term concert, but this one is special. As well as being a showcase for the hard work put in during winter term, the concert is a send off of sorts for three (Concert, Men’s, and Chamber choirs) of the groups who are traveling to New York City early next term to perform at St. Bartholomew’s Church as part of a festival being held there. The choirs leave April 6 and will return on April 12. Twelve members of the group going will be participating in the festivals honor choir.

“The students are excited for this opportunity,” said Reddan.

Thursday’s concert is a great opportunity for the LBCC student body to come together and support one of its high caliber programs. Some have said that we as a student body are apathetic, that we could care less about our fellow Roadrunners. For example only 51 of us voted in our student government elections held a few weeks ago. Granted one could blame the severe lack of advertising for this abysmal turn out. In this case, however, if you are reading this article, there really is not a good reason to miss this event. While just a concert, it could be just the thing to help bring our campus closer together. After all, who doesn’t enjoy some good music?

The cost of the concert is $6 and tickets can either be purchased online at https://secure.boxofficeavenue.com/LinnBenton/ or you can buy them at the box office. Hours are T-F, 8 a.m.-noon, 1 p.m.-2 p.m. and two hours before the show. For a video preview of the Concert Choir singing “Zion’s Walls” check out the video below!

Poetic Women

Part of being a woman is the strength and experiences shared by women throughout history. This was the topic of the LBCC Poetry club's poetry reading last week.

March is National Women’s History month. On March 2, a Tuesday afternoon, the LBCC Diversity Center along with the LBCC Poetry Club, held a poetry reading in honor of the occasion. Students and faculty alike joined together to share poems about and by women. The adviser of the poetry club, Robin Havenick, opened the reading by welcoming everyone and then reading a poem from “American Sublime” by Elizabeth Alexander.

About 20 people attended the event, most read works by women poets, while some read works of their own. One notable attendee was Coquille Rex. She read her poem “I too,” which was inspired by Langston Hughes poem by the same title. It was Coquille’s poem that won a recent competition here at LBCC called Poetry for the Mind’s Joy. Her poem will now go up against others from across the nation for a chance to be published in the Library of Congress.

“We are extremely proud of Coquille and her poem,” said Havenick. “We wish her all the luck at the next level.”

The poetry reading lasted just under an hour, and was closed by Havenick after her final poem titled “Ode” by Elizabeth Alexander.

A Lesson in Rhetoric

Aristotle: (Yawn) Hmmm…. What a great nap.

Lloyd Burke: Well good evening Aristotle! You woke just in

time for the Daily Show with John Stewart. Quintilian and

I were going to watch it and have a little discussion on

its rhetorical value.

Quintilian: Would you care to join us?

Aristotle: Why yes I would. I always enjoy a good

discussion about rhetoric.

…30 minutes later…

Burke: That was a very interesting show!

Quintilian: I agree, it is one of my favorites to watch. What

did you think Aristotle?

Aristotle: Well I did find it entertaining, but not entirely

rhetorical.

Burke: Maybe before we begin to discuss whether or not the

show was rhetorical, we should define each of our

views on rhetoric. Give our definitions.

Quintilian: I agree Burke. If neither of you mind, I will go

first.

Burke: Fine with me.

Aristotle: Please proceed.

Quintilian: Alright, here we go. I would define rhetoric

simply as the act of the good citizen speaking well. It is

something that is used to benefit society. There are

more in depth points, but we can discuss them as we go.

Burke would you like to go next?

Burke: Thank you Quintilian. I define rhetoric, or

identification, as the ability to connect with an

audience. You persuade a man only insofar as you can

talk his language by speech, gesture, tonality, order,

image, attitude, and/or idea.

Aristotle: Thank you Burke. My personal view on rhetoric,

however, is that it is the faculty of observing in any

given case the available means of persuasion. This

“faculty” is a tool box giving the rhetorician the ability

to discern all options in a situation; however they need

not apply all or any of those options.

Burke: So do you believe that the daily show is a form of

rhetoric?

Aristotle: Well as you are probably aware, I believe that there

are two sides to persuasion. First is the rhetorical side

that focuses on character, emotion, political, judicial,

and generally specific issues.

Quintilian: And the other side?

Aristotle: The other side is the dialectic. Its focus is on just

the facts. Common uses for the dialectic are to resolve

personal issues and address general questions.

