Wow! What a semester it has been! Looking back from our first criticism post to our last, we can see how far along all of our criticism skills have developed. This final blog post has been revised and polished to give you a clear and in-depth understanding of each of the four methods used. After explaining each of the methods, we will contrast and compare to figure out the strengths and weakness that pertain to each method.
(Rhetorical situation)
The criticism technique which can be applied to this episode of South Park is the rhetorical situation, as developed by Lloyd F. Bitzer. He defines it as, “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely [removed] if discourse can constrain human decision” (Burgchardt, 2010), When using the rhetorical situation, it is key to figure out what the exigence is, and who the intended audience is as well. The exigence is a pressing matter that has a need behind it, which often motivates people to take a certain course of action. In this episode of South Park, the school children in town are using cat pee to get high (called cheesing), this becomes evident to the adults in the community from a newscast on T.V. The news story imitates the typical "what are kids using to get high these days" type of broadcast. This is the exigence which prompts Kyle's dad Gerald to call a town hall meeting, gathering up the parents and adults of the community to discuss which type of action must be taken to prevent kids from "cheesing".
Image from fanpop.com
The next step in Bitzer's rhetorical situation is defining the audience intended to hear the message. In this particular episode, the audience to Gerald's speech is the entire adult community of South Park. He begins his speech by providing statistics as to how many children in America have tried cheesing, this gets the audience scared and wondering what course of action should be taken. The intended audience, from a viewers perspective, is the hundreds of parents across the country who tune in to watch these ridiculous news stories. It parodizes the seriousness often over exaggerated in the media. The next stop involved when using the rhetorical situation is identifying the constraints and limitations of the text.
Image from southpark.cc.com
The beautiful thing about South Park is that it has very little constraints as to what they can and cannot do, which gives the writers of the show a great deal of freedom in how they construct each episode. The most obvious example of a constraint is the metaphor used between drugs and cat piss. The network South Park airs on would never allow them to show children using actual drugs on television, so they used cat piss as an alternative, a hilarious countermeasure. After Gerald's speech, the townspeople agree to ban all cats from South Park. The next scene cuts to the Drug Enforcement Agency going into homes all over town confiscating cats. This is what makes this show hilarious because obviously in the real world that would never happen. Using the rhetorical method is a great tool to identify two seperate parts of a text, and analyze them in order to see how they are both effective.
(Second persona)
The use of the second persona in criticism relies heavily on who the audience is. The second persona is a technique authored by Edwin Black, who more or less describes it as an evaluation of global perspective, creating an ethical judgement from an implied audience (Burgchardt, 2010). South Park, in general, has a specific type of audience their show reaches. Most viewers of the shower are teenage to middle-aged men. That being said, most of the appeal is based upon comedic masculine rhetoric, and has a very burlesque type of framing. However, they do not shy away from controversial topics such as politics or religion. In the episode, "Debate", they are mocking the presidential race between George Bush and John Kerry in 2004 by representing them as a "giant douche" and a "turd sandwich".
Image from gamespot.com
Through use of the second persona, we are able to identify the type of audience intended for such a debate, as well as draw conclusions as who the candidates are represented by. During the episode, the giant douche and turd sandwich are competing against each other to see who will become the elementary school's next mascot, where they face off in a presidential style debate. This is mocking the credibility of both John Kerry and George Bush, by portraying them as a turd sandwich and a douche, the writers are exemplifying that neither president will be fit to run the country. This appeals to the portion of their audience who are politically engaged. It seems to be a tradition around every election year, where many Americans are unsatisfied with who the candidates for president are. Many times people vote for someone not because of the great feats they will accomplish, but who will screw up the least. This episode directly reflects that idea, no matter who wins the election, at the end of the day they will either be led by a turd or a douche. Through the second persona, we can see how the creators of South Park view politics as a comedic American discourse.
(Close Textual Analysis)
In order to understand the bigger picture, it is sometimes best to look at small examples from within that given subject, in order to increase our knowledge. This is exactly what the method of close textual analysis attempts to do. This method has been defined by Dr. Sigler from the University of Minnesota as, "a detailed interpretation of a passage... showing how the details of the text relate to the central theme of the story". Michael Leff also states that “rhetorical criticism should focus more on the actual conduct of discourse, rather than the generation of abstract methods” (Burgchardt, 2010). Instead of generating theories about what lies within the text, close textual analysis looks at the explicit code, and analyzes it as such. For this episode of South Park, titled "Ginger Cow", I will be applying the close textual analysis for two scenes within the episode, in order to demonstrate how it relates to the overall story.
Image from southpark.wikia.com
The overall plot of the episode is a play on religion, as this "holy cow" becomes famous all over the world, many different religions flock to South Park as part of their Holy Pilgrimage. Everyone believes that this cow is part of a prophecy which signals the end of the world. The first religious sect to appear in the episode is a group of Rabbi's from Israel, and Kyle (who is Jewish) is called into the office to "translate" for them. The scene begins with Kyle opening the door, standing next to them; the principal and counselor then explain to Kyle that they are on a very important trip, and he must do his best to translate the messages from Hebrew to English. A comedic effect is achieved when the Rabbi's are able to speak perfect English, but the counselor and principal still can't understand them. This is a satirical strategy meant to exemplify the ignorance of the population in their small community, which is effective.
Image from southpark.cc.com
The next major scene from the episode is when the Jews, Christians, and Muslims all congregate in order to agree on the terms of Armageddon. The scene takes place inside of a ballroom at a hotel with the Muslims on the left, the Christians in the middle, and the Jews on the right. The meeting begins with a ban on automatic weapons, shanks, and chemical weapons, which immediately causes an uproar between the Muslims and Christians. South Park does a great job with their comedic effect, as the leaders from each group call out their demands, the rest of their respective group shouts and yells with support... no matter how ridiculous it may be. The most important aspect of this scene, however, is when one of the Muslims stands up and claims that since the red cow is prophesied throughout all three religions, it may signify unity instead of war. This prompts everyone to agree that sacrificing the cow would finally bring peace between the religions.
Analyzing these two scenes from the episode, it becomes evident how close textual gives a full and clear report about what actually takes place. I believe this example is meant to show the absurdity of violence based upon religious beliefs. Despite the differing religions, all of the entities believe in basically the same thing. That God has given us guidelines for how to live our lives, and that these guidelines are meant to create peace in the world. And yet despite these similarities, people lose their lives over religious disputes all over the world. By sacrificing the cow to create unity, the writers are making fun of how small those differences are, and how insane it really is to be fighting and killing over these religions that are created in order to provide good for the world.
Image from southpark.cc.com
Image from southpark.cc.com
(Pentad)
When it comes to the art of storytelling, only certain forms of rhetoric are able to successfully portray
the true motives of their characters. But what makes a good story differ from a great one, is the intertwining and complicity of motives from various characters. In the season five premier of South Park, I will use Burke's pentad in order to gain a better understanding of the motives, and establish whether or not the entire piece is successful.
Image from giphy.com
Kenneth Burke refers to the pentad as, "The most concrete and describable feature of dramatism" (Burgchardt, 2010), He believes the components of act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose all form together to reveal the true motives of the characters. For our purposes, some background information is needed on the episode. The overall plot of the episode is evident, Cartman is seeking revenge on an older boy named Scott Tenorman who sold him his pubes. Cartman foolishly tried showing them off to his friends, claiming he was the first one in the group to get pubes. Little did he know that they are supposed to grow on you, leaving Cartman completely embarrassed in front of his friends. He then endures a series of failed and humiliating attempts to get reimbursed for his money, including a trip to the Fort Collins "pube fair" and begging and pleading while dancing like a "little piggy" on Tenorman's doorstep. From that point on, Cartman's revenge was inevitable.
Image from denofgeek.com
ACT: Cartman and Scott Tenorman are face to face in a chili cook off when Cartman drops an absolute bomb. He reveals his plan of revenge, detailing the murder of Tenorman's parents, and telling Scott that the chili he is eating includes remains of his parents.
SCENE: Cartman holds his "Chili Carn Carnival" on a Tuesday in the town of South Park with the entire community present.
AGENT: Cartman- The main character seeking revenge
Scott Tenorman- The bully who is attempting to further embarrass Cartman.
