11-04-2006, 05:59 PM
INTRODUCTION TO RHETORIC AS A TOPIC OF STUDY
1) What are we going to study?
The history of Rhetoric as a topic consists of 2,500 years of communication practice, theorizing as to how that practice works, and teaching as to how to best produce it. In other words, a body of literature as to: THEORIES, MODELS, AND PRACTICE.
The study of MODELS--
speakers, speeches, and written discourse--is generally done in courses perhaps titled "history of [X type of] public address," or in our case at Bradley in a course focused on criticism of communication events: communication analysis (often referred to as rhetorical criticism), or in literature courses titled "literary criticism."
The study of PRACTICE--
communication production--takes place in public speaking, oral interpretation, interpersonal, small group, listening, and writing courses.
This course, 303, focuses on the study of Rhetorical THEORY--
by examining the historical personages, literature, and social circumstances which produced our understandings of how communication operates. This study includes interest in learnings as to how to transfer theory into practice through models: approaches to pedagogy. Communication Theory examines these questions from a social scientific point of view. Rhetorical Theory examines these questions from a humanistic point of view.
2) How may we define the topic?
Over the course of 2,500 there have been numerous definitions for the term "Rhetoric." Let's note three main approaches, the details and significance of which we will examine in greater detail through the course.
-Rhetoric is the art of discovering all the available means of persuasion in any given case (Aristotle)
-Rhetoric is adjusting ideas to people and people to ideas (Bryant)
-Rhetoric is communication which helps people think alike so that they may share values, dispositions toward actions, and actions. (Burke and Perelman)
3) Let's summarize that which Rhetoric is probably not.
(Imagine 3 circles: widest is Communication, with Persuasion and Rhetoric inside, overlapping)
It's probably not equivalent to "communication": that is generally treated as a more broad term. It's probably not equivalent to "persuasion": that is often treated as a more narrow term. While all persuasion is communication and all rhetoric is communication there is certainly communication which is neither persuasive nor rhetorical and there may be rhetoric which is not persuasive. The key thing to remember here: various theorists size these circles differently. The majority view tends to equate rhetoric and persuasion.
4) Although it has sometimes been treated as such, Rhetoric is not western civilization's key devil term.
You may hear that
-it is empty talk
-it is the ornamental use of overly fancy words
-it is the linguistic substitute for action not taken
-it is the substitution of irrationality for reason
-it primarily involves appearances rather than reality
-it is primarily unethical
We do not treat Rhetoric as any of these negatives. I will try to show you over the course of the term that these explanations are wrong. At the end of the course, you may decide that one or more of them were right. At various points in the 2,500 years, Rhetoric has suffered from one or more of these deficiencies--but given the scope of history we do not throw out the good merely due to periods of blame (we don't toss science due to Hiroshima; we don't dismiss all visual arts due to some pornography).
5) So why do we study Rhetorical theory: who needs it?
Every discipline which seeks to convey its subject matter in order to gain adherents:
we will see that "experts" have to learn to convey "hidden" truths to the masses and that "experts" have to convince others of the truth of their claims.
Every individual who wants their communication to have impact:
we will see that politicians, lawyers, and business people must use rhetoric if they are to succeed.
Those who seek to elevate their communication from the human to the humane:
The key issues here being two kinds of choice making. First, there is choice making as to what to say and how to say it. Animals can signal their intentions but that which they signal has a unitary relation with that which they want. Humans symbolize by replacing that which is not there with oral sounds and scratches on paper. There is nearly infinite variety available in the sounds and scratches they may make. We make these choices in a personal way. The more deftly we do so, the more creative become our choices. The more creative, the closer we move toward art. The closer toward artistic expression, the closer we move toward the humane condition, as opposed to the merely human. Second, rhetoric stresses the importance of society--of others. Our artistic action presents others with communicative choices rather than with force. The purpose of rhetoric is to coordinate human interaction by making a given choice preferable.
5) Humans cooperate by the social act of constructing mutually compatible interpretations of reality. Rhetoric is the refinement of the communicative life of the individual for the good of the society.
----------
Intro to Contemporary Rhetorical Perspectives
1900-1915: Foment among the English Dept. Troops--The split
Prior to and at this time, "speech" departments did not exist in America. Colonial era schools had maintained an interest in Rhetoric both oral and written, primarily in "Classics" departments. As the school system developed many Classics departments fragmented among History, Foreign Language, and English units. Although some of the scholars/ teachers interested in Rhetoric stayed within Classics departments, many moved to English departments where, for a time, they shared common interests in oral and written discourse. Over time, however, the interest shifted, primarily, to the written mode and the study of rhetoric became subsumed within English Departments as "rhetoric and composition." English Departments further problematized this situation with their own conflicts and splits. Not only did those interested in teaching oral communication have to fight to be heard over the "traditional" preference for writing, rhetoric and composition was seen as less important than the study of great literature (a situation which still plagues many modern Departments of English). Teachers interested in speech were NOT in a good situation. They were, however, interested in teaching about oral communication, and so they "revolted" and split from the English Departments, forming Departments of Speech. Leaders in this movement included prominent Midwest professors at Illinois, Iowa, and Harvard (among others).
A: Initial/formative areas of interest on the part of early speech teachers and programs
1) oral speech in public speaking, debate, speech disorders, theatre, speech instruction, persuasion,
ethics
2) integration with classical tradition: interest in the history and literature of rhetorical theory.
