George Lakoff’s theories discussed in “Anna Nicole on the Brain” (an excerpt from his 2008 book The Political Mind).
This response is intended to help you delve further into the Lakoff text and consider its implications in other realms (beyond Anna Nicole Smith or contemporary U.S. politics). It will also give you practice in some key scholarly writing moves: summarizing a text for readers, paraphrasing in your own words, integrating quotes, and extending a text as a “lens” to examine a subject of your own.
Getting Started
Begin by reviewing the “Integrating Quotations” and “Demonstration of the Citation Sandwich Move” pages in this week’s Module. Re-read Lakoff’s chapter. Select some aspect of Lakoff’s thinking to consider further through your own example (or context).
Start your response by summarizing the part of Lakoff’s ideas you want to use. Keep in mind that you are writing this response for an audience of general readers. Therefore, you’ll need to introduce the text fully and fairly/accurately summarize the key idea you want to highlight for your own use (in your own words). Along the way, you can integrate key quotes from Lakoff to help clarify and support your own summary.
Using a Reading as a Lens
After your summary, respond to the idea/concept you’ve highlighted with your own thinking. Apply the idea or concept you’ve highlighted from Lakoff to an outside example of your choice. This example will most likely be something which you are already familiar with, yet it calls for “analysis” in some way (it’s interesting, strange, curious, puzzling, significant, etc.)
Your aim is to explore how Lakoff’s ideas might extend to another subject or context beyond the examples he uses. In particular, you’ll want to consider how Lakoff’s concepts/theories apply to visual rhetoric. If you get stuck, try one of the prompts listed below.
Your goal, as you write, is to think with Lakoff and add to the intellectual conversation he has started. Strong responses here will offer rich analysis, engagement with the source, and a developed discussion considering the implications of what you are thinking about.
The purpose for this response is two-fold:
1). to apply the strategies for working with sources, outlined in the “citation sandwich” materials (on Canvas), by summarizing, paraphrasing, and quoting some aspect of Lakoff’s text to introduce an idea or theory to your readers.
2). to add to the conversation applying this theory/idea brought up by Lakoff to an example of your own (using the reading as a “lens” to examine something else not mentioned by Lakoff)
Assignment Requirements:
Type your response, 12pt. font, Times New Roman, proofread and edit it carefully.
Your response should be a minimum of 750 words. Include the word count at the end of your response.
Any use of AI or evidence of plagiarism will result in no credit with no chance for resubmission.
Tips for your summary (the first part of your response):
Remember to focus in on one aspect of Lakoff’s thinking. Don’t try to summarize the entire chapter.
Be neutral. Don’t criticize, agree or disagree with either the author’s viewpoint or the content of the chapter as you summarize. Your readers should get a sense of Lakoff’s text without having to go read it themselves. (As your response develops, it should be clear what Lakoff’s thinking is and what you are adding to the discussion from your own thinking and analysis.)
Use mostly your own words as you write the summary – just like you are telling someone about the text. When you need to bring in specific, brief phrases or words from the text, put them in quotation marks. Try to integrate the quote smoothly using the “citation sandwich” move.
With any and all quotations, include the page number(s) in parentheses to tell readers where the quote appears in the original text.
Be sure to write about the text in the present tense/active voice. Example: “Lakoff argues/maintains/suggests…”
Possible ways you might respond (the second part of your response – pick ONLY ONE angle to focus on):
1). How might Lakoff’s notion of “complex narratives” or “frames” work in other visual or “mediated” realms?
How does this idea explain the popularity of a certain reality TV show (The Bachelor, for example)? How might it be working in a particular TV series (The Crown, for example)? How might it work with a particular celebrity or public figure?
After considering a specific example, what are the implications of this analysis?
What ideas, questions, or complexities would you add to Lakoff’s conversation?
2). Consider how the “complex narrative” or “frames” play out in the effectiveness of a particular commercial.
Describe and analyze this commercial for your readers and discuss how the commercial is crafted for a particular audience response (pathos). How do Lakoff’s theories help you “read” the commercial? Does it make you think about the commercial/product/advertiser in a different way?
