Tagged: RSA

The Rhetoric Society of America just released the CFP for their 2014 conference. For those who don’t already know, RSA holds conferences in alternate years, and holds a summer institute during off years. Right now the cycle is for the conference to take place in even years and the summer institute to take place in odd years.

I have mixed feelings about how large RSA, and its conference in particular, has become, and I’ll probably post on those at a later time. Regardless of my feelings though, it is an important conference, and I would argue the vanguard conference in the field. It is the highest quality, and largest, conference where folks from the English side of rhetorical studies and the Communications side of rhetorical studies converge on the same spot. It’s probably worth attending for that quality alone.

I’ll also say this for the CFP: it’s short, sweet, and not nearly as contrived/cutesy as many conference themes are. Thank you for that, RSA.

What appears below is the official RSA 2014 CFP:

Rhetoric Society of America Conference

“Border Rhetorics”

#RSA14

May 22-26, 2014

Marriot River Center – San Antonio, Texas

San Antonio is an ideal city for thinking about borders.  Not only has the city been positioned along different national borders, but it also exists at the interesting intersection of diverse cultures and histories.  “Border Rhetorics” not only invites consideration of these kinds of geographic, political and cultural borders but also invites consideration of a wider range of borders: the borders between identities, between roles, between disciplines, between concepts, etc.  The 2014 conference theme seeks to spur a broad conversation about the borders that unite and divide us, the ways in which these borders are constructed and deconstructed, confirmed and contested.

The theme of “Border Rhetorics” opens a space for numerous inquiries and conversations about the things that constitute our borders – politically, culturally, academically, etc. – as well as the ways in which those borders are constructed, crossed, challenged, circumvented, diminished and redrawn.  The theme also encourages us not only to think about our borders but also to think across them in the hopes of opening spaces for dialogue and disagreement that may in turn alter our sense of these borders. 

Interested parties are invited to submit abstracts for individual papers, proposals for panels, and ideas for special format events (roundtables, debates, etc.).  Panels representing only one institution are strongly discouraged and a slight preference will be shown for panels representing not only different institutions but also different disciplinary fields (e.g., Composition and Communication Studies). Submissions that take advantage of off-site venues are also encouraged. 

Proposals Due July 1, 2013; Notifications September 1, 2013

For more details and to submit your proposal, visit:  http://rhetoricsociety.org/aws/RSA/pt/sp/conferences

Join the official RSA 14 conference Facebook group for networking, news and updates:  http://www.facebook.com/groups/551900858153994/553997331277680/?notif_t=group_activity

 

Old Tractor, RSA '08

Just a public service announcement here:

Penn State recently issued their call for proposals for their 2011 Summer Conference on Rhetoric and Composition, which will occur in July, 2011.  Proposals are due in February.  I have not attended this conference yet, but I hear great things about it.  I have attended other events at Penn State, and they tend to throw a pretty good scholarly shindig, if you can trust my word for it.  The theme of the conference is “Rhetoric and Writing Across Language Boundaries,” which kind of has my brain salivating.

Similarly, in June of 2011, the Rhetoric Society of America will be hosting their Summer Institute.  I attended the 2009 Summer Institute at Penn State (see above) and it was one of the highlights of my graduate career.  I highly, highly recommend it, particularly for grad students.  I won’t be attending this year (thanks to a funded research trip!), but I can’t speak highly enough of it.  Though, this summer’s program looks about twice as large as in years past, and it will be interesting to hear how that goes.  The 2009 event was wonderful in large part because of its intimacy.  My sense is that the competitive application to attend might be getting more competitive too, so get your application in early.  Professors can attend too, not just grad students.  It’s super fun.  So apply. This year’s conference will be at the University of Colorado, Boulder, in case I haven’t yet convinced you to attend . . .

Sand Dune NP

The blog of the Rhetoric Society of America, The Blogora, will be hosting an online reading of Pat Gehrke‘s book The Ethics of Politics and Speech.  This is a great opportunity, and I’m particulary happy that the readings will be relatively slow paced.  In my own transition from grad school to the professoriate, I’ve been able to keep up with everything, including an active writing schedule, except perhaps reading.  And reading becomes the stuff of future writing, so this will be a great chance to get on the ball.  We’ve tried events similar to this one before on The Blogora, but I think the logistics are better set up than they ever have been.  Grad students and professors alike are welcome to participate.  So, take the chance to read with, and meet, digitally at least, some new folks in the discipline.  Personally, I’ve been meaning to read this book for some time anyway.  Thanks, Blogora folks, for putting this together.

