Summary:
The book is aptly named; it meets its objective as an introduction to rhetoric and rhetorical theory by defining important terms, presenting topics in the field, and providing a history of the philosophers and scholars of the field. The author also meets the aim of writing book's target audience: undergraduates.
Citation-worthy:
"Basically, rhetoric includes words, images, and gestures presented to an audience for some kind of purpose. Rhetoric is usually thought to include the content of those words, images, and gestures as well as the style or form in which they are presented… Rhetorical theory is, essentially, explanations for how rhetoric works and what it does" (Borchers, 2006, p. 5).
"An anonymous book, the Rhetorica ad Herennium, written in ancient Rome during the first century B.C.E. provides us with an operational definition of rhetoric. This book identifies the five canons of classical rhetoric: invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. Rhetoric is created as a result of these five processes. Invention refers to the discovery of ideas about which someone speaks. Thinking of a topic, focusing your thoughts, and deciding how to prove your ideas are all elements of invention. Arrangement refers to the order, or structure, of ideas presented by the speaker. Style includes the words and manner of speaking used. Memory refers to how the speaker remembers what will be said. (In ancient times, writing and printing technology were not widely available, so speakers had to create other ways of remembering their ideas.) Finally, delivery includes the speaker's vocal characteristics and physical mannerisms. At this point you have no doubt recalled your instruction in a public-speaking class, which was probably based on the five cannons" (Borchers, 2006, p. 6).
"Rhetorical theorist Kenneth Burke used the word identification as a synonym for communication. In 1969, he defined rhetoric as "the use of language as a symbolic means of inducing cooperation in beings that by nature respond to symbols" (Burke, 1969b, p. 43). Cooperation is achieved when a speaker and audience identify with each other. There is some give and take by both the speaker and audience for cooperation, or identification, to be achieved. Thus, Burke is interested in receivers, or audience members, and their perception of rhetoric. Burke's focus on symbolic communication and cooperation marked a departure from previous ways of viewing rhetoric. For Burke, symbols are the essential element of rhetoric; he downplayed other aspects in order to understand the full power of symbols on how we relate to others" (Borchers, 2006, p. 7).
"Foss and Griffin (1995) present us with the definition of rhetoric that focuses on the relationship between the person producing rhetoric and his or her audience. They define rhetoric as invitational rhetoric, which is "an invitation to understanding means to create a relationship rooted in equality, immanent value, and self-determination" (p. 5). As we continue, keep in mind that rhetoric is practiced by a variety of people who have very different orientations to the world" (Borchers, 2006, p. 7).
"Communication scholar Thomas Farrell (1976) highlights several important elements of rhetoric in the following definition: "a collaborative manner of engaging others through discourse so that contingencies may be resolved, judgments rendered, action produced" (p. 83). Ferrell broadened his definition by using the word "discourse," which presumably includes nonverbal forms of communication as well. Farrell's definition is also useful for us because it focuses on the collaborative nature of rhetoric and its uses.… Farrell was interested in rhetoric as a social act that is shared between two or more people to accomplish something" (Borchers, 2006, p. 7).
"Rhetoric… involves symbols— Verbal and/or nonverbal — and it is concerned with coordinating action between individuals. Rhetoric helps us make choices, and it is created in the interaction between unique individuals. Most important, a culture's conception of rhetoric is unique to that culture. As cultures change, so too do conceptions of rhetoric" (Borchers, 2006, p. 8).
"The word rhetoric often refers both to the symbols that are used in communication as well as to the theory about those symbols… To clarify what is meant by rhetoric, however, we'll use the term to designate the symbols used by people to communicate. We might also refer to this sort of communication as rhetorical practice on occasion. We'll call the person doing the communicating the rhetor. The term rhetorical theory will be reserved for theories that describe rhetorical practice. Rhetorical theorist will be used for a person who created a particular rhetorical theory" (Borchers, 2006, p. 8).
