In Bizzell and Herzberg’s general introduction, one constant theme runs through their description of rhetoric: that like language, rhetoric has “grown and changed” (7).
Their exploration of the history of rhetorical growth from classical to nineteenth-century style parallels the growth and change in our use of language. The development of rhetoric has been shown to be an academic exercise that, in some respects, is independent of language. However, rhetoric, unlike language, evolved through the work of authors like Aristotle and Cicero. Bizzell and Herzberg identified Aristotle as a student and teacher of rhetoric (30). In Cicero’s works, we see that rhetoric drives the formation of language. It is evident that rhetoric is more than types of rhetorical discourse tied to any one language. Instead, rhetoric is the formulaic and systematic intent of language to turn language into persuasive dialogue.
In defining rhetoric and its use, the challenge is in determining whether rhetoric is intentional or a consequence of language. Herrick brings up the important public perception of rhetoric as empty or deceptive (1). The critical aspect that Herrick focuses on is the assignment of a set of characteristics to rhetorical discourse--planned, adapted, shaped by motives, response to a situation, persuasion-seeking, and concerned with contingent issues. Through all of these characteristics, rhetoric is purposeful. Of the characteristics, it could be argued that the second one, audience, is the most critical. I agree with Herrick when he points out that "a well informed and critically minded audience demands that the rhetoric addressed to it be well reasoned and honestly presented" (10).
The early developers of rhetoric (Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian) developed the formulas that make rhetoric a viable and repeatable system to communicate complex ideas. Mankind gravitates to systems as they are convenient to work with, and it through systems we process knowledge easier--and are persuaded. Rhetoric today, however, extends beyond the methodology, system, and formulae seen in speeches and written works to social networking applications and software tools. While we revere the early rhetoricians, as they established the methodology for language and communication, we must concede that today’s rhetoric needs to be vastly different. The unprecedented speed of message delivery, the dis-reliance on grammar and spelling, increased used of symbols as rhetoric (e.g. emoticons, icons), and the widespread use of social networking has enabled a paradigm shift in how we use rhetoric and language today.
Tempora mutantur, et nos mutamur in illis.
Debbie,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your posting, and I particularly like your point about audience as key. I think we see an evolution in that direction in the shift in rhetoric. It shifted from formal oratories, in Classic times, to personal discourses in the Renascence times---thus involving more people and more situations. Also, there was a shift in the application of pathos---especially when we look at Aristotle vs. Cicero. I think part of that is due to a change in mindset about audience from "one type" to "many types" and a need to customize arguments to fit the varied audiences.
Cris