What is Rhetoric? Part II

So, I’ve noticed in this blog, I’ve focused a lot on the history of rhetoric. Maybe it is because history is one of my favorite subjects, but I am going to continue in this vein.

In the wake of Christianity and Islam’s influence over the European continent, and the fall of the Roman empire, rhetoric began its strange journey into the broad definition that it holds today. During this period, the debate on the proper uses of rhetoric that was essentially started by Aristotle continued. Throughout the Medieval period, rhetoric would find itself becoming integral to religious as well as secular life in various disciplines. 

In the early part of the Medieval period, Rhetoric was kept alive mainly in monasteries, where monks learned to read and write and preserve records. As far back as the mid-200’s, Origen, who taught in Palestine, “used Jewish exegetical methods to legitimize a kind of allegorical reading that extracted moral and spiritual meanings from the Bible” (432). Thus, rhetoric was now being used to analyze the Bible. In 529 C.E., Justinian closed the schools of Athens, but Benedict founded the monastery of Monte Cassino in Italy “symbolizing the way Latin-speaking Christian culture would appropriate classical learning” (434). I found it interesting that “at this time the best scholars of classical learning in Europe were Irish monks” including the famous “Saint Patrick.” Given that, in earlier times, Celtics believed in skill in oratory to pass on their myths and traditions, it makes a lot of sense. Archbishop Isidore of Seville also helped shape monastic rules to preserve classical study. However, he saw rhetoric as chiefly “secular and especially legal occupation” (436). 

Throughout this period, the Byzantine, Muslim and Christian empire emerged. In 800, Frankish king Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the West by the Pope. He founded palace schools and brought in the best scholars from all over Europe to teach grammar and rhetoric to nobility. Alcuin directed the school and argued that rhetoric had “civic usefulness,” especially for the conduct of government (438).  

By the 12^th century, classical teachers of “grammar” would cover all five canons of classical rhetoric and included analysis of poetry’s “uses of tropes and figures” (439). Philosophy was transformed in the 12^th Century by the rediscovered influence of Aristotle thanks to the Arab and Jewish peoples. “Dialectic flourished for its usefulness not only to theology but also increasingly to professionalized disciplines of law and medicine” (441). In the 13^th Century, Thomas Aquinas famously used rhetoric in his writings that became Catholic doctrine.

Thus, rhetoric would come to be associated with the disciplines of theology, law, medicine, hermeneutics, poetry, and government. Aristotle certainly believed rhetoric played important roles in law, politics, and public life. In addition, the application of Rhetorical principles can be extremely broad. Knowing the history of how all of this came to be makes all the varying Rhetoric classes I have taken over the years seem much less random.

Egyptians, Semites, and Women in Ancient Greece

The history of Egyptians, Semites, and women in ancient Greece is an interesting one. I like that we are discussing these topics in this class as my previous rhetoric classes never touched on these ideas when discussing ancient Greece. Typically, one pictures Plato and others as old white men with beards, however, I never thought much about their race except to assume that the Greeks were Greek, whatever that means. In Black Athena the author argues that Phoenicians and Egyptians greatly influenced Greek culture, and, considering their proximity and similarity of langue, this seems like a rather obvious conclusion. However, Euro-centrics over the years have tried to argue otherwise.

The reading “Rhetoric, Possibility, and Women's Status in Ancient Athens: Gorgias' and Isocrates' Encomiums of Helen” by Susan Biesecker, brings up Pericles’ law instituted in 451 B.C.E that stated “that if a child was to be guaranteed full rights to citizenship, not only the father, but also the mother had to be an Athenian citizen.” (101). Biesecker discusses this in the context of its implication for the status of Athenian women. In its attempt to distinguish who is a citizen and who isn’t, the law brought up the idea of women as Athenian citizens and challenged the authority of the patronym because “the law identified no difference between the citizenship of men and women” (103). This actually caused more disputes over citizenship rather than less because the mother’s genealogy then had to be traced in a society that was only recording male linage up to this point. Biesecker points out that this meant women’s status was suddenly in the spotlight. It did not give them full rights as citizens, but implied that they were citizens, it made matrilineage important, and did put the idea of male patronyms into question. