<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Of Visual Enthymemes and Rhetorical Intentions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:01:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sven</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5443</link>
		<dc:creator>Sven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 14:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5443</guid>
		<description>Came across this passage while re-reading &lt;i&gt;The Unbearable Lightness of Being&lt;/i&gt; over the weekend:
&lt;blockquote&gt;She had seen May Day parades during the time people were still enthusiastic or still did their best to feign enthusiasm. The women all wore red, white and blue blouses, and the public, looking on from balconies and windows, could make out various five-pointed stars, hearts and letters when the marchers went into formation.

Small brass bands accompanied the individual groups, keeping everyone in step. As a group approached the reviewing stand, even the most blase faces would beam dazzling smiles, as if trying to prove they were properly joyful or, to be more precise, in proper &lt;i&gt;agreement&lt;/i&gt;.

Nor were they merely expressing political agreement with Communism; no, theirs was an agreement with being as such. The May Day ceremony drew its inspiration from the deep well of the categorical agreement with being. 

The unwritten, unsung motto of the parade was not &quot;Long live Communism!&quot; but &quot;Long live life.&quot; The power and cunning of Communist politics lay in the fact that it appropriated this slogan. For it was this idiotic tautology - &quot;Long live life!&quot; - which attracted people indifferent to the theses of Communism to the Communist parade.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Hmmm. No wonder the &lt;a href=&quot;http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2008/05/five-years-ago-bush-was-just-awesome.html&quot;&gt;other purveyors&lt;/a&gt; of totalitarian kitsch got so excited.&lt;br&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Came across this passage while re-reading <i>The Unbearable Lightness of Being</i> over the weekend:</p>
<blockquote><p>She had seen May Day parades during the time people were still enthusiastic or still did their best to feign enthusiasm. The women all wore red, white and blue blouses, and the public, looking on from balconies and windows, could make out various five-pointed stars, hearts and letters when the marchers went into formation.</p>
<p>Small brass bands accompanied the individual groups, keeping everyone in step. As a group approached the reviewing stand, even the most blase faces would beam dazzling smiles, as if trying to prove they were properly joyful or, to be more precise, in proper <i>agreement</i>.</p>
<p>Nor were they merely expressing political agreement with Communism; no, theirs was an agreement with being as such. The May Day ceremony drew its inspiration from the deep well of the categorical agreement with being. </p>
<p>The unwritten, unsung motto of the parade was not &#8220;Long live Communism!&#8221; but &#8220;Long live life.&#8221; The power and cunning of Communist politics lay in the fact that it appropriated this slogan. For it was this idiotic tautology &#8211; &#8220;Long live life!&#8221; &#8211; which attracted people indifferent to the theses of Communism to the Communist parade.</p></blockquote>
<p>Hmmm. No wonder the <a href="http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2008/05/five-years-ago-bush-was-just-awesome.html">other purveyors</a> of totalitarian kitsch got so excited.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: acline</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5442</link>
		<dc:creator>acline</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 12:19:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5442</guid>
		<description>:-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <img src='http://rhetorica.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sven</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5441</link>
		<dc:creator>Sven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 16:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5441</guid>
		<description>:+:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>:+:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5440</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 15:57:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5440</guid>
		<description>I like the wink smiley ;)

I don&#039;t know if that&#039;s sarcasm, but I &lt;i&gt;do&lt;/i&gt; like the wink smiley ;)

;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the wink smiley <img src='http://rhetorica.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know if that&#8217;s sarcasm, but I <i>do</i> like the wink smiley <img src='http://rhetorica.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
 <img src='http://rhetorica.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: acline</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5439</link>
		<dc:creator>acline</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 11:49:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5439</guid>
		<description>Is there a sarcasm smiley?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is there a sarcasm smiley?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sven</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5438</link>
		<dc:creator>Sven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 10:52:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5438</guid>
		<description>While you&#039;re at it, Andy, could you get that HaloScan plugin that allows comments to drip with sarcasm?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While you&#8217;re at it, Andy, could you get that HaloScan plugin that allows comments to drip with sarcasm?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: acline</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5437</link>
		<dc:creator>acline</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 09:24:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5437</guid>
		<description>Interesting discussion. I&#039;ll try to consider all of this some more over the weekend. Tim and Sven... thanks for the links.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting discussion. I&#8217;ll try to consider all of this some more over the weekend. Tim and Sven&#8230; thanks for the links.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5436</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 23:57:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5436</guid>
		<description>Sven,

A good question for Scott Sforza.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sven,</p>
<p>A good question for Scott Sforza.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sven</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5435</link>
		<dc:creator>Sven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 22:54:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5435</guid>
		<description>I didn&#039;t say television warped the banner, or even the words on the banner. I said it warped the critical message the administration was trying to convey - that &lt;i&gt;major combat operations in Iraq have ended&lt;/i&gt;

One would think that would be clear to the country&#039;s premiere communication professionals. What on Earth were they thinking?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I didn&#8217;t say television warped the banner, or even the words on the banner. I said it warped the critical message the administration was trying to convey &#8211; that <i>major combat operations in Iraq have ended</i></p>
<p>One would think that would be clear to the country&#8217;s premiere communication professionals. What on Earth were they thinking?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://rhetorica.net/archives/6786.html/comment-page-1#comment-5434</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 22:24:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wpp3/?p=6786#comment-5434</guid>
		<description>Sven,

It wasn&#039;t television that &quot;warped&quot; the banner. The banner was poorly placed for television. In fact, one &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkRHki5P6fc&quot;&gt;idiot&lt;/a&gt; has already been caught lying about the placement of the banner based on that false idea.

No, it&#039;s an AP photo you usually see with Bush under the banner. Of all the PR visuals from that day that deserve criticism, only idiocy explains the banner&#039;s prominent rhetorical syllogism years after the fact.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sven,</p>
<p>It wasn&#8217;t television that &#8220;warped&#8221; the banner. The banner was poorly placed for television. In fact, one <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkRHki5P6fc">idiot</a> has already been caught lying about the placement of the banner based on that false idea.</p>
<p>No, it&#8217;s an AP photo you usually see with Bush under the banner. Of all the PR visuals from that day that deserve criticism, only idiocy explains the banner&#8217;s prominent rhetorical syllogism years after the fact.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