Burke: I am not sure I completely understand. Could you

give a few examples?

Aristotle: Take the death penalty for example. Asking if the

death penalty is correct in general is an example of a

dialectic situation. Asking if the death penalty is a correct punishment for a specific case would be an example of a rhetorical situation.

Quintilian: Sounds very much like my definite and indefinite

questions.

Burke: Excuse me?

Quintilian: Indefinite questions are dialectic in nature, and

definite questions are rhetorical.

Burke: Interesting, since both of your times rhetoric has come

to encompass both under the same heading.

Aristotle: Well that is just silly. Rhetoric and dialectic are

mutually exclusive conditions.

Quintilian: I agree.

Burke: I am just saying that from my point of view, rhetoric is

more how we go about persuading people.

Humans are symbol making, using, and misusing

animals. It is through our language that we apply filters

to our world and our views. We can use our language

like a play. In my dramatistic pentad, I can break down

a rhetorical situation to better understand what is

occurring. The five parts are the act, agent, agency,

scene, and purpose. The act is the “what.” The agent is

the “who.” The agency is the “how.” The scene is the

“where.” Finally the purpose is the “why.”

Quintilian: Well now that we have an idea where we are all

coming from, perhaps we should focus our attentions

on whether this Daily Show is rhetorical.

Aristotle: I concur.

Quintilian: As far as I am concerned, the Daily Show is

rhetorical. John Stewart is a good citizen who speaks

well. The show is entertaining, and giving the masses something to enjoy is a benefit to society. The show employs writers and it is clear that very little of the show is extemporaneous.

Aristotle: Just because the show is well thought out, planned,

and organized does not make it rhetorical. Dialectic

situations rely on planning and organization just as

much as rhetorical situations do.

Burke: Would you agree that if rhetoric and dialectic were

mutually inclusive, counter to your belief, that the show

would in fact be rhetorical? After all, much of the show

deals exclusively with matters regarding political and

judicial topics.

Aristotle: This is true, however the topics are often broad in

nature and therefore dialectic.

Burke: I agree, but the fact that they are dialectic does not

mean that they are not rhetorical. The show utilizes

many terministic screens to support both specific and

general issues.

Quintilian: Terministic screens?

Burke: Terministic screens are like the filters on a camera. It

is the mechanisms of language we employ and a

reflection, selection, and even deflection of what we consider reality.

Aristotle: How does that apply to the Daily Show?

Burke: Glad you asked. Many occasions in the Daily Show

use terministic screens, or rather language choices

designed to shape perceptions and reveal intentions.

On June 25, 2008, the show premiered a new tag line

for the presidential campaign of Barack Obama.

“Baracknophobia” was the term John Stewart coined

for the irrational accusations of James Dobson, who

claimed that Obama was distorting the traditional

understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview.

(http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml) Not

only is the term “Baracknophobia” a terministic screen,

but had Dobson been correct, Obama distorting the

Bible to fit his world view would have also been an

example of a terministic screen.

Quintilian: I had never thought of rhetoric in that light. For

me, rhetoric has always been strictly noble. One must

be a good citizen, with a strong moral fiber in order to

speak rhetoric.

Aristotle: So in other words, if a man speaks rhetoric he is a

morally strong and just individual?

Quintilian: Basically!

Aristotle: I love a good Enthymeme.

Burke: A what?

Aristotle: An Enthymeme is a shortened syllogism. In this

case the syllogism is good citizen equals strong moral

fiber which equals a rhetorician. An enthymeme would

be to say that a good citizen is a rhetorician.

Burke: Would you two agree that John Stewart has a strong

moral fiber?

Both: Yes.

Burke: And would agree that John Stewart is a good citizen?

Both: Yes.

Burke: Then it would be fair to say that, according to your

own arguments Quintilian, and your enthymeme

concept Aristotle, John Stewart is a rhetorician!

Aristotle: Yes.

Quintilian: He is yes.

Aristotle: The question then becomes, does having a true

rhetorician as the host of a program, make the program

itself rhetorical?

Quintilian: I believe that it does, as the things Stewart

discusses do benefit society. Also, the interviews he

does are well thought out, not necessarily memorized,

but very well planned for.

