.
POSTSCRIPT: 7 February 2008
--Tool Kit for Rhetorical Analysis. We considered some strategies for effectively using the online Tool Kit to help learn some of the more difficult terms. Here are some other online pages that may prove helpful:
-Figures, Tropes, & Other Rhetorical Terms
-Definitions of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece and Rome
-Rhetorical Terms with Examples (Fall 2007): Terms A-G and Terms H-Z.

--Rhetorical Terms and Squeezing Julius Caesar. We looked at some clusters of related terms and concepts and then revisited the first 20 lines of Antony's speech in Act III, scene two of Julius Caesar, identifying (and tracing connections between and among) such figures, devices, and strategies as tricolon, synecdoche, metonymy, paralepsis, epithet, encomium, isocolon, asyndeton, antithesis, accismus, sprezzatura, epithet, polyptoton, diacope, epimone, epizeuxis, irony, parenthesis, enthymeme, aporia, hyperbaton, maxim (aka proverb), antirrhesis, and erotesis (among others)--all of which serve to convey or enhance the ethical, logical, pathetic, and kairotic appeals in a speech that is superficially epideictic but more profoundly judicial (and which will eventually prove to be deliberative as well). Next Thursday we'll have a few words to say about the remainder of Antony's speech in Act III.

--Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. Our study of speeches by Brutus and Antony in Julius Caesar is preparing us for (among other things) a transition from the rhetoric of classical Greece to that of ancient Rome (specifically, the works of Cicero and Quintilian).  Put simply: the Greeks wrote the books; the Romans wrote the textbooks based on those books.  
Rhetoric and Power - Julius Caesar gives detailed consideration to the relationship between rhetoric and power. The ability to make things happen by words alone is the most powerful type of authority. Early in the play, it is established that Caesar has this type of absolute authority: "When Caesar says 'Do this,' it is performed," says Antony, who attaches a similar weight to Octavius's words toward the end of the play (I.ii.12). Words also serve to move hearts and minds, as Act III evidences. Antony cleverly convinces the conspirators of his desire to side with them: "Let each man render me with his bloody hand" (III.i.185). Under the guise of a gesture of friendship, Antony actually marks the conspirators for vengeance. In the Forum, Brutus speaks to the crowd and appeals to its love of liberty in order to justify the killing of Caesar. He also makes ample reference to the honor in which he is generally esteemed so as to validate further his explanation of the deed. Antony likewise wins the crowd's favor, using persuasive rhetoric to whip the masses into a frenzy so great that they don't even realize the fickleness of their favor. (from SparkNotes on Shakespeare's Julius Caesar)

--Kairos. Our study of the central speeches in Julius Caesar also provides an occasion to reexamine the rhetorical concept of kairos (read Eric Charles White's explanation of this Greek term and its metaphorical etymology). We'll have a few more things to say about these speeches next week. Make sure you've read the Comments on the Rhetoric of Brutus and Marc Antony in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.

Ads and the Rhetoric of the Word. We discussed the online ASSIGNMENT due Tuesday with special attention to the rhetoric of indidvidual words, as illustrated in the handout "Euphemisms for 'Killer Words and Phrases.'"

--"THE MATADOR IN FOOTJOYS." (Article by Rick Reilly that I handed out this afternoon.)  Don't read any further until you've spent some time trying to match the terms at the top of the handout with examples in the text.
For the sake of review, here are examples of some of the key terms listed at the top of the handout (keeping in mind that in many cases, multiple answers are possible):
par. 1 ("Yeah . . .") illustrates polysyndeton (24) and enthymeme.
par. 2 ("He may . . .") illustrates epimone (21).
par. 3 ("True . . .") begins with a concession (17) and includes hyperbole (3), argument by example (9), and pathetic appeal (5).
par. 4 ("O.K. . . .") includes metaphor (1), hypophora (4), pathetic appeal (5), and (in conjunction with pars. 1-3) accumulation (10).
par. 5 ("Oh . . .") illustrates deduction (18), verbal irony (7), and ironic categoria (16).
par. 6 ("So what . . .") is characterized by metaphors, simile (8), and anaphora (2)
par. 7 ("Yeah, the dude's . . .") contains ellipsis (19), antonomasia (14), and argument by example (9).
par. 8 ("Everything . . .") includes euphemism (22) and metaphor.
par. 9 ("He's Indiana Jones . . .") contains metaphor, apposition (15), and tricolon (23).
par. 10 ("So . . .") illustrates metaphor and antonomasia (14).
par. 11 ("You don't . . .") contains metaphors and antirrhesis (13).
par's. 12 & 13 (That he plays . . .") demonstrate irony of situation (13).
The entire piece, of course, illustrates epideictic rhetoric (20).