"Rhetorical criticism is the process of using rhetorical theory in order to understand and evaluate rhetorical practice and generate future rhetorical theory. Rhetorical criticism is the method used by rhetorical researchers, whereas social scientific researchers use surveys, experiments, or ethnography. Rhetorical critics are people who practice rhetorical criticism… Rhetorical theory is useless without the practice of rhetoric and application of theoretical principles. In essence, rhetoric invites theorizing about its principles, strategies and effects. Accordingly, rhetorical theory is used to critique rhetoric so that rhetors have a better understanding of its impact. Consequently, new rhetorical theory is developed or existing theory is modified through the critical application of rhetorical principles" (Borchers, 2006, pp. 8-9).
"Characteristics of rhetoric [are]…
– symbolic...
– involves an audience...
– establishes what is probably true...
– inventive and analytic" (Borchers, 2006, p. 9).
"Limits of rhetoric… For each issue, you might think of a continuum, a line with two divergent ideas upon which there are many intermediary points. Some theorists hold extreme views on these issues, but other theorists fit somewhere in the middle of the continuum…
– Is rhetoric limited to persuasion?
– Is rhetoric intentional?
– Is rhetoric comprised only of words?
– Is rhetoric limited to public at dress?
– Is rhetoric concerned with propositions or style or both" (Borchers, 2006, p. 14).
"Pragmatic-dominant rhetorical theory… Ancient theorists from Greece and Rome who asked and answered very pragmatic questions about rhetoric and who saw the speaker as influencing the events of the world through rhetoric" (Borchers, 2006, p. 19).
"Rhetoric was used during this period [Middle Ages] to embellish the truth or ingratiate the rhetor to a very small audience. That is, attention was paid to the aesthetic qualities of rhetoric, which is a way of referring to rhetoric's style. Rhetoric during this period consisted of sermonmaking and the art of letter-writing. Rhetors wrote beautiful letters in order to show that they were worthy of positive judgment (Scott, 1975, p. 444)" (Borchers, 2006, p. 20).
"Scientific discoveries would shape the role of rhetoric in the time period Scott discuss his next, the pragmatic-subordinate. Rhetoric would come to play a pragmatic role in the 1700s-1800s, but it would be subordinate to science. That is, rhetoric would be used to communicate what science had found. The world, as discovered through science, would be the dominant element and the speaker would receive secondary emphasis during this time" (Borchers, 2006, p. 20).
"As we explore contemporary rhetorical theory, you'll see how an increasing effort is made to understand the interaction of speaker and audience. Whereas the meaning of words was mostly taken for granted during the earlier periods, we'll spend a great deal of time as we study contemporary rhetoric discussing understanding, misunderstanding, and how audiences perceive a speaker's messages. Rhetorical theory during this period also attempts to reduce human conflict, although Scott did not see this as a defining characteristic of contemporary theory" (Borchers, 2006, p. 20).
"Rhetoric is concerned with what is probably true in a given culture at a given time. The statement refers to epistemology, the study of knowledge or ways of knowing. Although theorists more or less agree that rhetoric creates what is accepted as knowledge, or truth, some theorists see rhetoric as playing a greater role in the creation of knowledge than others" (Borchers, 2006, p. 23).
"The rhetorical theory of the period lasting from approximately 400 B.C.E. to 100 C.E. is often called classical rhetoric. The primary purpose of rhetoric during this time was persuasion" (Borchers, 2006, pp. 30-31).
"Parts of the speech. Cicero, who believed that arrangement was one of the most important aspects of rhetoric, identified seven parts to a speech:
– The entrance, to introduce the subject and assure the audience of the speaker's right intentions
– The narration, which provides background information about the topic at hand
– The proposition, or the speaker's thesis
– Division, which outlines the main concepts, or points, of the speech
– Confirmation, or the supports for the claims made in the speech
– Rebuttal, which is an attempt to overcome potential disagreements
– Conclusion, or the synopsis of evidence and final appeal to the audience's emotions" (Borchers, 2006, p. 48).
"The sublime, according to Longinus, is the use of language to momentarily lift the audience members outside of themselves. He defined the sublime as "the process by which we may raise our natural powers to a required advance in scale" (On the Sublime, section I). The sublime was not an appeal to logic, or even emotion, but an appeal to the stylistic and aesthetic subtleties of the audience. Longinus traced the sublime to the speaker's use of language: "subliminity is always an eminence and excellence in language" (C-section I).