Bike Wheel and Airplanes

*This is the second in a series of brief posts in which I undertake to perform a rhetorical analysis of the university advertisements that appeared in the 2010 Rhetoric Society of America (RSA) conference program.  I will undertake to comment upon all of the university ads in the program, in the order that they appeared in the program.  Because rhetoric programs are advertising themselves in the program of the field’s premier conference, the ads seem especially ripe for analysis.*

The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s half-page ad appears on page 11 of the RSA conference program.  This ad has some nice touches, particularly the welcome the department’s new faculty.  The use of logos is nice, and the symmetry of the ad allows the eye to travel easily between points of emphasis in the ad space.  Teh fonts are bold without being aggressive, and the use of bold and plain fonts clearly differentiates the importance of various bits of data for readers.

The only significant complaint I have about this ad is that it doesn’t make clear the role of the faculty it lists.  Michael Bernard-Donals is, I think, in the English department, which I guess is how he is affiliated with the Communication Arts Department, which appears to have placed the ad.  Why not just list English faculty as such, rather than the confusing “Affiliated”?  This seems a weird sort of departmental colonialism to me, like the Comm Arts folks didn’t want to acknowledge the department from which their affiliates hail.

Graphically, the ad does significantly better than the UT Austin ad, though it is a bit text-heavy. Another problem is that it appears on page 11, which means that it’s going to be breezed over once people get past the session of the conference next to which the ad appears.  Far fewer eyes are going to see it than if it were at the front or back of the program.  I bet this made the ad cheaper, but also far less noticeable.  I’d say that if you’re going to bother running an ad, go for broke.  Put it where the people will see it.  I would think that the page adjacent to the map of conference rooms would be primo real estate for ads, but RSA didn’t sell that space, which I think would attract a lot of eyes.

One irony of these ads is that no one seems willing to get down to brass tacks and make any claims, for example, about their placement of graduates in real-life jobs.

*This is the first in a series of brief posts in which I undertake to perform a rhetorical analysis of the university advertisements that appeared in the 2010 Rhetoric Society of America (RSA) conference program.  I will undertake to comment upon all of the university ads in the program, in the order that they appeared in the program.  Because rhetoric programs are advertising themselves in the program of the field’s premier conference, the ads seem especially ripe for analysis.*

This series begins with an analysis of the ad on the inside cover of the 2010 RSA program, an ad for my own PhD granting institution, the University of Texas at Austin.  In many ways this is fitting, not only because it is the rhetoric program from which I hail, but also because it is the advertisement for which I have the toughest criticisms.

By way of disclaimer, let me say that I don’t know who at UT Austin created the ad.  That said, I probably do know the person, either as a colleague or friend or, more likely, both.  So, let me be clear–my criticisms of this ad are tough, but not directed at the creator.  My criticisms are tough also though because this is the rhetoric graduate program that I know the most about, and so am in the best position to analyze.

I’m not a fan of this ad at all, which appears on the inside cover of the RSA program, a position of some visibility and prominence.  It strikes me as an ad that was–and I can only speculate here–designed in color, but that translates very poorly to the grayscale format used in the actual printing of the RSA program.  More than that though, the ad is simultaneously weak and too busy.  By too busy I mean that the faded text collage in the background is distracting, and not a particularly engaging effect. Similarly, the bulk of the text in the fore of the image is shadowed. Unfortunately though, the shadowing only muddies the text.  This ad is indecisive and schizophrenic.  I know it isn’t the case, but if I had to judge this program purely from its ad, I would say that it is a program that doesn’t know what it is or what it wants to be.  This negative effect is magnified by the overly thin script used, which also lends an appearance of indecisiveness, weakness, and amateurishness.  This ad simply lacks graphic confidence.  The department’s website address also appears in a disappointingly low resolution, which doesn’t instill confidence either.  The ad’s primary problems all go back to font.  Additionally, the white on gray used to list the program’s faculty simply obscured the wonderful names.  They should pop, but instead simply fade into the simultaneously distracting and incoherent background.

I am also disappointed that none of UT Austin’s signature logos, which are graphically wonderful, were employed in the ad.  The longhorn logo, most often associated with the sports programs, would have been great, as would the more academically oriented “tower” logo.

Another point of contention for me is that this ad only lists the English Department rhetoric faculty, and not the Communication Studies rhetoric faculty.  These two departments are two of the best at what they do, and two of the strongest associated departments in the nation, and from what I can tell, they get along fabulously with one another.  It’s disappointing then that they did not reach out to one another for this advertisement, which mistakenly conveys the notion that there is no cooperation between the two departments.  For shame.  These are two top tier departments with quite collegial faculties, and they should be represented together in an ad that appears in the program for a conference that both departments send a phenomenal number of graduate students and faculty to attend.

In short, this ad is indescisive, graphically muddy, and fails to convey the strength or breadth of the department(s) it might be intended to represent.  I am saddened that my own program’s ad does not convey they confidence of a wonderful program that is arguably one of the top two, if not THE top, in the rhetoric concentration.  Bolder fonts, more symmetrical presentation, less busy-ness, and better branding would dramatically improve future incarnations of this ad, which simply isn’t convincing in the form in which it appeared in the RSA program.  Sorry UT Austin, but we can do much, much better.