The YouTube community illustrates a secondary discourse where I belong, as I can freely express my opinions and choose what I want to view. Talking occurs within a discourse with a shared set of values between individuals, while the secondary discourse happens outside of our primary discourse, which we acquire throughout our childhood. On YouTube, videos are constantly being posted every day and there are endless discourses to watch but what I find the most interesting is watching video game channels, a specific secondary discourse community of Pyropuncher. I can personally relate to Pyro on multiple different levels beyond just video games to his age, interests and moral views on the world. YouTube demonstrates a virtual space where anyone can write comments on a video by creating their own YouTube account. As for most of the videos that I watch from his channel, I click to like every video before even watching them. The community of Pyropuncher subscribes for many different reasons: watching specific videos he posts, inspiration after a long day of work or just hearing him simply talk. If there are differences between subscriber and Pyro, then each side has to assent to reach a common ground through each individual’s blind assent, in this imaginary and discourse community.

                 Relating this to the essay “What is Literacy?” by James Paul Gee, Gee’s overall goal for his essay defines what literacy is, in respect to the modern world. Gee first describes that literacy illustrates a discourse, “a [group of people] using language to of thinking and acting to identify oneself in part of a meaningful group or ‘social network’” (Gee 73). Literacy requires learning, involving attendance and explanation, In addition to the use of acquisition, experiencing in a natural setting in order to function. Eventually, Gee reaches the conclusion that “literacy is control of secondary uses of language” (Gee 78). Literacy requires this acquisition of a common language by interacting with oral or written communication of individuals, and specific values in the group. Individuals in this community share these values and comment with one another to expand upon their passionate ideas to link the individual’s together.

                 Further, Wayne C. Booth adds to Gee’s conversation in the essay “Blind Skepticism versus a Rhetoric of Assent” by stating that communication can only occur if the individuals start to listen to each other. Booth’s overall goal for his essay displays emphasis on finding this common ground between people to use rhetoric, where communication can understand to remove misunderstandings. This concept Booth defines listening as the Rhetoric of Assent. “Never assume that you should doubt everything but never assume that you should not change your mind, if you really listen. Always at least try to listen” (Booth 8). Booth wants new conversations arising between individuals so that life can offer more understandings or agreement through secondary discourses. Listening in the discourse community is made up by the individuals with many different beliefs and they come together forming the bond in my interest, the YouTube community.

                  Adding in, a final essay “Arts of the Contact Zone” by Mary Louise Pratt, Pratt works to use contact zones to explain how discourse communities clash with different ideals and how those communities can understand each other in academia. One of the terms Pratt inquires after is imaginary communities “communities where members will never know most of their fellows, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the mind of each lives the image of their communion” (Pratt 112). YouTube in a sense is an imaginary community because even though you are talking to hundreds of people on a certain video, that does not mean they will recognize you in the real world and actually start a conversation with them outside the discourse of YouTube.

                  To begin with, Pyro acquires his place by obtaining mastery or control in his own discourse community by having five years’ experience in creating videos on his channel, along with communicating with his subscribers. Pyro bases the videos he posts around the interest in the games he has at the time. When he started his channel, he based his content around Minecraft, but over time playing the same game for years makes Pyro strained to further production of videos or enjoyment from the game. His last Minecraft video was around a year ago when he obtained his degree from university. Subscribers to this day, still hold nostalgic values wanting him going back and play Minecraft.  Pyro responds to these comments similarly, “I appreciate the suggestion but there's going to be very little Minecraft on here. I'm currently not enjoying the game that much, maybe when an update comes out” (Channel Update). Pyro demonstrates the rhetoric of assent by listening to the suggestions in the comments, and he might play Minecraft again but only when the game offers something new. Pyro has no reason posting videos on a game he does not enjoy playing anymore and want to share with his community, even though the minority of the community requests those specific games. By listening to what his subscribers say and understanding their personal values, he can come to a common ground that the majority of his subscribers can enjoy watching the new games he continues to play.