Aristotle: I agree. John Stewart’s rhetoric allows things to

become equal. The playing field becomes level. When

all things are equal, the truth tends to rise to the top.

Burke: The final nail in this coffin of the rhetoric debate is

how well Stewart identifies with his audience, and how

well the audience connects with him. In my opinion, this identification is analogous with rhetoric. They are the same thing. If identification is present, so is rhetoric. Conclusion, the Daily Show is rhetorical.

Aristotle: I agree, for my own reasons, and in the sense I

defined.

Quintilian: Ditto Aristotle, ditto on both accounts.

Burke: Rhetoric is a fluid medium, much like water. It takes

many shapes and accomplishes many things.

All Three: Fin

20/20 cartoon 2. Lane Kiffin Arrives at USC

20/20 cartoon 1. Pete Carroll

The Games We Play... On Facebook

“Attention: A rare and elusive turtle has appeared on your friend’s island, hurry to be the first to adopt this cute little guy!”

You have probably seen this message, or at least something like it. Maybe it was a lonely pink cow that had lost its way, or it could have been an invite to join the mob. Regardless, if you have a Facebook account, you are aware of these games.

A survey of 50 individuals with a Facebook account revealed that all had tried at least one Facebook game. Thirty of them had well-established “farms,” and 20 had achieved at least a “125k Medal” in the game Bejeweled Blitz.

So what? Most people enjoy playing games. One might argue that it is part of human nature. The problem comes when games become more important than real-life responsibilities. Take the popular game “Farmville,” for instance.

“Procrastination through cultivation,” is the term used to describe the obsession my friends have with this game. Of the 30 individuals who said they had a “well-established farm,” 25 admitted to playing the game in lieu of doing homework. Ten of those said that maintaining their “farms” had at least once resulted in a negative real world consequence.

“I use my computer to write papers and do homework. The Internet is always there and it isn’t uncommon for me to put off the responsibilities of school in order to harvest my crops,” Stephanie Samuels said.

Forty-eight of those interviewed cited avoidance of homework or to-do list items as a reason they play online. “It is so easy to do, if you have a connection [to the Internet] you’re set,” said Ashley Nosam. “Who wouldn’t play?”

Good question. From the evidence of many casual conversations, as well as my own research for this article, I am forced to admit that most people do play. Like many of you, one of the things I do every morning is log on to my Facebook account. I maintain several pages, and, to be fair, Facebook is a great way to get information that may be important to my day ahead. For the most part, I find the services and features of the site to be helpful and entertaining.

Do I play any Facebook games? I have tried a few, but they are not my cup of tea. Do I think Facebook games are wrong? No. Do I think they can be a waste of time? Most definitely!

Play for entertainment.
Play to defrag from a stressful day.
Just don’t let your real life be negatively affected.
By these games we play.

At a glance:
Who: Facebook users
What: Facebook Games
Why: For entertainment or to avoid homework

ESPN 3D: Sports that hit you in the face, virtually.

If 2009 was the year of touch, 2010 is shaping up to be the year of 3D. With new breakthroughs in 3D technology, 3D media looks to become the next "big thing." At the forefront of this new movement is the sports news company ESPN. They announced Monday the creation of the industry's first 3D network, ESPN 3D. The plan is to produce at least 85 live broadcasts in 2010-11. The first of these is scheduled for June 11. It will be a FIFA World Cup Soccer match between South Africa and Mexico. According to the ESPN website, this will be the first of a possible 25 matches that will be broadcast in this new form.

To quote the ESPN news release,
"In addition to the World Cup opener, ESPN will produce up to 25 total World Cup matches, as well as the Summer X Games, college basketball, and college football, including the BCS National Championship game in Glendale, Ariz., January 10, 2011. ESPN has been testing ESPN 3D for more than two years, and produced USC's 18-15 win over Ohio State in 3D for select theaters back in September. This network launch will certainly drive the early adoption of 3D TV sets, while combining "great content with new technology to enhance the fan's viewing experience," according to ESPN President, George Bodenheimer."

An obvious question concerning this new way of viewing our media is "So what?" Aside from the "cool" factor, the possibilities for this kind of technology are exciting. While sports will be first, other subjects and networks will likely be soon follow. Can you imagine watching the Discovery Channel's "Deadliest Catch" in 3D? Better bring your Dramamine.

Source: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=4796555