3) attempts to integrate with new social sciences: not only as indicated by the work of Campbell, but as encouraged by the rapid and dramatic development of the social sciences in America.
B: Forces for continued change and fracture
Changing departments by no means solved all of the problems. Almost immediately, fractures endemic to Speech Departments themselves began to come to the fore.
1) social sciences & war influences:
the early founders were interested in the "new" psychologies and other social sciences. Due to Campbell's influence (and the influence of other "Epistemologists"), rhetorical historians and theorists were initially motivated to study social scientific features of communication events. However, as the social sciences developed into a purely quantitative and experimental mode, "humanities"-driven rhetorical theory and "science" driven communication studies began to diverge.
Further, governments and military establishments funded communication research as part of the war efforts. These activities led to the development of the modern field of communication studies. The politics, pragmatics, and technologies of these efforts also favored the social scientific.
Additionally, speech/communication departments began to take up study of professional activities in communication. Where, previously, professional research was limited to the domain of public speaking (so entailed politics and the law, primarily), "modern" research included not only theoretic research in professional, but also "applied" professional research.
These and other factors further encouraged sub-disciplinary diversity in speech communication studies.
2) continued splits in English as well--for instance,
As noted above, such diversity was not exclusive to speech/.com in the area of relative interest in rhetoric. Similar splits occured in English, as between the literature vs composition camps.
C: Rhetoric Reborn: Forces in the Rhetorical Turn
1) European philosophy and linguistic philosophy
(Nietzsche,Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Vico/Grassi, Habermas, Foucault, and a large group of others who I'll not detail here)
One of the primary descriptions of the modern philosphic age focuses on its interest in the "linguistic" or "rhetorical" turn. Many continental/European 20th century philosophers foreground the importance of linguistic action in their thought systems. Many also formulated and articulated rhetorical theories (or forms thereof). Contemporary rhetorical scholars have become increasingly interested in, and influence by, these thought systems.
2) European legal philosophy
Particularly as exemplified by the work of Toulmin and Perelman, European writers have taken an interest in the relationships between judicial systems and practical argumentation in everyday life. American scholars of argumentation and debate, strong currents in the history and practices of academic speech communication, have taken particularly strong interests in this work.
3) European textual hermeneutics
European philosophical and theological work with religious texts (textual interpretation) has led to a broad range of developments in "meaning interpretation." This work, represented by the writing of Husserl, Schutz, and others, has led to the development of philosophies which undergird all of qualitative/field-oriented research; work which is now seen as offering ways to do social science without acceptance of the positivist (and anti-rhetorical) tradition of Cartesian logic.
4) European/English (mass media) critical studies
Scholars interested in the sociology of everyday life, particularly those in England (Stuart Hall, Raymond Williams and others), have combined critical studies of mass media (its economic/organizational basese) with continental philosophy as ways to understand the rhetorical properties of otherwise taken-for-granted media practices. These scholars encourage theory, criticism, and practical action which moves media studies away from the practical interests of owners and operators toward social consciousness and change. Grossberg and other Americans carry on this tradition. McLuhan and Postman present "Americanized" versions of mass media critical theory.
5) American literary philosophy
Kenneth Burke, Wayne Booth and others have kept contemporary English scholars well within the rhetorical loop by extending literary critical techniques outside the limitations of exclusive interest in "high-culture printed texts."
6) American rhetorical theory
In addition to Kenneth Burke's work, a large number of American scholars, most identifying with Speech Communication, have developed numerous hetorical theories and approachesWeaver, Black, Bitzer, Fisher, Bormann., and many others). The National Communication Association (formerly Speech Communcation Association) and its member regional and affiliated organizations sponsor upwards of 30 academic journals dedicated to communication studies, many of which often foreground rhetorical theory issues.
7) American rhetorical subdisciplines
i. public address
"historical" study of speeches, speakers, events with a focus on communication practices in the public sphere
ii. rhetorical theory
conceptual development of thought systems about the operation of, and philosophy behind, communication action.
iii. Rhet. crit. & communication analysis
critical application of rhetorical theory to communication in action. A wedding of public address with rhetorical theory via a critical modality.
iv. cultural criticism
European hermaneutic and critical studies perspective brought to bear on communication action, particularly on on the rhetorical phenomena of everyday life. Hyde and Wander (and others) often produce outstanding examples of this work.
SOME CONTEMPORARY (AMERICAN OR OF PARTICULAR INTEREST TO AMERICANS) RHETORICAL PERSPECTIVES
1) Rhetoric as epistemic (Scott, Brummett)
2) Rhetoric and argumentation (Brockreide, Toulman, Perelman, Sillars)
3) Rhetoric and performance (including cultural studies) (Conquergood, Burke, Goffman)
4) Rhetoric of inquiry/science (Ehninger, Simons, Lyne, Nelson, Megill)
5) Narrative Paradigm (Fisher)
6) Fantasy Theme/Symbolic Convergence Theory (Bormann)
7) "Other" Voices and cultural challenges (Feminism, Asian, African, African-American, Native American, South American/Latino)
8) Ontological/Forms of Life (Conversational, ethnographic, interpersonal)
9) Historical (esp. revisionist) (Enos; Foss, Foss, & Trapp; Foss)
10) Movement and genre work (Campbell, Ja mieson)
----
The Classical Conception of Rhetoric
Rhetoric is an art, more particularly, is one of the seven liberal arts It is composed of principles which must be applied flexibly depending on the relationship among speaker, audience, occasion, and content
It is a matter of importance whenever humans seek to discover and communicate the humane truth It is an endeavor which develops the "Humane" condition (by helping us solve our problems in mind and society)
Stresses the power of the word showing how this power can be used properly or misused: narration and history contextualize
That probability is as important to human affairs as is certainty
Rhetoric is part of cultural affairs, especially civic, religious, and poetic
It is ethically based (prefers good to evil)
It has three faces (forensic, deliberative, demonstrative)
It seeks to persuade, inform, and/or please
Participants' contributions should influence society
It is a matter of importance whenever humans seek to convey the content and methodology of a subject in order to gain adherents to a point of view
That the power of a text is at issue
That conflict breeds discontinuities which Rhetoric can address
Rhetoric may be taught/learned
Depends on natural ability, educated training, extensive practice
Theories, models, and guided pract
ice are important perspectives for learning the art.
Virtue must be joined to eloquence
Knowledge of the world (philosophy, law, politics, history, literature) are essential
Rhetoricians have five canons at their disposal as resources
Invention
investigate facts (and "other" ways of knowing including dialectic, logic, intuition, inspiration/authority, and remembrance)
determine character of all sides of the case (stasis, status, and topoi)
artistic proofs, ethos/pathos/logical argument (and inartistic)
Disposition
plan of compositions in general from the nature of all cases order the specific parts of the composition
Style
word choice
virtues of style,
correctness, clarity, embellishment,
appropriateness types of style
plain, middle, grand
flexibility among styles that words not only "clothe," that they also "create"
Memory
thought memory (command of the material)
word memory (command of the words)
rote memorization (of parts or the whole)
associational systems
Delivery
vocal control and variety
physical control and variety
Speeches have parts; each part contributes to the whole
Statement of the case and its proofs
Exordium, narratio, divisio, confirmatio, confutatio, peroriatio
Rhetoric emphasizes analysis and involvement of the audience and situation
Discovery of the question and the case
Use of the enthymeme
Includes dialectical (question and answer) formats
Is most often about the audience "doing" something civic/religious
Requires extensive audience analysis so as to learn the "best" approach
Empowers people to participate in social development
----
Preface to the middle ages--"Dark"Ages (50-1000)
Tertullian: 2nd century Montanist.
De Spectaculis: an exhortative epistle designed to counsel Christian faithful to avoid all pagan ritual. It underscored the desperate rhetorical struggle, on the part of the new Church, to reject the decadent surface of ordinary life in favor of the new consciousness of Christianity. Everything of this world was taken as bad; of the next, good. God did not create the world as bad, but man and his efforts have polluted it. Man's inner life must be protected for communication with God. Mass culture undermines that dialog.
Second Sophistic: Lucian, Hermogenes, Capella
More emphasis on elocutio than ever before. Extensive use of declamatio for education. Growth of demonstrative (rather than judicial or deliberative)
Capella: (c. 420)
the lady rhetoric endowed with many beautiful adornments and powerful weapons
St. Augustine
Practical applications were limited to preaching Invention relegated to inspiration. (more on pages dedicated to Augustine).
Cassiodorus (c.490-583)
Includes letter writing rhetoric as indispensable to the study of the bible and necessary for civil affairs of state.
Isidore, Alcuin Isidore (c. 550)
encyclopaedia of human knowledge which included rhetoric and dialectic. Slows the "slide" to style; treats the 5 canons.
Alcuin (730-804)
Treatise on legal procedure, in the dialogic form. By this time, the church was in cahoots with the state and the state needed the monastery schools to teach civic lessons in addition to Christian coverage.
Bede (672-735)
authored an important book on poetry including numerous stylistic devices. His point was to show (as had Augustine) that the Bible was rich literature. Remember that by this time the monks had been working for some time to produce literary translations of the biblical texts--a testimony to the need for rhetorical elements in sacred texts.
Notker Labeo (950-1022)
Translated Capella thereby encouraging rhetorical study in the old Germanic.
Boethius
writes on topoi, syllogisms and confuses dialectic and rhetoric.
The very essence of working out the authority of texts became a rhetorical problem in this period. The hierarchy of textual authority depended on the type of text and its "authentic inspiration." Rhetorical analysis, criticism, and argument were required in each step of this process.
A principle force FOR rhetoric in this period was the use of the "lectio" as a teaching and preaching method. The lectio reminds us of the conversia (declamatio) in Rome: a passage was read (almost as though it were a sample case question). It was then discussed with regard to its proper translation, interpretation, and application. Numerous arguments were put forward in defense of the "right" position and, especially, against the current "heresy." This lecture form developed into the "disputatio," a public discussion along the same lines. A significant hitch in the process: one could always retreat to an appeal to "And yet it is true" based on the higher authority of the Word of God. However, SI points out that this practice was not much different from the modern reliance on "facts, science, reason, etc." We still have to deal with the "argument to the self-evident"-- a central point in Perelman's treatment of rhetoric. One does not find rhetoric in operation at these points of self-evidence, except in that they are apparent as junctures where arguers have tried to supplant argument as the operative mode--a sort of argument in itself.
"Three factors in particular have determined this characteristic style of philosophizing. . . it is greatly inspired by JURIDICAL PROCEDURE, which is naturally based on LEGAL TEXTS and their interpretation. . . Secondly, this style of philosophizing is prompted by an unprecedented reverence for the WRITTEN WORD. Whatever has been written is by this very fact already authoritative. . . Thirdly . . . God is a speaking God, his son is called the Word, he has revealed himself through the Word and has become accessible in sacred literature" (52)
Medieval philosophy has a rhetorical structure; although middle agers would vehemently deny it.
