November 7, 2011
ARCS Ch. 11; RT 19th Century Rhetoric pp. 981-999 and Whately pp. 1000-1030
Memory: The Treasure-House of Invention
I cannot believe how hard it was to memorize a two minute speech that we had to do earlier in the semester. It made me wonder how so many ancient rhetors were able to memorize much longer, and much more detailed speeches that were much more effective. Also, the listeners must have been much more adapt to listening than students are today. After writing notes for an hour of lecture, most students cannot remember what the class was about. Kairos is shown to have a connection to memory. There is even a difference between artificial and natural memory. Artificial memory being when the student is trained to remember something, natural memory being the extent to which a person naturally remembers some processes. There is an organized set of information in the mind. A lot of information. I think there is no way our culture could remember some of the things that were required to be remembered hundreds of years ago. Cultural memory or communal memory was used in ancient times. The idea that our memories are stocked with many things besides narratives of our experiences, things we learned, media, people, church as well as experiences. One cultural memory- 9/11. Everyone remembers where they were and how they felt when that event occurred. Organizational memory is used to use the chaos sometimes seen as an advantage to remember what needs to be remembered at the right time. Memory is an interesting thing. I feel like I remember much less from school than ancient students or rhetors did. Cultural changes is one huge reason, perhaps adaptation? There is no longer a need to commit so much information to memory when it is so readily available.
19th Century Rhetoric
Science and technology are finally coming into their own. Mathematics and science are now primary subjects. The concept of reading, writing and arithmetic are commonly known. Rhetoric is changing based on the nature of public education changes. The internal economies of the discipline and related intellectual movements was just part of it.
Richard Whately
Whately uses the trends of his time to publish a new work of rhetoric. Using Campbell's moral evidence, epistemological focus on persuasion and composition presumably written and an elocution that is clearly oral, Whately contributes a new rhetorical theory to the field. Whately believed that Aristotle had never been passed in regards to his theories. He claims that theory has not advanced since Aristotle's time and rhetors need to go back and consider this as a type of logic. His idea of discovery being based on experience, reasoning on argument is interesting. I find it so odd that so much of our current idea of effective rhetoric is based on ancient times. There are very few significant differences, mainly those being of technologies that were not present during that time. But the majority of ideas are still very relevant to writing today.
Monday, November 7, 2011
Reading Blog 13
November 3, 2011
ARCS Ch. 10; RT Vico pp. 862-879 and Sheridan 879-888
Style: Composition and Ornament
I love the stylistic elements of rhetoric. I like the fact that there is persuasion in delivery. The antithesis used in many writings is very interesting. Aristotle knew of this power and recognized that it needed to be studied along with the other elements of rhetoric. Similes, metaphors and personification are used in many works to make the words more relatable. I think this is a great way to incorporate more visual meanings into the words being said. Correctness, sometimes translated literally as 'purity' from Latin or Greek, meant that rhetors should use current words and grammatical rules. I think this is mostly true, however, to make a point, sometimes going to an extreme one direction or another can be rhetorically effective. Appropriateness is very important. There is literally a time and a place for every conversation and every situation. Ornamental styles is an extremely good way to produce an effective text. The 3 categories, figures of speech, figures of thought, and tropes are used to ornament rhetorical style with an extreme effect. This is important to persuade listeners and/or readers to interpret the intended meaning of a text.
Giambattista Vico
Vico describes himself as an autodidact, or one who is both self-taught and free from academic prejudices. He was a professor of rhetoric from 1699-1741 at University of Naples- I find this very interesting, especially since he had no professional schooling himself. So was he providing prejudices to his students that he was 'lucky enough' to go without? Very interesting concept. Vico is seen as a major figure in the development of rhetoric with a culturally based epistemology, in his time, he was regarded as reactionary because he opposed the thoughts of Descartes. He criticized his (Descartes) works for basing the only sources of knowledge on mathematics and science.
Vico provides three stages through which human history evolves: the poetic, the heroic, and the human. The poetic stage uses knowledge as a metaphor. In the heroic stage, nations are developing, while rigid systems of law preserve the organization of society. And the human stage provides self-conscious study of human knowledge leads to greater equity and democracy in politics. This shows that individualism is growing, both with this idea, and with society.
Thomas Sheridan
Sheridan did receive an education, with a career as a stage actor, whose son is now a famous playwright. Rhetorical influence at work, a rhetorically effective writer. Sheridan had an overwhelming interest in correcting language. Leading him to a career in elocution. He gave a very successful lecture course on the subject. He found an ideal forum for his own talents and interests and he was encouraged by the contemporary desire for linguistic self-improvement and educational reform. The thing I find most interesting about Sheridan is that he was so interesting in the correctness of writing and the fact that he was a professional speaker as an actor. It makes me think that he became this way because of his acting and of his talent with words. I would like to compare the writings of his son's to Sheridan's to see if there are any rhetorical similarities.
ARCS Ch. 10; RT Vico pp. 862-879 and Sheridan 879-888
Style: Composition and Ornament
I love the stylistic elements of rhetoric. I like the fact that there is persuasion in delivery. The antithesis used in many writings is very interesting. Aristotle knew of this power and recognized that it needed to be studied along with the other elements of rhetoric. Similes, metaphors and personification are used in many works to make the words more relatable. I think this is a great way to incorporate more visual meanings into the words being said. Correctness, sometimes translated literally as 'purity' from Latin or Greek, meant that rhetors should use current words and grammatical rules. I think this is mostly true, however, to make a point, sometimes going to an extreme one direction or another can be rhetorically effective. Appropriateness is very important. There is literally a time and a place for every conversation and every situation. Ornamental styles is an extremely good way to produce an effective text. The 3 categories, figures of speech, figures of thought, and tropes are used to ornament rhetorical style with an extreme effect. This is important to persuade listeners and/or readers to interpret the intended meaning of a text.
Giambattista Vico
Vico describes himself as an autodidact, or one who is both self-taught and free from academic prejudices. He was a professor of rhetoric from 1699-1741 at University of Naples- I find this very interesting, especially since he had no professional schooling himself. So was he providing prejudices to his students that he was 'lucky enough' to go without? Very interesting concept. Vico is seen as a major figure in the development of rhetoric with a culturally based epistemology, in his time, he was regarded as reactionary because he opposed the thoughts of Descartes. He criticized his (Descartes) works for basing the only sources of knowledge on mathematics and science.
Vico provides three stages through which human history evolves: the poetic, the heroic, and the human. The poetic stage uses knowledge as a metaphor. In the heroic stage, nations are developing, while rigid systems of law preserve the organization of society. And the human stage provides self-conscious study of human knowledge leads to greater equity and democracy in politics. This shows that individualism is growing, both with this idea, and with society.
Thomas Sheridan
Sheridan did receive an education, with a career as a stage actor, whose son is now a famous playwright. Rhetorical influence at work, a rhetorically effective writer. Sheridan had an overwhelming interest in correcting language. Leading him to a career in elocution. He gave a very successful lecture course on the subject. He found an ideal forum for his own talents and interests and he was encouraged by the contemporary desire for linguistic self-improvement and educational reform. The thing I find most interesting about Sheridan is that he was so interesting in the correctness of writing and the fact that he was a professional speaker as an actor. It makes me think that he became this way because of his acting and of his talent with words. I would like to compare the writings of his son's to Sheridan's to see if there are any rhetorical similarities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)