Whether you are reading a text, listening to a song, or watching a public speech it is impossible to ignore any reputation the author might have be it positive or negative. We as an audience are forced into looking at past actions to determine how much we should take away from the content before us. This could ultimately help or hurt the author. A speech given by a well known and respected politician will hold more weight than a speech given by a local college student majoring in political science. As an audience we would much rather pay attention to someone with a history of successful achievements as opposed to a young adult with no political background. It may even be true that the political science student’s speech is far superior to the politician’s, however we trust the politician to add to his list of accomplishments as opposed to a student with no track record. Although there is a lot to be said about someone’s reputation, it plays a far too extensive role in the way we as an audience perceive a text.
Unfortunately for someone who wishes to change their appearance, their past actions play an enormous role in defining who the audience thinks they are and what the audience expect from them. A singer with a bubbly personality such as Jessica Simpson will not be taken seriously by an audience if she chooses to cross over into the rap genre of music. She could have some of the deepest and most inspirational rap lyrics ever written, however it is difficult for an audience to overlook her previous reputation and focus solely on her current works. Audiences need to try and discount past reputations whenever possible as complicated as this may be with the ever growing media exposure around today. Reputation can be a good indicator of how credible an author is, but we must remember that people change. A person ten years ago is not that same person today, and an author’s arguments ten years ago may not even remotely resemble his current arguments. If only we could ignore an author’s reputation we could see his or her work for what it truly is. But is this something we are capable of?
-S.T.L.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree, society today does put too much emphasis on people’s reputations when determining how to perceive them and what they have to say. Also, it is true that reputations can be helpful or hurtful for the author. It is hard for a person to get past their reputation and start a new life; no matter what, your reputation will somehow follow you in the end. Now, with that said, I would like to emphasize that as said in this post, reputations can be unfair. Though one might say that “you pick your own reputation”, he or she must consider that people change. The argument of a five year old is vastly different than one that same person will make twenty years down the line, and chances are that argument will be even further developed another twenty years later. As unfair as it is to judge someone in this way, however, it is not possible for someone to completely ignore who a person is when considering their position.
ReplyDeleteEveryone would be better off if they could ignore an author’s reputation and just look at the work as it is-based on the situation at hand as Aristotle argues. Though it would be better to do this, it is human nature to judge others, no matter how wrong that is. Today’s media and access to the internet worsen this, bringing personal lives to the public stage to be ridiculed and judged; each technological advancement makes it easier to spread reputations around. There is no way of getting around this, and no matter how hard anyone tries, it is nearly impossible to be judgment free about a person who has a strong reputation or lack of one when arguing in areas of expertise (e.g. politician vs. political science student).
Though reputations are always a factor in determining an author’s credibility, this doesn’t mean that ethos is not influenced by the situation at hand as well. For example, if one of today’s rap stars decided to perform one of his or her most popular songs in the middle of a church service, their performance would receive a very different reaction than it would at a traditional concert setting. I definitely agree that we weigh too much emphasis on reputation (and no, Jessica Simpson would never be able to pull off becoming a rap star), but that doesn’t mean that situational factors mean nothing. Ultimately, it is a mix of both of these factors that determine an author’s ethos.
When evaluating any type of information, looking at the reputation of the source is not only necessary but imperative. The author's ethos should not be merely an at the moment observation but should be made up of many factors including past events. It was argued that people change and that therefore reputation shouldn't necessarily be taken into account. However, people should also be held responsible for their actions. If I make an argument about a basketball team being the best in the country it shouldn’t be evaluated in the same way as had a basketball coach made the exact same argument. We have different life experiences and knowledge and therefore the basketball coach should be given the deserved credit and have his arguments given more weight.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, I think that the argument that people shouldn’t judge others is inherently flawed. If I am looking at two different arguments, it would be simply naïve to ignore the reputations of the individuals making the arguments. Rather I should take into account past actions, previous knowledge, and other relevant factors. Simply listening to the argument and deciding if the speaker is ethically acceptable doesn’t provide academic justice. Returning to the basketball example, the argument made by the basketball coach is based on years and years of in depth knowledge of the game. My argument would be merely that of a passive fan. Clearly the argument of the basketball coach should be taken more seriously.
I believe that although it is inarguably important to look at the individual argument that is being made, to throw away a pool of information about the source would just be foolish. There absolutely needs to be some balance between the two when evaluating the ethos of a speaker or author but in my opinion the reputation should be given a great deal of importance.