Stan and Kyle- Cartman's "friends" who despise him and are hoping to see him fail
AGENCY: Cartman's ultimate goal is revenge, he creatively disguises his intentions. He knew his friends would tell Scott the original plan (which was to have a pony bight Tenorman's wiener off). He knew Scott would want to steal the pony, but he also predicted Scott would lie to his parents about the pony being sick and needed to be saved. Cartman then warned the rancher that pony thieves were on the loose. When Scott's parents showed up for the pony, the rancher shot and killed them. Cartman then stole the bodies, and made them into chili, which he fed to Scott during the chili cook off.
PURPOSE: The entire purpose of this devilish plan was to get back at Scott for selling him fake pubes, lying about the "pube fair", making Cartman dance and oink like a "little piggy", and burning Cartman's money in front of him.
Image from co-optimus.com
Looking at Ratios
The next step of using Burke's Pentad involves examining the relationships between each individual component, in an effort to identify which ones are most important.
ACT TO SCENE: This relationship paints a picture of the episode for us. We can see that this carnival was Cartman's attempt to gather as many people as possible, so that they could all see him embarrass Scott.
ACT TO AGENT: This shows us Cartman's friends watching the two face off. They are expecting Cartman to get embarrassed.
ACT TO AGENCY: This is the climax of the story. This is when Cartman reveals the truth behind the chili carnival. It gives us an insight as to just how smart Cartman really is.
ACT TO PURPOSE: In this instance, the purpose was achieved through the act.
SCENE TO AGENT: This relationship shows us the total involvement of the community.
SCENE TO AGENCY: Through this relationship, we can see the effectiveness of Cartman's plan. What also made it effective was that the motives was hidden from the audience until the climax.
SCENE TO PURPOSE: The scene added another element to the purpose; public humiliation.
AGENT TO AGENCY: This relationship reveals the the differing dynamics between the agents AGENT TO PURPOSE: The purpose is a eery reminder to the rest of the agents of what Cartman is capable of.
AGENCY TO PURPOSE: The agency heightened the achieving purpose of Cartman;s intentions. This relationship truly achieves a well thought-out story.
Burke’s pentad digs deeper into rhetoric than possibly any other critique method. Through the use of the pentad, the true motive of the episode is revealed The motivation behind it is to show how smart and ruthless Cartman is. He developed a master plan, completely surprising everyone as to how far he is willing to go. This episode solidified Cartman as the most famous of all South Park characters. The most important relationship in this case is the agency to purpose. Those two things are what came together to create one of the franchises most viewed episodes. The rhetoric used in this episode is extremely effective, and will be remembered as one of the best episodes of South Park.
Looking back at all of these methods, we can see hoe each one has its strengths and weaknesses. In regards to the rhetorical situation, it does a great job in identifying the course of action and the motivation behind it. However, I am still not completely sure as to what the constraints and limitations component of the method has to do with the audience. Yes it may be directly applied, but very little can be drawn from that considering the restrictions of media content on public television. As far as the close textual analysis, this method does a fantastic job at addressing the audience, It addresses who the rhetoric is explicitly talking too. This method goes a step further by addressing a moral judgment to the text, whether it is good or bad. These are all great results, but the individual motives for why each character acts the way they do is missing. That void gets filled when talking about the pentad. As I stated earlier, you cant dig much deeper with any other criticism method. This method examines relationships between the text that seem to have zero connection, but somehow find a way they correlate. Through its intensive analysis, we are able to see the true motives of characters, as the author intended. This in depth view, in my opinion, makes the pentad the strongest method of criticism applicable. Although it may be the strongest, each of these methods has its individual characteristics that make them excellent techniques for criticizing and analyzing any piece of rhetoric, text, or media you may come across.
References
Burgchardt, C. R. (2010). Readings in Rhetorical Criticism. In C. R. Burgchardt, Readings in Rhetorical Criticism (pp. 270-283). Pennsylvania:g, Inc.
Sigler, Carolyn. "Close Textual Analysis Essay" February 7, 2006." 3906 Close Textual Analysis Essay. University of Minnesota Duluth, 7 Feb. 2006. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.