Middle Ages (1000-1300)
Those above highly influenced those in middle period. Further, the classics were still fragmented and lost. However, various forms of rhetoric were still important in the schools as illustrated by the organization of topics which held for more than a thousand years: Septennium: Trivium: grammar, rhetoric, dialectic Quadrivium: arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy
Middle Age rhetoricians had a sense of the 5 canons, and
1) sustained emphasis upon style. Rhetoric: related most to the style, manner of speaking. Beauty and the ability to convince were central concerns. (art of speaking well and convincingly)
2) restricting the art to, primarily, grammar (letters and poetry) letter writing (dictamen) became a major rhetorical activity. In grammar: rules for speaking and writing correctly under the presupposition that the structure of language corresponds to that of being and understanding (precursor of modern linguistics).
3) confusing the provinces of rhetoric and dialectic, esp. with regard to the assignment of invention. Remember that Augustine and the churchmen had, essentially, stripped invention from rhetoric. Hugh of St. Victor and John of Salisbury put invention with dialectic. Dialectics: concept, judgment, and reasoning were essential here. Roughly, philosophy.
4) conceiving its area, in the early period, to be theology, in its late parts, with civic affairs. The theological confusion gave rhetoric great strength (socially) but further robbed it of invention. Thomas Aquinas and "Scholasticism" which applied the method of Augustine to the doctrines of Aristotle through Cicero: rhetoric as a part of logic, attached to theology not civic affairs or philosophy in the early period. In the later:
5) retaining some of the classical concepts: for some, politics was still a rhetorical issue. Notker Labeo, Latini. This urge was driven by the need for illiterates to communicate to run their countries and led to the development of letter writing as an important rhetorical activity. "In application, the art of rhetoric contributed during the period from the fourth to the fourteenth century not only to the methods of speaking and writing, of composing letters and petitions, sermons and prayers, legal documents and briefs, poetry and prose, but to the canons of interpreting laws and scripture, to the dialectical devices of discovery and proof, to the establishment of the scholastic method which was to come into universal use in philosophy, theology, and finally to the formulation of scientific inquiry which was to separate philosophy from theology (91 in Golden et al. intro.)
Although always about (1) the subject matter (2) the nature and (3) the ends, of the art, Mediaeval rhetoric was NOT a consistently unitary study. Nor have subsequent studies provided unitary and satisfactory understandings of the nuances of Mediaeval treatments. Three rhetorical lines of intellectual development in this period:
1. rhetorical traditions as established by Cicero and Quintilian
2. philosophy and theology as a reconstructed Platonism and Ciceronianism taken from Augustine
3. "logic," supposedly Aristotelian, which actually followed Aristotle only in terms and propositions, Ciceronian in definitions and principles. Rhetorical constancies: Ciceronian influence on the entire affair. Rhetoric was used not only to discuss its own problems as subject matter, but also to work out disagreements in dialectic and theology. Kinds of oratory (deliberative, judicial, demonstrative) Distinction between the proposition and hypothesis. Delineation of the status of an issue (the questions) In the use of these status/questions (5 w's) to determine the hierarchy of textual authority. As to the treatment of logic, incomplete texts were the rule through to the 13th century. Dialectic gets mixed in with logic such that their subject matter is confused. Some placed rhetoric over dialectic; others did not. The general moving of invention from rhetoric to logic. Many subordinated rhetoric to logic by finding it to be part of logic; or at least, by finding that it is about expression rather than discovery. Others by separating the differences between demonstration and probability. Others define the relationships among the various activities such that rhetoric simply gets "divided" out of important places. Distinction between rhetoric as the "work of the orator" or as "the parts of rhetoric" "Rhetoric was to come into conflict with dialectic . . . as it was to come into conflict with theology . . . Since its discipline was gradually limited by the transfer of the commonplaces, definition, and finally proof . . . to the domain of dialectic, and since its subject matter was limited by the transfer of moral and political questions to theology, rhetoric entered into a second period during which it developed along three separate lines: as a part of logic, or as the art of stating truths certified by theology, or as a simple art of words. Rhetoric was put to use in the Augustinian tradition as a way to further the work of divine eloquence and to further interpret their meanings. Especially as a way to re-align differences pointed out in textual hierarchies. In one of two ways: rhetoric becomes a part of logic (as that part of logic concerned with probabilities); or a part of theology (as the culmination of the trivium). moderni rhetoricians: those primarily concerned with the development of style--mostly derided by others as foolish, but left alone.
Transitions to Renaissance
-rhetoric as a part of rational philosophy subordinate to logic
-rhetoric as dominate in the arts and theology
-all philosophy and subjects assimilated to rhetoric
-invention taken from rhetoric and given over to dialectic
-rhetoric as the discipline of words
-rhetoric as a way to establish verbal distinctions, later leading to physics, mathematics, symbolic logic.
-theories of poetry dealing passion, imagination, truth and virtue
-political philosophy
-stasis (whether, what, of what sort) as basis for scientific methods which eventually sought to supplant rhetorical method.
-basis for analysis of "causes" of things
-thesis/hypothesis into modern scientific methods
-investigation of the passions
-use of common-places to invent arguments
-the "logic" of arrangement
-civil philosophies of psychology, law, literature, and philosophy.