                   Furthermore, Pyro considers numerous details when assenting to a new game on his channel from suggestions by his viewers. One of the facts to consider is the video’s success will actually obtain views and reach enjoyment for the overall discourse. Individuals choose which videos receive views, give feedback, like or dislike the video and subscribe, gaining access on the newest video updates. The role of assenting by subscribing offers new individuals when new games come out, this adds an opportunity for Pyro potentially gaining more subscribers for his community. Of course, the individuals find the common place themselves, actually listening what Pyro and the community openly communicates. The types of common places range from listening to what Pyro verbally articulates to understanding the choices he takes involving the game.  In relation, Booth says there are extreme dogmatic as those with refusal on listening to Pyro or extreme skeptics reluctant from believing about what Pyro discusses on the games he plays. Booth tells us that, “it’s not surprising that many of us take one or another false step that feels like a step forwards” (Booth 6). Both of these juxtaposing individuals are closed minded and are generally not welcomed into the discourse community with this mentality. Because they have this closed mind set, both sides cannot add further or new information to the community being an outsider to the discourse. These concepts of irrational thinking brings up Booth’s terms of blind assent, “occurred for all of us as soon as we started hearing and using language” (Booth 5). Blind assent depends on how the individual acquires language and the situation of discourses they were exposed to acquire their beliefs. However, even these individuals can come to terms by certain trigger words Pyro says whether it is communicating in video or replying to a comment, the discourse community can find some value in what Pyro says to their own beliefs. If there is a need for balance in finding a common place, then there is the need for balance between acquisition and learning in Pyro’s YouTube community.

                     Even though Pyro’s subscribers are learning how to play the game through Pyro’s videos, they grow acquiring the game and play for themselves. Keeping people entertained becomes Pyro’s overall goal for his subscribers and the individuals watching his videos by responding to comments and what the overall discourse wants witnesses him play. When individuals enjoy the game Pyro plays, this enjoyment becomes contagious desiring them buy the game themselves and play first hand replicating his experience and passion he shares for his discourse. I observe that Pyro creates the gateway for games new or retro, that might be over looked or passes by the community and playing these games exposes the community, deciding for themselves whether they want purchase the game. On the other hand, Pratt says “It is assumed that all participants are engaged in the same game and that the game is the same for all players” (Pratt 113). I have to disagree that games are the same for everyone because every individual has their own blind assent and receive enjoyment from different games and have different playstyles depending on the choices or items they choose to use to acquire. The story might change depending on the actions they took throughout the game has a plot to whether a miserable ending or content ending depends on how well the game was experienced. Even looking at the game the first time everyone has different perspectives and beliefs about their first reactions and the value they put their time into a game. Sure the same game, but everyone puts their unique play styles and interests into the game to construct it to truly shine and have value beyond actual game itself to bring discourse communities together. Pyro usually says when he concludes every series, “Buy the game to support the developers and just to show my thanks, I always let all the credits roll” (Pyro quoted by Wills). The community learns rhetoric of assent from Pyro on multiple levels, from appreciating the effort developers put into making an enjoyable game the community shares and talks about. However, why even assent watching an entire series Pyro creates if it will ruin the experiences of yourself playing?

                        There are many reasons but simply not everyone can afford playing each and every game Pyro posts as he opens a wide audience who own multiple different consoles, which limits which each person can play and only play certain games the company owns. For example, Mario Kart eight or Super Smash Bros four can only be played on the Wii U console but Mortal Kombat ten or Bloodborne can only be played on the PlayStation four console and these games are not compatible with each other’s consoles. Second, watching Pyro play your favorite game becomes easier than making stressful decisions inside the game itself, and each individual can take what they learn from Pyro’s series and apply those in their own acquisition of the game. Gee states that discourses have overall rules, “Discourses are resistant to internal criticism and self-scrutiny since uttering viewpoints seriously undermine them defines one as being outside” (Gee 74).  People cannot say all games are the same without playing them first because each development as with the progress of technology, offers something new to history and how the discourse community changes. We assent watching Pyro’s videos because this allows us to expose ourselves to the game and can see if this appeals our values or not. The first episode is critical for the individual to buy a game and either they are all for buying the game as that might be the only episode in the series they watch.