POSTSCRIPT: 5 February 2008
--ARISTOTLE'S RHETORIC.  Using the diagram handed out in class, we reviewed some of the key concepts introduced in Book I of the Rhetoric--and we considered Aristotle's primary justifications for studying rhetoric.

--Rhetoric in Everyday Life. Keep in mind that second   piece of candy.

--Rhetoric in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.  After viewing Act III of the 1953 film version of Julius Caesar (with James Mason and Marlon Brando), we examined some of the strategies employed by Brutus in his opening speech. On Thursday we'll focus on Antony's speeches.


PREVIEW: 5 and 7 February 2008
--Rhetoric in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. We'll apply some of the key terms and concepts we've been studying in an analysis of the famous exchange of orations by Brutus and Antony in Act III, scene two. Make sure that before coming to class you have (a) read this brief synopsis of the play, and (b) studied the speeches in Act III, scene two. (Also, as always, make sure that you bring the handout to class.) Consider in what ways the speeches by Brutus and Antony are similar, and in what ways they differ. After evaluating each speaker's appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos, spend some time examining the enthymemes and examples in their respective arguments. Look at how Brutus attempts to manipulate kairos--and how Antony outwits him in this regard. After you have spent some time studying this scene, read these Comments on the Rhetoric of Brutus and Marc Antony in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. 

--ARISTOTLE'S RHETORIC.  This week and over the next few weeks we'll be supplementing our study of broad rhetorical concepts with more specific kinds of stylistic analysis (and some admittedly tough terms).  Now would be an excellent time to review some of those broad rhetorical concepts by carefully re-reading the excerpts I've provided from Book One of Aristotle's Rhetoric. (Purely optional but encouraged: an alternative summary of Aristotle's Rhetoric at the American Rhetoric website.)

--BACKGROUND ON THE GETTYSBURG ADDRESS (pages 432-33 in Classical Rhetoric). This Thursday, if time allows, we'll examine Lincoln's Gettysburg Address--a classic example of epideictic rhetoric. Some background information might be helpful.

The battle at Gettysburg (July 1-3, 1863) was the largest and bloodiest of the Civil War (over 51,000 soldiers killed, wounded, or captured).  On November 2, 1863, several months after the battle, David Wills invited President Abraham Lincoln to make a "few appropriate remarks" at the consecration of a cemetery for the Union war dead.    Wills, a local judge, had been charged with cleaning up the horrible aftermath of the battle: wounded soldiers crammed into every available building, and thousands of swollen dead strewn among hundreds of bloated dead horses.

With the approval of the governor and the eighteen states whose sons were among the dead, Wills quickly acquired seventeen acres for the national cemetery and had the Germantown landscape architect, William Saunders, draw up a plan.  Burial began not long after.   On September 23, Wills invited the venerable Edward Everett, the nation's foremost rhetorician, to give an oration at the dedication ceremony planned for October 23.  Everett accepted, but, needing more time to prepare, persuaded Wills to postpone the ceremony to November 19.   Lincoln accepted the invitation from Wills, probably viewing it as an appropriate time to honor all those who had given their lives in the Civil War.  He may also have seen the dedication as an opportunity to reveal his evolving thinking about the War, as a fight not only to save the Union, but also to establish freedom and equality for all under the law. These ideas are central to the speech Lincoln gave at Gettysburg, which, despite its brevity (in contrast to Edward Everett's long-forgotten two-hour oration), has become one of the most memorable of all time.  