------
1) What are we going to study?
The history of Rhetoric as a topic consists of 2,500 years of communication practice, theorizing as to how that practice works, and teaching as to how to best produce it. In other words, a body of literature as to: THEORIES, MODELS, AND PRACTICE.
The study of MODELS--
speakers, speeches, and written discourse--is generally done in courses perhaps titled "history of [X type of] public address," or in our case at Bradley in a course focused on criticism of communication events: communication analysis (often referred to as rhetorical criticism), or in literature courses titled "literary criticism."
The study of PRACTICE--
communication production--takes place in public speaking, oral interpretation, interpersonal, small group, listening, and writing courses.
This course, 303, focuses on the study of Rhetorical THEORY--
by examining the historical personages, literature, and social circumstances which produced our understandings of how communication operates. This study includes interest in learnings as to how to transfer theory into practice through models: approaches to pedagogy. Communication Theory examines these questions from a social scientific point of view. Rhetorical Theory examines these questions from a humanistic point of view.
2) How may we define the topic?
Over the course of 2,500 there have been numerous definitions for the term "Rhetoric." Let's note three main approaches, the details and significance of which we will examine in greater detail through the course.
-Rhetoric is the art of discovering all the available means of persuasion in any given case (Aristotle)
-Rhetoric is adjusting ideas to people and people to ideas (Bryant)
-Rhetoric is communication which helps people think alike so that they may share values, dispositions toward actions, and actions. (Burke and Perelman)
3) Let's summarize that which Rhetoric is probably not.
(Imagine 3 circles: widest is Communication, with Persuasion and Rhetoric inside, overlapping)
It's probably not equivalent to "communication": that is generally treated as a more broad term. It's probably not equivalent to "persuasion": that is often treated as a more narrow term. While all persuasion is communication and all rhetoric is communication there is certainly communication which is neither persuasive nor rhetorical and there may be rhetoric which is not persuasive. The key thing to remember here: various theorists size these circles differently. The majority view tends to equate rhetoric and persuasion.
4) Although it has sometimes been treated as such, Rhetoric is not western civilization's key devil term.
You may hear that
-it is empty talk
-it is the ornamental use of overly fancy words
-it is the linguistic substitute for action not taken
-it is the substitution of irrationality for reason
-it primarily involves appearances rather than reality
-it is primarily unethical
We do not treat Rhetoric as any of these negatives. I will try to show you over the course of the term that these explanations are wrong. At the end of the course, you may decide that one or more of them were right. At various points in the 2,500 years, Rhetoric has suffered from one or more of these deficiencies--but given the scope of history we do not throw out the good merely due to periods of blame (we don't toss science due to Hiroshima; we don't dismiss all visual arts due to some pornography).
5) So why do we study Rhetorical theory: who needs it?
Every discipline which seeks to convey its subject matter in order to gain adherents:
we will see that "experts" have to learn to convey "hidden" truths to the masses and that "experts" have to convince others of the truth of their claims.
Every individual who wants their communication to have impact:
we will see that politicians, lawyers, and business people must use rhetoric if they are to succeed.
Those who seek to elevate their communication from the human to the humane:
The key issues here being two kinds of choice making. First, there is choice making as to what to say and how to say it. Animals can signal their intentions but that which they signal has a unitary relation with that which they want. Humans symbolize by replacing that which is not there with oral sounds and scratches on paper. There is nearly infinite variety available in the sounds and scratches they may make. We make these choices in a personal way. The more deftly we do so, the more creative become our choices. The more creative, the closer we move toward art. The closer toward artistic expression, the closer we move toward the humane condition, as opposed to the merely human. Second, rhetoric stresses the importance of society--of others. Our artistic action presents others with communicative choices rather than with force. The purpose of rhetoric is to coordinate human interaction by making a given choice preferable.
5) Humans cooperate by the social act of constructing mutually compatible interpretations of reality. Rhetoric is the refinement of the communicative life of the individual for the good of the society.
----------
Intro to Contemporary Rhetorical Perspectives
1900-1915: Foment among the English Dept. Troops--The split
Prior to and at this time, "speech" departments did not exist in America. Colonial era schools had maintained an interest in Rhetoric both oral and written, primarily in "Classics" departments. As the school system developed many Classics departments fragmented among History, Foreign Language, and English units. Although some of the scholars/ teachers interested in Rhetoric stayed within Classics departments, many moved to English departments where, for a time, they shared common interests in oral and written discourse. Over time, however, the interest shifted, primarily, to the written mode and the study of rhetoric became subsumed within English Departments as "rhetoric and composition." English Departments further problematized this situation with their own conflicts and splits. Not only did those interested in teaching oral communication have to fight to be heard over the "traditional" preference for writing, rhetoric and composition was seen as less important than the study of great literature (a situation which still plagues many modern Departments of English). Teachers interested in speech were NOT in a good situation. They were, however, interested in teaching about oral communication, and so they "revolted" and split from the English Departments, forming Departments of Speech. Leaders in this movement included prominent Midwest professors at Illinois, Iowa, and Harvard (among others).
A: Initial/formative areas of interest on the part of early speech teachers and programs
1) oral speech in public speaking, debate, speech disorders, theatre, speech instruction, persuasion,
ethics
2) integration with classical tradition: interest in the history and literature of rhetorical theory.
3) attempts to integrate with new social sciences: not only as indicated by the work of Campbell, but as encouraged by the rapid and dramatic development of the social sciences in America.
B: Forces for continued change and fracture
Changing departments by no means solved all of the problems. Almost immediately, fractures endemic to Speech Departments themselves began to come to the fore.
1) social sciences & war influences:
the early founders were interested in the "new" psychologies and other social sciences. Due to Campbell's influence (and the influence of other "Epistemologists"), rhetorical historians and theorists were initially motivated to study social scientific features of communication events. However, as the social sciences developed into a purely quantitative and experimental mode, "humanities"-driven rhetorical theory and "science" driven communication studies began to diverge.
Further, governments and military establishments funded communication research as part of the war efforts. These activities led to the development of the modern field of communication studies. The politics, pragmatics, and technologies of these efforts also favored the social scientific.
Additionally, speech/communication departments began to take up study of professional activities in communication. Where, previously, professional research was limited to the domain of public speaking (so entailed politics and the law, primarily), "modern" research included not only theoretic research in professional, but also "applied" professional research.
These and other factors further encouraged sub-disciplinary diversity in speech communication studies.
2) continued splits in English as well--for instance,
As noted above, such diversity was not exclusive to speech/.com in the area of relative interest in rhetoric. Similar splits occured in English, as between the literature vs composition camps.
C: Rhetoric Reborn: Forces in the Rhetorical Turn
1) European philosophy and linguistic philosophy
(Nietzsche,Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Vico/Grassi, Habermas, Foucault, and a large group of others who I'll not detail here)
One of the primary descriptions of the modern philosphic age focuses on its interest in the "linguistic" or "rhetorical" turn. Many continental/European 20th century philosophers foreground the importance of linguistic action in their thought systems. Many also formulated and articulated rhetorical theories (or forms thereof). Contemporary rhetorical scholars have become increasingly interested in, and influence by, these thought systems.
2) European legal philosophy
Particularly as exemplified by the work of Toulmin and Perelman, European writers have taken an interest in the relationships between judicial systems and practical argumentation in everyday life. American scholars of argumentation and debate, strong currents in the history and practices of academic speech communication, have taken particularly strong interests in this work.
3) European textual hermeneutics
European philosophical and theological work with religious texts (textual interpretation) has led to a broad range of developments in "meaning interpretation." This work, represented by the writing of Husserl, Schutz, and others, has led to the development of philosophies which undergird all of qualitative/field-oriented research; work which is now seen as offering ways to do social science without acceptance of the positivist (and anti-rhetorical) tradition of Cartesian logic.
4) European/English (mass media) critical studies
Scholars interested in the sociology of everyday life, particularly those in England (Stuart Hall, Raymond Williams and others), have combined critical studies of mass media (its economic/organizational basese) with continental philosophy as ways to understand the rhetorical properties of otherwise taken-for-granted media practices. These scholars encourage theory, criticism, and practical action which moves media studies away from the practical interests of owners and operators toward social consciousness and change. Grossberg and other Americans carry on this tradition. McLuhan and Postman present "Americanized" versions of mass media critical theory.
5) American literary philosophy
Kenneth Burke, Wayne Booth and others have kept contemporary English scholars well within the rhetorical loop by extending literary critical techniques outside the limitations of exclusive interest in "high-culture printed texts."
6) American rhetorical theory
In addition to Kenneth Burke's work, a large number of American scholars, most identifying with Speech Communication, have developed numerous hetorical theories and approachesWeaver, Black, Bitzer, Fisher, Bormann., and many others). The National Communication Association (formerly Speech Communcation Association) and its member regional and affiliated organizations sponsor upwards of 30 academic journals dedicated to communication studies, many of which often foreground rhetorical theory issues.
7) American rhetorical subdisciplines
i. public address
"historical" study of speeches, speakers, events with a focus on communication practices in the public sphere
ii. rhetorical theory
conceptual development of thought systems about the operation of, and philosophy behind, communication action.
iii. Rhet. crit. & communication analysis
critical application of rhetorical theory to communication in action. A wedding of public address with rhetorical theory via a critical modality.
iv. cultural criticism
European hermaneutic and critical studies perspective brought to bear on communication action, particularly on on the rhetorical phenomena of everyday life. Hyde and Wander (and others) often produce outstanding examples of this work.
SOME CONTEMPORARY (AMERICAN OR OF PARTICULAR INTEREST TO AMERICANS) RHETORICAL PERSPECTIVES
1) Rhetoric as epistemic (Scott, Brummett)
2) Rhetoric and argumentation (Brockreide, Toulman, Perelman, Sillars)
3) Rhetoric and performance (including cultural studies) (Conquergood, Burke, Goffman)
4) Rhetoric of inquiry/science (Ehninger, Simons, Lyne, Nelson, Megill)
5) Narrative Paradigm (Fisher)
6) Fantasy Theme/Symbolic Convergence Theory (Bormann)
7) "Other" Voices and cultural challenges (Feminism, Asian, African, African-American, Native American, South American/Latino)
8) Ontological/Forms of Life (Conversational, ethnographic, interpersonal)
9) Historical (esp. revisionist) (Enos; Foss, Foss, & Trapp; Foss)
10) Movement and genre work (Campbell, Ja mieson)
----
The Classical Conception of Rhetoric
Rhetoric is an art, more particularly, is one of the seven liberal arts It is composed of principles which must be applied flexibly depending on the relationship among speaker, audience, occasion, and content
It is a matter of importance whenever humans seek to discover and communicate the humane truth It is an endeavor which develops the "Humane" condition (by helping us solve our problems in mind and society)
Stresses the power of the word showing how this power can be used properly or misused: narration and history contextualize
That probability is as important to human affairs as is certainty
Rhetoric is part of cultural affairs, especially civic, religious, and poetic
It is ethically based (prefers good to evil)
It has three faces (forensic, deliberative, demonstrative)
It seeks to persuade, inform, and/or please
Participants' contributions should influence society
It is a matter of importance whenever humans seek to convey the content and methodology of a subject in order to gain adherents to a point of view
That the power of a text is at issue
That conflict breeds discontinuities which Rhetoric can address
Rhetoric may be taught/learned
Depends on natural ability, educated training, extensive practice
Theories, models, and guided pract
ice are important perspectives for learning the art.
Virtue must be joined to eloquence
Knowledge of the world (philosophy, law, politics, history, literature) are essential
Rhetoricians have five canons at their disposal as resources
Invention
investigate facts (and "other" ways of knowing including dialectic, logic, intuition, inspiration/authority, and remembrance)
determine character of all sides of the case (stasis, status, and topoi)
artistic proofs, ethos/pathos/logical argument (and inartistic)
Disposition
plan of compositions in general from the nature of all cases order the specific parts of the composition
Style
word choice
virtues of style,
correctness, clarity, embellishment,
appropriateness types of style
plain, middle, grand
flexibility among styles that words not only "clothe," that they also "create"
Memory
thought memory (command of the material)
word memory (command of the words)
rote memorization (of parts or the whole)
associational systems
Delivery
vocal control and variety
physical control and variety
Speeches have parts; each part contributes to the whole
Statement of the case and its proofs
Exordium, narratio, divisio, confirmatio, confutatio, peroriatio
Rhetoric emphasizes analysis and involvement of the audience and situation
Discovery of the question and the case
Use of the enthymeme
Includes dialectical (question and answer) formats
Is most often about the audience "doing" something civic/religious
Requires extensive audience analysis so as to learn the "best" approach
Empowers people to participate in social development
----
Preface to the middle ages--"Dark"Ages (50-1000)
Tertullian: 2nd century Montanist.
De Spectaculis: an exhortative epistle designed to counsel Christian faithful to avoid all pagan ritual. It underscored the desperate rhetorical struggle, on the part of the new Church, to reject the decadent surface of ordinary life in favor of the new consciousness of Christianity. Everything of this world was taken as bad; of the next, good. God did not create the world as bad, but man and his efforts have polluted it. Man's inner life must be protected for communication with God. Mass culture undermines that dialog.
Second Sophistic: Lucian, Hermogenes, Capella
More emphasis on elocutio than ever before. Extensive use of declamatio for education. Growth of demonstrative (rather than judicial or deliberative)
Capella: (c. 420)
the lady rhetoric endowed with many beautiful adornments and powerful weapons
St. Augustine
Practical applications were limited to preaching Invention relegated to inspiration. (more on pages dedicated to Augustine).
Cassiodorus (c.490-583)
Includes letter writing rhetoric as indispensable to the study of the bible and necessary for civil affairs of state.
Isidore, Alcuin Isidore (c. 550)
encyclopaedia of human knowledge which included rhetoric and dialectic. Slows the "slide" to style; treats the 5 canons.
Alcuin (730-804)
Treatise on legal procedure, in the dialogic form. By this time, the church was in cahoots with the state and the state needed the monastery schools to teach civic lessons in addition to Christian coverage.
Bede (672-735)
authored an important book on poetry including numerous stylistic devices. His point was to show (as had Augustine) that the Bible was rich literature. Remember that by this time the monks had been working for some time to produce literary translations of the biblical texts--a testimony to the need for rhetorical elements in sacred texts.
Notker Labeo (950-1022)
Translated Capella thereby encouraging rhetorical study in the old Germanic.
Boethius
writes on topoi, syllogisms and confuses dialectic and rhetoric.
The very essence of working out the authority of texts became a rhetorical problem in this period. The hierarchy of textual authority depended on the type of text and its "authentic inspiration." Rhetorical analysis, criticism, and argument were required in each step of this process.
A principle force FOR rhetoric in this period was the use of the "lectio" as a teaching and preaching method. The lectio reminds us of the conversia (declamatio) in Rome: a passage was read (almost as though it were a sample case question). It was then discussed with regard to its proper translation, interpretation, and application. Numerous arguments were put forward in defense of the "right" position and, especially, against the current "heresy." This lecture form developed into the "disputatio," a public discussion along the same lines. A significant hitch in the process: one could always retreat to an appeal to "And yet it is true" based on the higher authority of the Word of God. However, SI points out that this practice was not much different from the modern reliance on "facts, science, reason, etc." We still have to deal with the "argument to the self-evident"-- a central point in Perelman's treatment of rhetoric. One does not find rhetoric in operation at these points of self-evidence, except in that they are apparent as junctures where arguers have tried to supplant argument as the operative mode--a sort of argument in itself.
"Three factors in particular have determined this characteristic style of philosophizing. . . it is greatly inspired by JURIDICAL PROCEDURE, which is naturally based on LEGAL TEXTS and their interpretation. . . Secondly, this style of philosophizing is prompted by an unprecedented reverence for the WRITTEN WORD. Whatever has been written is by this very fact already authoritative. . . Thirdly . . . God is a speaking God, his son is called the Word, he has revealed himself through the Word and has become accessible in sacred literature" (52)
Medieval philosophy has a rhetorical structure; although middle agers would vehemently deny it.