                     Also the discourse community can be thought of as a Safe house, to all the members. Pratt defines the term of safe house as a “social and intellectual spaces where groups can align themselves as horizontal, homogenous, sovereign communities with high degrees of trust, shared understandings, temporary protection from legacies of oppression” (Pratt 116). Safe houses can simply be thought of another way that defines a discourse. Pyro’s safe house has values that the community shares between individuals with trust, until they abuse that trust and post a negative comment. Live streams are live communications between the viewers and the content producer playing the game. Pyro on his stream makes jokes about negative comments targeted at him and actually gives attention to the comment but not allowing that to disrupt his flow for the majority of viewers. There is no sense of oppression within Pyro’s community as everyone has the right to post, whether the comment is negative or positive. Which leads to Pratt also stating the idea of the contact zone, “social spaces where cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other, often in contexts of highly asymmetrical relations of power” (Pratt 106). Pyro can be thought of by outsiders to the safe house, as the aristocracy of power similar to a king for his channel. Certain individuals want to challenge his authority over his channel by posting negative comments to make him play the games they want and not the ones Pyro currently posts. Those individuals have to assent that the contact zone does change slowly over time and so has Pyro’s values on what games he wants to play and Pyro positively dealing with outsiders by addressing them professionally. Pyro understands that people have their reasons for not subscribing and assenting to his authority, as he only wants individuals who enjoy his content on a daily basis. Pyro controls the flow of the community by the new videos he posts and not everyone can be constantly adapting over the years to keep watching games they do not enjoy. The safe house displays sovereignty in the ownership of Pyro and not under his absolute control or of an outside force but under the policies of YouTube that Pyro follows, in order to keep producing videos. If Pyro broadcasts all these different games in sub discourses, then the profit grained from the developers for the game affects the overall discourse community.

                      Individuals do not have to buy the game but they can expose what each game offers and at least listen and witness the video before making the choice of purchasing the game. The purchase of most games is worth the value for the overall safe house to talk and share new understanding on new games. Pyro can be also thought as a game reviewer as he verbal talks about what he likes and further improvement, after completion of a series, for the game that could have been added. The safe house shares this common link within the sub discourses, which are discourses within the discourse, of every game and relate them with one another that each has its own unique value. The enjoyment from the game itself is usually worth the cost as individuals by nature crave new forms of enjoyment through technology, as time progresses.

                     Just as there is a specific hobby for everyone, I notice there can also be for a game for everyone as well. Whether individual’s gamers ranging from casual to hardcore, just by playing the game opens doors to communication with different people around the internet on that specific discourse community. The few people that actually meet up and interact because they meet each other inside a game or online imaginary community that they share the common link in the game. Pyro achieves this link for more than the four hundred thousand individual people he has. However, the majority of people in Pyro’s community are not willing to see each other because that defines the online imaginary community. Pyro said on his livestream once “I might go to Pax this year in the summer, so I will be able to go to Seattle” (Pyro quoted by Wills). Pyro is from Ireland and as with most people on the internet it is rare they are from the same country, and I live two hours away from Seattle. The thought of meeting Pyro is a once in a lifetime occasion that I cannot afford to miss, as he even recognizes me on his streams as one of his loyal subscribers out of the thousands he has posting on his videos back in 2013.  If individuals could just open themselves up more to reduce the amount of missed opportunities by closing themselves off, refusing to watch his videos around these dogmatic or skeptic beliefs before giving Pyro a chance to even hear him talk or clicking the video, proves that they have not yet acquired the rhetoric of assent. The rhetoric of assent portrays a powerful tool and that any individual can learn but most people cannot acquire this tool and practice this throughout their everyday life.   

                     With all these concepts in mind, I conclude that no matter what safe houses we choose for our life, everyone has their blind assents but that does not mean we cannot have multiple interests in our life that make us passionate and desire communicating with other individuals about. Pyro’s YouTube channel allows videos to accessibly be shared and apply the rhetoric of assent, assenting from what we believe has value to our own personal lives and expand them to benefit our other discourses. YouTube may be an imaginary community, but the real life implications people take from the conversations from having an emphasis on video games to becoming beneficial to the future of acquisition of online technical communication.

 

 

 

Works Citied

Booth, Wayne C. "Blind Skepticism versus a Rhetoric of Assent." Participating in Cultures of Writing and Reading. Boston:               Bedford/St. Martin's, 2015. 1-10. Print.

Gee, James P. "What Is Literacy." Participating in Cultures of Writing and Reading. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2015. 73-81.

           Print.

Paul. "Channel Update (4th May 2015)." YouTube. YouTube, 4 May 2015. Web. 7 May 2015. 

Pratt, Marry Louise. "Arts of the Contact Zone." Participating in Cultures of Writing and Reading. Boston: Bedford/St.                        Martin's, 2015. 104-16. Print.