We have been immersed in the history of rhetoric, studying the great rhetoricians and at times putting ourselves in their place as they struggle with the tough job of creating a system that would enhance communication among scholars (and others). What we read about in chapter eight with respect to the British rhetoricians in the eighteenth century is a truly expansion of rhetoric to the common man. Educational institutions are the basic common elements of the creation of rhetoric as we have seen in the past; however, British education is different than other audiences we have read about. British education was/is more than a philosophical journey, it was/is a vehicle for a “vastly increased number of British subjects” (179) to comprehend the English language. The audience was growing and changing with women and the common public becoming part of the educated masses.
The elocutionary movement, which was assisted people to a path of personal refinement had a practical function as it helped the growing professional class gain the skills needed. Thomas Sheridan also saw that “Rhetoric answered a strongly felt social need on the second half of the eighteenth century” (181). He worked towards providing a guide for students who wished to gain effective public speaking skills. The growth of oral rhetorical skills was also matched with the growth of British written rhetoric. What we see happening during the British enlightenment is an almost commercialization of rhetoric. The chapter discusses the expansion, or adoption, of the Scottish rhetorical theorists into American rhetorical teaching. And this shows another step in the history of rhetoric, from purely academic and elitist art to one of truly commercial and public value. This chapter takes us through the progression for rhetorical study.
Debbie,
ReplyDeleteI agree that we are seeing an evolution in rhetoric as we read about the Enlightenment period. As you said, we’re seeing schools teaching public speaking and delivery. However, I think the evolution/shift is also reminiscent of what we saw in the Greek time period: the Sophist had schools to teach these same skills---but, for me, a big difference, I think, is that the Sophists professed their teachings to be more than what they were---now we see these same teachings, but they are not covered in such elaborate trappings. I think there is a recognition of delivery as being only one scope in the spectrum now---whereas the Sophist tried to paint it as the only attribute of rhetoric.
Cris
Hi, Cris...
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments, You are quite right, If we go back far enough, we can trace the evolution of everything :-) I think it is interesting that today we are quite removed from the oral tradition of rhetoric (unless one is a politician or other public spokesperson). I wonder if today's reliance on social media will be the death knell of traditional oral rhetoric? Yes, there are still speech-givers, but don't more people rely on their twitter and facebook feeds for persuasion? Or maybe this is me being far too cynical. It will be interesting to see the next generation's experiences with oral rhetoric...maybe, we'll be the last hold outs and anachronisms?
Interesting point about the "commercialization" of rhetoric, and the comparison of rhet, by Chris, to contemporary times. Think about the rise, for instance, of new media tools, and how they're becoming quite pervasive with children through massively used tools like YouTube and Facebook. I think there is a sense though, that there are ethics missing. The purpose of rhetoric today seems to sell content more than anything. In other eras it seems rhetoric was to resolve problems or to bring about social change or to keep status quo.
ReplyDelete