The sublime has a powerful impact on audience. In fact, Longinus placed the sublime ahead of logical, pathetic, or ethical appeals" (Borchers, 2006, pp. 59-60).
"Rationes dictandi outlined the five key parts of a letter:
– Salutatio, which was the salutation
– Benevolentiae captiatio, which made the reader "attentive and well-disposed to the writer" (Conley, p. 94).
– Narratio, which included the facts on which the letter was based
– Petitio, in which the rhetor made a request of the reader
– Conclusio, or the closing" (Borchers, 2006, p. 69).
"Correctness refers to consistently using the proper standard when evaluating items of beauty. Blair explained, "a man of correct Taste is one who is never imposed on by counterfeit beauties; who carries always in his mind that standard of good sense which he employs and judging everything (p. 24). Delicacy is an innate trait, while correctness can be learned" (Borchers, 2006, p. 75).
"Blair explained that style has two qualities: perspicuity and ornament. He explains… Perspicuity,... is using language in a way that clearly states the speaker's idea… Perspicuity has three qualities: purity, propriety, and precision. Purity refers to using words that are "of the language which we speak" and not "imported from other Languages" (Blair, 1965, p. 216). We might consider this today to mean that a rhetor is to use words that are commonly understood, not exotic words or slang words which do not have designated meanings. Propriety means to use the right word. A rhetor's words should be "correct" and "significant." Propriety, then, refers to the specific words chosen by the rhetor to communicate a specific idea. Precision avoids superfluous words and expressions and gets to the point of the speaker's idea...A speaker should avoid saying more than he or she intends to have precision" (Borchers, 2006, p. 76).
"A second element of style is ornament. We have previously said that ornament concerns how words are pleasing and interesting for hte listener. Ornament is achieved through graceful, stron, or melodious sentences or by figurative language. A graceful sentence has unity, which means that "There must always be some connecting principles among the parts" (Blair, 1965, p. 216). That is, a sentence should discuss one idea, should have a consistent tense and voice, and should be a complete unit of thought" (Borchers, 2006, p. 77).
"In the early 1600s, the scientific study of rhetoric evolved into a systematic study of argumentation" (Borchers, 2006, p. 87).
"Another contribution to rhetorical theory is Bacon's theory for the four fallacies of reasoning.… First, the Idols of the Tribe relates to inherent limitations in the nature of humans to reason and attain knowledge. Despite the fact that voters have their own areas of expertise, very few of us have the ability to understand the full range of economic, social, and international issues that are involved in voting for a presidential candidate. We are inherently limited in our
ability to understand all the issues of an election campaign.
Second, the Idols of Cave points to individual traits that prevent knowing. We are biased, prejudiced, and/or incapable of grasping certain concepts and ideas…
Third, the Idols of the Marketplace refers to problems inherent in language that prevent clear communication.…
Fourth the Idols of the Theatre refers to fallacies in philosophy and theory that obscure experiential ways of knowing. That is, we are limited by the theoretical and conceptual frameworks we use to make sense of our world.…each of Bacon's idols refers to limitations in our ability to know something" (Borchers, 2006, pp. 89-90).
"Celeste Condit (1995) and other rhetorical theorists use the term linguistic reflexivity to refer to the "intellectual orientation that entails constant reflection on the forces of language as they are at work in what one hears and what one speaks" (p. 209). In other words, rhetorical theory turns its attention in this chapter to role and influence of language and how we communicate" (Borchers, 2006, p. 115).
"Ogden and Richards (1928) identified context as being one of the key reasons why people have different interpretations of symbols" (Borchers, 2006, p. 119).
"Kramarae (C 1981) explained that a woman's presence as a rhetor is not "always fully acceptable" (p. xiv) and that women face disadvantages when they communicate with men. Kramarae said women are a "muted group" because the language of our culture does not serve women as well as it does men. Women cannot express themselves as well as men because the words we use have been formulated based on the male experience. That is, women are "muted" in our culture. Women, she argued, have different experiences and require different words than our language contains in order to express themselves. Because of language, women are forced to see the world through the experiences of men and communicate using male words. Women are "muted" because they cannot easily express their perspective and experiences" (Borchers, 2006, p. 130).
"Humans use narrative rationality when evaluating the stories they hear, which is based on two standards: narrative probability and narrative fidelity. Narrative probability asks whether the story is consistent with itself. Narrative fidelity evaluates the degree to which the individual components of the story "ring true" with the audience. Narrative rationality depends not entirely on rules of logic but also on the values that are part of decision-making. This is an important part of Fisher's theory. Let's consider these standards in greater detail" (Borchers, 2006, p. 161).
"Narrative probability concerns the degree to which the story "hangs together." In other words, the standard looks at whether the story makes sense by itself. Fisher (1987) argues that stories must have structural coherence, material coherence, and characterological coherence. Structural coherence refers to whether the story contradicts itself. A witness who testifies in court and says something different than he or she had previously said would not have structural coherence. The story would not "hang together." Material coherence refers to how well the story accounts for facts that are known to be true. A witness who testifies that the car in the accident was green, when all the other witness claim it was red it would not have material coherence. Characterological coherence questions the reliability of the characters in the story. A witness accused of murder but who is claiming innocence would be difficult to believe if he or she did not display some emotion about being accused.… The second standard of Fisher's (1987) narrative paradigm is fidelity. Whereas coherence refers to the integrity of the story, fidelity refers to the individual components of stories and the degree to which these components make sense to the audience. Thus, probability concerns the story itself and fidelity refers to the connection between the story in the audience" (Borchers, 2006, pp. 161-162).
"Critical approaches to rhetoric...the word "critical," in this sense, refers to a concern for power and ideology as expressed through rhetoric" (Borchers, 2006, p. 172).
"Ideographs are words or phrases that are "pregnant" with ideological commitment – for example, "liberty," "rights of privacy," or "religion"" (Borchers, 2006, p. 182).
"That's the core of universal pragmatics are speech acts and how those speech acts can be challenged to come to rational understanding. A speech act is a statement that accomplishes something or does something. A threat is an example of a speech act. When you make a threat, you enter into an implicit contract by which you pledge to take some action if someone else doesn't take one. Habermas (1979) outlined three types of speech acts: constatives, regulatives, and avowals. Constatives are used to search the truth or falsity of something. When you say that it is cold outside, you're using a constative. Regulatives are used to influence someone else. You use regulatives when you make a promise or issue a command. Avowals are used to express the speaker's feelings or emotions, such as saying "I am sad."
Constatives, regulatives, and avowals are measured against certain standards. Constatives must be truthful. Habermas (1979) wrote that the intention of the speaker does not matter. What matters is the "truth of the proposition" (p. 58). Regulatives must be appropriate given the interpersonal relationship between the speaker and listener. A student, for example, cannot demand that an instructor give a certain grade for an assignment. Such command is not appropriate for the relationship. Avowals must be sincere expressions of the speaker's feelings. If I say that I am sad, that statement must be a genuine reflection of my mood" (Borchers, 2006, p. 187).
"Rhetorical theorists contend that images are replacing words as the primary form of rhetoric in our culture today. These changes in how rhetoric is practiced have made it necessary to re-examine our theories of rhetoric, revise them when necessary, and develop new theories to better explain the dominance of media and images on how we think about what is true, what is real, and what is ethical.
Our central argument in this chapter is that media have had a strong influence on the way rhetoric is practiced and on the theories that have been developed to explain rhetoric" (Borchers, 2006, p. 255).
"Today, rhetors communicate with a more intimate style, one more characteristic of the personal, informal, and intimate medium of television (figure 10.1). This rhetorical style, which Kathleen Jamieson (1988) has called electronic eloquence, has, according to Jamieson, five characteristics: it is personalized, self-disclosive, conversational, synoptic, and visually dramatic" (Borchers, 2006, p. 263).
"Like our ideas of what's true, the theorists of media rhetoric challenge our ideas about what it means to be human. That is, there is an ontological dimension to the study of rhetoric and media. In this sense, McLuhan, perhaps, makes the strongest argument when he claims that a medium is an extension of our senses. That is, human experience and our conception of what it means to be "real" is directly linked to the media we use to experience the world. We are different beings when we use different media. Ong's work, too, has an ontological dimension. He believes that human consciousness is linked to the type of media culture in which one lives. That is, our very way of thinking and feeling is linked to the dominant media of our culture" (Borchers, 2006, p. 279).
"The postmodern movement has also had a significant impact on how rhetorical theorists have conceived of rhetorical practice. In particular, postmodernist have explored the link between the symbols and words they mean. The implications of their investigation influences the most fundamental questions about knowledge, identity, and ethics" (Borchers, 2006, p. 281-282).
"Modernization is "a term denoting those processes of individualization, secularization, industrialization, cultural differentiation, commodification, urbanization, bureaucratization, and rationalization which together have constituted the modern world" (Best and Kellner, 1991, p. 3). Lucaites and Condit (1999) add, "in the modern worldview, the universe is a relatively simple, stable, and highly ordered place, describable in and reducible to absolute formulas that hold across contexts" (p. 11). For academic researchers and theorists, social discord, according to Lucaites and Condit, is cured by "greater research, less passion, more rationality, and more education" (p. 11). Put simply, the use of supposedly objective research methods were thought to provide adequate explanation for social life and offer solutions to problems humans faced during the modern era" (Borchers, 2006, p. 282).
"Postmodernism views with skepticism those definitive statements about that nature of knowledge, truth, ontology, or ethics" (Borchers, 2006, p. 283).
"Hill's analysis was met by discussion from other rhetorical experts, who claimed that objectivity was next to impossible and that rhetorical critics should embrace their biases and perspective in their analyses" (Borchers, 2006, p. 284).
"Foucault theorized that power relations were not always apparent. Individuals who have power didn't always know the ways that they could exercise their power" (Borchers, 2006, p. 289).
"Nelson (1996) offers a 16-point "manifesto" of cultural studies beliefs and practices.… Some of the most instructive:
– Cultural studies involves more than a "close reading" of nonliterary cultural text. Instead, cultural studies has a history and literature that must be considered when one person forms a "cultural studies" critique
– Cultural studies does not necessarily have to concern itself with artifacts of popular culture
– Cultural studies may make use of semiotics — which we studied in chapter 10 — but it is not synonymous with semiotics. Cultural studies instead is concerned with cultural context on the politics of signification, a process we will discuss later in this chapter.
– Cultural studies is concerned with the production, reception, and uses of cultural text, not necessarily their internal characteristics
– Cultural studies considers the relationships between texts, objects, and cultural forces. The focus is not on the text in isolation from culture, but rather on a text's operation within a cultural structure
– Cultural studies does not provide a "fixed, repeatable methodology" that can be used over and over again on cultural phenomena
– Cultural studies criticism suggests future courses of action for members of a culture
– Academic disciplines that teach cultural studies must take seriously the politics of disciplinarity. It is not enough to simply rename a class or department "cultural studies" without a commitment to how the unique cross-disciplinary nature of cultural studies fits within the university framework" (Borchers, 2006, p. 309).
"Signification is the study of the production of meaning. We shouldn't assume that meaning is fixed or set in any way. There is a kind of symbolic work or practice that goes on to give meaning to things. Signifying practices are practices involved in the production of meaning" (see Jhally, 1997). Media are widely used systems of signifying. Talking with other people is another way in which signifying practices occur. Often, however, a medium such as computer technology takes the place of face-to-face communication and becomes very widespread. Questions of power arise in this discussion. Hall says we should ask "who has the power to circulate which meanings to whom?" (See Jhally, 1997). To answer this question, one must consider the economic system in which message producers exist. It is difficult today to separate news organizations, for example, from their business of producing profit.
It is important to look not only at what is communicated but also add what is absent from communication" (Borchers, 2006, p. 314).
