.
Sankofa symbol
It’s critical to note that the field of digital rhetorics is dynamic, and discussions and viewpoints about redefining the field must continue to evolve based on ongoing research and how the field can explore innovative pedagogical approaches that can utilize digital and surfing technologies to enhance teaching writing and composition. Not only that rhetoric in digital environment should meet demands of interests are only pedagogical, but practically, the definition of the field will be a success if it embraces indigenous scholars and knowledges that come into play in Tech. Com. According to Agboka et al. (2021), language justice, access, and power are at the heart of ever-expanding, increasingly globalized work that needs to include working systems against injustice through intercultural and internationalized knowledges of BIPOC. The interest of this discussion is to address the priming question: what are digital rhetorics now, and what might we do with digital rhetorics as scholars? And what can we do with the exploration of Sankofanarration as a tool of reflexivity? I employ Sankofanarration as a tool of reclamation in embracing the lost indigenous knowledegs, cultures, scholars, practices in redefining the field of Digital Rhetorics.
Using Sankofanarration as a tool of reflexivity to embrace social justice and inclusivity, Rhetoric in Digital Environments should extend to areas of pedagogy. To make that a reality what we might do with Digital Rhetoric is to be seen as a tool to create spaces for non-western and diasporic rhetoric in our writing curriculum. I have championed Korankye’s (2023) Sankofanarration as a decolonial methodology and a tool we can use to reclaim the lost indigenous voices and identities in the digital spaces. Sankofanarartion is a conflation of two words: Sankofa and narration. Sankofa, an Akan term, which is an example of Adinkra symbols which also literally means ‘go back and take.’ By using this term, I am not just talking about embracing internationalized knowledge, but it is a way to educate readers about the cultural impact of such symbol-precious things that are lost or forgotten can be reclaimed if we come to a realization of their importance. The symbol is made up of a mythological bird that has its feet firmly planted forward and can easily turn its head backward to get an egg. The egg represents indigenous knowledges and resources that need to be handled with care. The Sankofa symbol is printed on clothes, and can be found on furniture, architecture, sculptures, logos, Ghanaian archives, chief places, on top of linguist staff and portrayed in traditional festivals, marriage, costumes like ‘kente’. The gaze of indigenous knowledges and practices in Digital Rhetoric shows that there is a gap between the present and past treasures of traditional knowledges. Just as Sankofa’s omnipresence in every visible and covert phenomena in Ghana, what I seek to nudge for in Digital Rhetorics is to have a field that recognizes and values the work of BIPOC community in pedagogy, history, and practice. The term Safonarration as practice urges the field to reclaim the lost values and undervalued indigenous knowledges we have forgotten in redefining Digital Rhetoric. Sankofanarration is a useful reclamation framework for DR pedagogies because it brings into bear.
According to Mary Hocks (2003) “digital rhetoric describes a system of ongoing dialogue and negotiations among writers, audiences, and institutional contexts, but it focuses on the multiple modalities available for making meaning using new communication and information technologies” (2003,p. 632). Zappen (2005) also adds the key activities within the field of Digital Rhetoric involves the use of rhetorical strategies in the production and analysis of digital text; identifying characteristics, affordances, and constraints of new media; formation of digital identities and building potential for building social communities (p. 319). Looking at the scholarly conceptualization of the term, what I intend add to the definition of the term as an emerging scholar are examinations of other oral rhetorical practices of indigenous cultures; making the work of indigenous scholars work accessible, integrating much of BIPOC’ rhetorical work into the field, using rhetorical decolonial methods rooted in cultural practices to construct knowledge in digital work; using surviving technologies in amplifying Ghanaian voices that regard to family and community; inventing traditional methods from indigenous cultures to study Digital Rhetoric. So far, I have used Ghanaian survival technologies-adinkra symbols like Sankofa in my research pedagogies to amplifying Ghanaian voices in meaningful ways with regard to family, community, and civic sphere. Sankofa is not only an art but an activism that raises awareness about endangered languages of minoritized people which we do not see in digital spaces. Sankfanaration, as a translingual term gives hope to emerging scholars to use decolonial research that can reclaim lost and underprivileged, under-dominated knowledges and technocultural audiences in the space of Tech. Com. I believe the current definition (practices) of Digital Rhetorics should be expanded to embrace these useful components to make the world of Digital Rhetoric a safe seeking space.
Haas (2008) looks at digital rhetoric as a study of “everyday rhetoric and writing practices of specific cultural groups” and the historical, socio-cultural political context that shapes those practices in the digital spaces. If Haas conceptualizes DR as everyday rhetoric of specific groups in the digital spaces, the field has a lot of works to do to cater for African indigenous tools and stories for theorizing and doing digital rhetoric. It is in my interest to employ a Ghanaian rhetorical lens to examine how Kwa-Ewe and Akan cultures use digital rhetoric to articulate their cultural practices. Surviving technologies-Sankofa and other adinkra symbols have shaped the black movements and black identities. Exploration of Sankofannaration teaches us the importance of learning from the past indigenous cultures and building into the future an inclusive digital rhetoric that ensures the survival of indigenous knowledge and scholars in the field. Unfortunately, in my classes in Visible and Digital Rhetorics, I have, so far, not witnessed a practice of rhetoric that meets the cultural needs of the local and indigenous people of Ghana. I would like to clarify that a cultural and linguistic survival of such of indigenous symbols, people, knowledges, stories, values depends heavily on how we use digital technologies to celebrate their rhetorics.
To redefine Digital Rhetorics, we need to care about aspects of performance, particularly non-western indigenous oral rhetorical practices. Just as Banks in his work, Digital Griot reminds us about the important black multimedia and oral rhetorical traditions. Sankofanarration is not only a tool but a decolonial way to critically reclaim the indigenous stories of those who have been erased by dominant histories and narratives. We should not only embrace those useful resources only in our scholarly works. In pedagogical practices, we need to tap on t such surviving technologies like Ghanaian Adinkra symbols which connect communicative arts in teaching Writing. These Adinkra symbols as surviving technologies printed on clothes and fabrics intend to champion Ghanaian identities in festivals, naming ceremonies and other. These symbols are useful because they reclaim lost histories of Ghanaian culture. Giving sensitization about such surviving technologies will enable students in multicultural spaces to be knowledgeable about the cultural impact of these symbols in Communication.
Adinkra symbols
We also need to care about equitable citational practices. Talking about the politics of citational practices against BIPOC scholars, Lockett et al. (2021) say, “the demographics of published RCWS researchers fail to accurately reflect the culturally diverse participation that constitutes the profession (although racial/ethnic diversity among professionals in the field remains very limited).” According to Ruiz (2021), white male scholars were cited repeatedly from 1950-1993 in Rhetoric and composition studies. This politics of citation of scholars in Digital Rhetoric challenges us to value BIPOC and non-western and diasporic epistemological enterprise of scholars that need to be reclaimed in culturally sustained citational practices as far as redefining Digital rhetoric is concerned. Even those who successfully publish their works, sometimes such works are not accessed. Editorial boards should make their work accessible to solve issues of access.
The field of Digital Rhetoric therefore has not done much to include epistemological ways of knowing from minoritized groups. The space has been western-dominated. I believe DR is a site to integrate local stories, tools, and incoming scholars to make the field inclusive.
[Haas, 2018; Ruiz, et. al, 2021; Agboka, et. al 2021; Korankye, 2023; Locket, et. al 2021; Zappen, 2005; Hocks, 2003]