Listen to the Gettysburg Address as read by Jeff Daniels and others (courtesy of at American Rhetoric Online Speech Bank). Further reading (purely optional): Lincoln at Gettysburg: The Words That Remade America, by Garry Wills (Simon & Schuster, 1992). 


POSTSCRIPT: 31 January 2008
--START OF THE SECOND QUARTER OF TERM.  It should be clear by now that class time is, for the most part, spent applying and illustrating and discussing principles introduced in our text, in handouts, in online resources (that's two tricolons in one sentence: the first is polysyndetic; the second is asyndetic).  If you check the NEWS page frequently and then keep up with the instructions and information posted at ASSIGNMENTS and NOTES, you should know exactly what you're expected to know at any point in the course.  Put another way, class time isn't spent repeating information that's online or in our text for the benefit of those who don't keep up with what's online or in our text.  This observation, however, is something of a paradox.   If you keep up with what's online (as you're doing right now), you already know this fact.  If you don't keep up with what's online, "you" are not even here to read these observations. In rhetorical terms, you're not clueless--"you" simply don't (or is it doesn't?) exist. 

--Excerpts from Aristotle's Rhetoric, Book I. This ASSIGNMENT was posted on January 24.
Guided by the outline of Book I of Aristotle's Rhetoric, we distinguished betweed non-artistic and artistic proofs, and we revisited the Aristotelian notions of logos (with particular attention to enthymemes) and ethos (distinguishing between invented and situated ethos, and considering how creation of a persona is often accompanied by creation of a role for the audience).  Of course, we shouldn't overlook the important function of pathos--winning metaphorical hearts as well as minds through appeals to emotion.  Consider why Corbett has observed that "it is perilous to announce to an audience that we are going to play on the emotions" and "we must get at the emotions indirectly" (Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student, 78).  (Please read this short article by Daniel Kies on "Emotional Appeal: Pathos.") Those who have read the excerpts from Aristotle's Rhetoric, Book I will recognize that we discussed other points as well.

--IDENTIFICATION and ETHOPOEIA in a subscription sales pitch for MAXIM magazine. See postscript below (Jan. 29).

--KEY TERMS REVISITED.  Even though many students of rhetoric favor Latin terms, in some cases we have clear English equivalents that you'll probably find easier to learn. For the five parts (or "canons") of classical rhetoric, try these translations:
Inventio  =  invention (or discovery)
Dispositio = arrangement (or structure)
Elocutio = style
Memoria = memory
Pronunciatio = delivery
Similarly, more common English words may help you to remember the three kinds of persuasive discourse:
deliberative = political (with a focus on the future)
forensic = legal (focus on the past)
epideictic = ceremonial (generally, with a focus on the present)

--The Rhetoric of the Word, continued. By now you should be familiar with the concepts of denotation and connotation (purely optional, further discussion here), euphemism (and while we're at it, dysphemism: a nastier way of expressing something; etymology (see also "Introduction to Etymology"); and (most importantly) metaphor. Again, purely optional, but you might find it helpful to skim Mr. Stone's lucid "Introduction to Metaphor."

--EXTENDED & CONVENTIONAL METAPHORS: Life as a Journey. We looked at Emily Dickinson's famous adaptation of the journey metaphor in "Because I could not stop for death"--with understatement, personification, and metaphors shaping a narrative that's recast in the final stanza. Contrast's Dickinson's view of death in this poem with that in her poem "I heard a fly buzz when I died."  The Frost poem also draws on the familiar journey metaphor, in this case also considering life as a story.   The common misreading of "The Road Not Taken" (check out, for example, Ms. Kenny's take on the poem, which includes the false title "The Road Less Traveled") depends on deliberately ignoring or at least overlooking several lines in this short poem.  A lesson here for young rhetoricians: we need to read what's given (every word, every line), not just what we'd like to believe about a text (or about ourselves). 