Middle Ages (1000-1300)
Those above highly influenced those in middle period. Further, the classics were still fragmented and lost. However, various forms of rhetoric were still important in the schools as illustrated by the organization of topics which held for more than a thousand years: Septennium: Trivium: grammar, rhetoric, dialectic Quadrivium: arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy
Middle Age rhetoricians had a sense of the 5 canons, and
1) sustained emphasis upon style. Rhetoric: related most to the style, manner of speaking. Beauty and the ability to convince were central concerns. (art of speaking well and convincingly)
2) restricting the art to, primarily, grammar (letters and poetry) letter writing (dictamen) became a major rhetorical activity. In grammar: rules for speaking and writing correctly under the presupposition that the structure of language corresponds to that of being and understanding (precursor of modern linguistics).
3) confusing the provinces of rhetoric and dialectic, esp. with regard to the assignment of invention. Remember that Augustine and the churchmen had, essentially, stripped invention from rhetoric. Hugh of St. Victor and John of Salisbury put invention with dialectic. Dialectics: concept, judgment, and reasoning were essential here. Roughly, philosophy.
4) conceiving its area, in the early period, to be theology, in its late parts, with civic affairs. The theological confusion gave rhetoric great strength (socially) but further robbed it of invention. Thomas Aquinas and "Scholasticism" which applied the method of Augustine to the doctrines of Aristotle through Cicero: rhetoric as a part of logic, attached to theology not civic affairs or philosophy in the early period. In the later:
5) retaining some of the classical concepts: for some, politics was still a rhetorical issue. Notker Labeo, Latini. This urge was driven by the need for illiterates to communicate to run their countries and led to the development of letter writing as an important rhetorical activity. "In application, the art of rhetoric contributed during the period from the fourth to the fourteenth century not only to the methods of speaking and writing, of composing letters and petitions, sermons and prayers, legal documents and briefs, poetry and prose, but to the canons of interpreting laws and scripture, to the dialectical devices of discovery and proof, to the establishment of the scholastic method which was to come into universal use in philosophy, theology, and finally to the formulation of scientific inquiry which was to separate philosophy from theology (91 in Golden et al. intro.)
Although always about (1) the subject matter (2) the nature and (3) the ends, of the art, Mediaeval rhetoric was NOT a consistently unitary study. Nor have subsequent studies provided unitary and satisfactory understandings of the nuances of Mediaeval treatments. Three rhetorical lines of intellectual development in this period:
1. rhetorical traditions as established by Cicero and Quintilian
2. philosophy and theology as a reconstructed Platonism and Ciceronianism taken from Augustine
3. "logic," supposedly Aristotelian, which actually followed Aristotle only in terms and propositions, Ciceronian in definitions and principles. Rhetorical constancies: Ciceronian influence on the entire affair. Rhetoric was used not only to discuss its own problems as subject matter, but also to work out disagreements in dialectic and theology. Kinds of oratory (deliberative, judicial, demonstrative) Distinction between the proposition and hypothesis. Delineation of the status of an issue (the questions) In the use of these status/questions (5 w's) to determine the hierarchy of textual authority. As to the treatment of logic, incomplete texts were the rule through to the 13th century. Dialectic gets mixed in with logic such that their subject matter is confused. Some placed rhetoric over dialectic; others did not. The general moving of invention from rhetoric to logic. Many subordinated rhetoric to logic by finding it to be part of logic; or at least, by finding that it is about expression rather than discovery. Others by separating the differences between demonstration and probability. Others define the relationships among the various activities such that rhetoric simply gets "divided" out of important places. Distinction between rhetoric as the "work of the orator" or as "the parts of rhetoric" "Rhetoric was to come into conflict with dialectic . . . as it was to come into conflict with theology . . . Since its discipline was gradually limited by the transfer of the commonplaces, definition, and finally proof . . . to the domain of dialectic, and since its subject matter was limited by the transfer of moral and political questions to theology, rhetoric entered into a second period during which it developed along three separate lines: as a part of logic, or as the art of stating truths certified by theology, or as a simple art of words. Rhetoric was put to use in the Augustinian tradition as a way to further the work of divine eloquence and to further interpret their meanings. Especially as a way to re-align differences pointed out in textual hierarchies. In one of two ways: rhetoric becomes a part of logic (as that part of logic concerned with probabilities); or a part of theology (as the culmination of the trivium). moderni rhetoricians: those primarily concerned with the development of style--mostly derided by others as foolish, but left alone.
Transitions to Renaissance
-rhetoric as a part of rational philosophy subordinate to logic
-rhetoric as dominate in the arts and theology
-all philosophy and subjects assimilated to rhetoric
-invention taken from rhetoric and given over to dialectic
-rhetoric as the discipline of words
-rhetoric as a way to establish verbal distinctions, later leading to physics, mathematics, symbolic logic.
-theories of poetry dealing passion, imagination, truth and virtue
-political philosophy
-stasis (whether, what, of what sort) as basis for scientific methods which eventually sought to supplant rhetorical method.
-basis for analysis of "causes" of things
-thesis/hypothesis into modern scientific methods
-investigation of the passions
-use of common-places to invent arguments
-the "logic" of arrangement
-civil philosophies of psychology, law, literature, and philosophy.
------