The publics with which I identify are publics in my current environment but then are counterpublics in the larger environment of the real world. I identify with the publics of electrical engineers, an academic of physics and math, and the Asian community. That being said, the first of the three are actually one of the more dominant publics at Texas A&M University but I am aware that outside of the university, it would be a counterpublic. In addition to that, as an academic of physics and math, while I consider it a dominant public because of its relevance in my own private life as well as being due to the people with which I am involved, it would be more of a counterpublic according to world issues. As for identifying with the Asian community, I consider that of some importance in spite of my lack of knowledge regarding Vietnamese history because of how it stands according to dominant publics.
Some counterpublics with which I identify with would be being a woman engineering major, avid readers, Sherlock Holmes and Supernatural fans, and the atheist community as well as being part of the Vietnamese Americans. One of the counterpublics on which I will remark is being a part of the Vietnamese Americans community. As remarked earlier, I am not a avid historian of Vietnamese politics, that being said, Vietnamese Americans are one of the counterpublics within the Asian community by mere percentage and its dominance on the national level, which is not much relative to the Chinese community.
When I first wrote this post in terms of public, the contextual factors with which I found myself considering were my identity. With what do I strongly associate my identity? When it comes with a public, the question of to which public one belongs can be answered not only by “Who am I?” but also “What do I believe in?” or “What do I do?” or even “Why do I believe in this issue?” People of a certain public share a common ground in some ways though they may not be completely interlaced with every single core beliefs.
So if I were asked to redefine my publics, I would still keep my top three when speaking about my identity. However, in speaking of my core beliefs in regards to traditions and customs, particularly for being part of the Asian community, I might identify with a different public – though I know that it ventures dangerously close to stereotyping – because of my age group. For the counterpublics, I found it much easier to consider my hobbies because I realize that, perhaps due to daily observations, that they were not common.
That said, my thoughts about these definitions have remained relatively the same though I have come to understand more about speaking in terms of directing my message to my publics. If I can identify and understand the publics to which I am speaking, I can tailor my rhetoric to make my message more effective. In particular – the recent Obama reading and the rhetorical analysis on the speeches Bush made during 9/11. They were speeches that hit home emotionally for many people, whether it was in terms of coping after a tragedy or choosing a president. Both presidents connected on an emotional level with their audiences and that’s what made it more effective.
In my case, with regards to my counter public and publics – while I would not change my original postings, I would add that I am part of the publics of daughters and women not only because I identify with them on a physical level but also the history regarding those publics.