--SHAKESPEAREAN RHETORIC.   The assassination of the Roman rhetorician Cicero is dramatized (with poetic license, of course) in Shakespeare's tragedy Julius Caesar, sections of which (specifically, Act III, scene two) we'll be examining next week.  (If you've never read or seen the play, please at least read this summary before Tuesday's class.)  We'll concentrate on the famous exchange of orations by Brutus and Antony in Act III of the play, considering the rhetorical situation(s); the appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos in each speech; the use of enthymemes and irony; the application of kairos; and other rhetorical strategies and stylistic devices employed by each speaker.  Before coming to class, make sure that you've jotted down your rhetorical notes on the handouts distributed this afternoon.


POSTSCRIPT: 29 January 2008
--IDENTIFICATION and ETHOPOEIA. As the term goes on we'll have more to say about these related concepts, but for now I want to emphasize the two-way nature of the strategy: a speaker or writer may either invite identification or try to impose it. Consider this recent subscription sales pitch from MAXIM magazine:

Great News! The Free Year Certificate enclosed is guaranteed to bring you a Free Year of MAXIM.

It has your name on it and can only be used by you.

Why?

Because MAXIM is written for you. Especially for guys like you. MAXIM speaks your language and knows your fantasies. You're the Man and MAXIM knows it!

MAXIM is here to make your life better in every way! Hot women, cool cars, cold beer, high tech toys, hilarious jokes, intense sports action, . . . in short, your life will be SUPERSIZED. . . .

MAXIM always gets you what you want, when you want it, anywhere, anytime -- guaranteed!.

Now, do the marketers at MAXIM really think that I'm "the Man"? Or do they think I'm, well, sad enough to subscribe to the self-image they're imagining for me? We'll pick up this discussion when we return to a few of your ad analyses next week.

--RHETORIC REVIEW (handout). Here are some of the key concepts we looked at today in the context of short passages from Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon, FDR, and Jane Austen:
1. tricolon -- with sidebars on apposition and the rhetoric of punctuation
2. hypophora
3. distinctio
4. enthymeme (example here) -- with a sidebar on syllogism
5. hypophora and anaphora (with a sidebar on paralepsis--similar to apophasis)
6. pathos and ethos and anaphora
7. ethos and anaphora
8. pathos
9. identification
10. pathos
11. personification
12. pathos (humor)
13. ethos and irony
14. logos
15. paralepsis--similar to apophasis
16. prolepsis (definition #2--on the part of Mr. Collins) and the rhetoric of silence (on the part of Elizabeth Bennett, in response to Collins' "perseverance in wilful self-deception").
All of the hyperlinked terms (except for apophasis) are in the Tool Kit for Rhetorical Analysis.

--The Rhetoric of the Word.
For examples of the points raised at the end of today's class, please read this short article, "Euphemisms, Dysphemisms, and Distinctio: Soggy Sweat's Whiskey Speech."

--Metaphors Be with You. In preparation for Thursday's discussion of conventional cognitive metaphors (in the context of the assigned poems), English majors, in particular, may want to read this short article (purely optional) by Dr. Christy Desmet, one of my professors in grad school: "From Literature to Literacy: Teaching Writing with Cognitive Metaphor." Not optional: Remember to bring printouts of the poems with you to class on Thursday.

__________________


PREVIEW: 29 and 31 January 2008
--Metaphors.  Of all the rhetorical and stylistic devices that we'll be studying this term, the most prevalent is metaphor (sometimes referred to as "the primary trope").  This week we'll briefly consider how many common English words are actually "lost" or "buried" metaphors--including the word metaphor itself.  To prepare for our discussion, you might want to open up a good dictionary (such as the online Oxford English Dictionary) and check out the etymologies  (or histories) of each of the the following words to see how a literal reference has gained a figurative meaning: ambition, astonish, disaster, escape, insult, record, prestige. We'll then look at the assigned poems to see how some metaphors (sometimes called metaphorical clusters--yummy!) are so pervasive in our culture that we may fail to recognize the ways in which they condition our thinking.  
--Rhetoric of the Word. By now you should be familiar with the terms denotation and connotation (see also "Choosing the Best Words: Denotations and Connotations"), euphemism (and while we're at it, dysphemism: a nastier way of expressing something; a word used as a weapon against others, or as a release valve for anger and frustration), etymology, and (most importantly) metaphor.  For examples of the rhetoric of individual words (and of word clusters), check out the following (purely optional):
-"What Those Code Words in Personal Ads Really Mean"
-any of George Carlin's comedy routines.
--Aristotle. As we continue our survey of classical rhetoric, we'll make the transition from Plato to Aristotle.


POSTSCRIPT: 24 January 2008

--SPREZZATURA. Also see "What Is Sprezzatura?"

--REVIEW QUIZ:
1.    D
2.    D
3.    B
4.    E
5.    C
6.    B
7.    D
8.    A
9.    B
10.  invention, arrangement, style
11.  (see below, Plato on Rhetoric)
12.  cardboard box (i.e., the packaging--of products and then of people)
13.  Socrates appealed to Gorgias's pride and persuaded him to give short responses.
14.  litotes, paradox, irony
15. C
Interpreting Your Scores:
The Quiz Itself. If you weren't aware that I'd be giving a review quiz this week (see preview), you're not taking advantage of the materials on the course website--and so, to put it gently, you appear to be doomed. However, if you're reading this before our next class (on Jan. 29), you still have a chance to un-doom yourself: get cracking. (Of course, if you're not reading this, you're blissfully unaware that you're doomed.)

The Questions. Most of the material on the quiz appeared in at least two of these places over the past couple of weeks: assigned readings in our two texts, handouts, class, and these online notes. If you answered all 15 questions correctly, go to the head of the class. If you missed one, you're about where I expect you to be. If you missed two or three questions, you're passing--but you don't have any laurels to rest on. If you missed more than three questions, go back and review all the materials covered so far so that you'll be prepared for the more challenging work ahead.

--
WHY STUDY RHETORIC?: the open hand of rhetoric vs. the closed fist of logic (Zeno).  At the end of the semester, I'll have more to say about rhetoric as a distinctive discipline and as a subject for graduate study, but if you're curious about the recently revitalized interdisciplinary role of rhetoric (purely optional), good starting points would include visits to the Rhetoric Society of America and the American Society for the History of Rhetoric. (Have a look at the allegorical medieval image of Lady Rhetoric.)   For a less formal glimpse into the world of rhetorical studies, you might want to check out the blogora ("a public blogspace about rhetoric and rhetoricians"). 

--PLATO ON RHETORIC.
GORGIAS. The Gorgias raises ethical questions about the teachings of the Sophists (e.g., does the ability to argue both sides of an issue signal an indifference to truth?) and asks how a discipline such as rhetoric can even be considered a "discipline" if it has no subject matter.   (These are issues that Aristotle takes up in a markedly different fashion in his Rhetoric.)   In addition, Plato charged: (1) rhetoric is the simple knack of producing pleasure; (2) it is merely a species of flattery; and (3) the power to move minds is evil since it often feeds on the ignorance of the audience.  To place the excerpts we looked at in context, please read this quick summary of Gorgias.   (Purely optional: the  SparkNotes site also contains a more detailed analysis of each section of the Gorgias; Plato's complete text is also available online.) 

PHAEDRUS. In Phaedrus, a later work by Plato, the character of Socrates recalls the legend of Theuth as a means of questioning the value of the new technology of writing ("a recipe for forgetting") as opposed to oral discourse.  As discussed in our text, Phaedrus also "hints at a true art of rhetoric" while proposing a kind of psychological analysis of human souls.  In addition to reading today's handout (including the introduction), please read this thoughtful summary of the Phaedrus, with particular attention to Socrates' discussion of an ideal rhetoric.  (Purely optional: the complete text of the Phaedrus is also online.)   Various scholars have suggested (perhaps simplistically) that Plato's Phaedrus provides the foundation for Aristotle's Rhetoric.  In any case, the Phaedrus makes clear that Plato's opposition to the methods of the Sophists was not accompanied by whole-hearted opposition to rhetoric itself. 

--Women in Classical Rhetoric.  Though our texts focus primarily on the "father figures" of classical rhetoric, women (though generally excluded from educational opportunities and political offices) also contributed to the rhetorical tradition in ancient Greece and Rome.  Women such as Aspasia and Theodote have sometimes been described as "the muted rhetoricians"; unfortunately, because they left no texts, we know few details about their contributions.  Purely optional: Three books that provide good starting points on this subject are Rhetorical Theory by Women Before 1900, edited by Jane Donawerth (2002), Women in the Classical World: Image and Text (1995), and Jan Swearingen's Rhetoric and Irony: Western Literacy and Western Lies (1991).  

--ETHOS, PATHOS, LOGOS.  We've looked at some of the various ways these artful strategies were employed by three politicians who found themselves in hot water: Gary Hart in 1987, Bill Clinton in 1998, and Richard Nixon in 1952. (We'll return to the Checkers speech next week.) Consider how some of these same strategies are also employed in a "personal" letter generated by Publishers Clearing House.

--KAIROS. To deepen your understanding of the rhetorical concept of kairos (see the example of "A Daughter's Letter Home"), read Eric Charles White's (brief) explanation of this Greek term and its metaphorical etymology.  Note that the adjective form of kairos is kairotic.

--CHIASMUS. For more examples, see Dr. Mardy Grothe's web site, Chiasmus.com.

--TODAY'S TIP ON LEARNING THE TERMS.  As mentioned in class, I've organized the terms into eight broad categories at Figures, Tropes, and Other Rhetorical Terms. Learning the terms by type may be helpful to you. (You'll notice that some of the terms in these lists aren't included in our Tool Kit; these you may skip.)

____________________

POSTSCRIPT 22 January
PREVIEW: 24 January 2008
-- RHETORICAL ANALYSIS.  In Tuesday's class we spoke briefly about the basic characteristics of analysis: "show me" and "so what?"  That is, "show me" (or "point out") what you think are the significant details in the text (or speech or movie or ad or supermarket--or whatever it is you're analyzing); and then, regarding each of those points, answer the question, "So what?"-- so what is the significance of each detail?   What effect does that detail create (or attempt to create)?  How does it shape (or attempt to shape) the reader's response?  How does it work in concert with other details to create effects and shape the reader's response?  In a rhetorical analysis, of course, the "details" will include the rhetorical strategies and stylistic devices identified in our course text and in our glossary. 

When composing an analysis, presume (unless you're instructed otherwise) that your reader is already familiar with the text (or whatever manner of discourse) that you're analyzing.   In other words, there's no need to summarize something for its own sake: your reader can see the ad, read the poem, hear the speech.  Your job is first to direct the reader's attention to key details ("show me") and then explain why each of those details is significant ("so what?").  Because one of our primary objectives is to be able to compose thoughtful and thought-provoking rhetorical analyses, it's essential that we first have the tools to do the job and that we understand the fundamental nature of analysis. And in any analysis, don't waste words. 

--Three Branches of Rhetoric: Judicial (aka "forensic"--to accuse or defend), Legislative (aka "deliberative"--to exhort or dissuade), and Epideictic (aka "ceremonial"--to commemorate or blame . . . and just about every other form of communication not embraced by the first two branches).

--From Orality to Literacy . . . to Secondary Orality.  Though rhetorical studies may have begun in Greece in the fifth century B.C., the practice of rhetoric began much earlier with the emergence of homo sapiens, the first creatures who--through their creation of language--were capable of understanding.  As we've seen, rhetoric became a subject of academic study at a time when Ancient Greece was evolving from an oral culture to a literate one.  In our own era, according to many theorists, we are experiencing a comparable transformation in human cognition and communication:   
"We are in a period of history and technology where much of the world's population, perhaps a majority, are still in the pre-literate oral communication era, while the west, and particularly the US and Canada, are in the post-literate information age [sometimes called "a secondary orality"]. In the post-literate world, learners have a base of literacy, but their primary means of learning have shifted back to oral and aural media (if in fact they were ever fully indoctrinated into literate forms of learning), but the media are new.

"The current western generation learns and processes in terms of media such as television (drama, news, music, interactive graphics or text), radio (music, news, discussion), telephone (often in conjunction with TV or radio), computer (which involves basic literacy, but more visuals, graphics and click-skills), visual and aural media, often multiplexed, as all the media merge. In this post-literate society, writing and reading are still of value, but only as they facilitate manipulation for the other media." (Dr. Orville Boyd-Jenkins, "Orality and the Post-Literate West" 2006).
So, even as we explore the origins of classical rhetoric, we'll also be applying some of these ancient principles to contemporary forms of communication. At the end of the semester, we'll come full circle and consider how the field of rhetoric has continued to evolve in our own times.

-- ORIGINS of RHETORIC.  Recent scholarship (for example, Edward Schiappa's The Beginnings of Rhetorical Theory in Classical Greece, 1999) has challenged (or at least attempted to qualify) conventional views that "rhetoric" was born with the democratization of Syracuse, developed by the Sophists in a somewhat shallow way, criticized by Plato in a somewhat "impractical" way, and rescued by Aristotle, whose Rhetoric found the mean between Sophistic relativism and Platonic idealism.  The Sophists were, in fact, a rather disparate group of teachers, some of whom may have been opportunistic hucksters and some of whom may have been closer in spirit and method to Aristotle and other philosophers.  In any case, the development of rhetoric in 5th-century B.C. certainly corresponded to the rise of the new legal system that accompanied the "democratic government" (i.e., the several hundred men who were defined as Athenian citizens) in parts of ancient Greece. (Keep in mind that before the invention of lawyers, citizens represented themselves in the Assembly--usually in front of sizeable juries.)   It is believed that the Sophists generally taught by example rather than precept; that is, they prepared and delivered specimen speeches for their students to imitate.  In any case, it's difficult to identify anything like a common set of Sophistic rhetorical principles.   We do know a couple of things for certain: (1) that in the 4th century B.C. Aristotle assembled the rhetorical handbooks that were then available into a collection called the Synagoge Techne (now, unfortunately, lost); and (2) that his Rhetoric (which is, in fact, a collection of lecture notes) is the earliest extant example of a complete theory, or art, of rhetoric.  Next week, our attention shifts to Aristotle's Rhetoric.

--PLATO on RHETORIC.  This week we're looking at excerpts from Plato's Gorgias and Phaedrus, considering how the character of Socrates (himself a master rhetorician--though a firm opponent of the Sophists) quickly puts the Sophists at a disadvantage in Gorgias by manipulating the rhetorical situation to favor his own (Socratic) method.  Understanding why Plato opposed Athenian democracy should help us to appreciate, in part, why he also opposed the Sophists and the teaching of rhetoric.  (In fact, both Plato and Aristotle opposed democracy, though for different reasons.) 

The Gorgias also raises ethical questions about the teachings of the Sophists (e.g., does the ability to argue both sides of an issue signal an indifference to truth?) and asks how a discipline such as rhetoric can even be considered a "discipline" if it has no subject matter.   (These are issues that Aristotle takes up in a markedly different fashion in the Rhetoric.)

In Phaedrus, a later work by Plato, the character of Socrates recalls the legend of Theuth as a means of questioning the value of the new technology of writing ("a recipe for forgetting") as opposed to oral discourse.  As discussed in our text, Phaedrus also "hints at a true art of rhetoric" while proposing a kind of psychological analysis of human souls. Be sure that you're able to articulate Plato's various objections to Sophistic rhetoric and his broad vision for a "true art of rhetoric." Know the terms dialectic and enthymeme.

--ETHOS in AUSTEN. For Thursday's class, please read the excerpt from Chapter 19 in Pride and Prejudice, pp. 75-76 in Classical Rhetoric. 

____________________


NOTES ARCHIVE A: Jan. 10-Jan. 24

English 5730 is taught by Dr. Richard Nordquist
Office of Liberal Studies (Solms 211)
Armstrong Atlantic State University
Savannah, Georgia 31419
912/921 5991

e-mail: engl5730@lycos.com      
                                      

UPDATED
14 February 2008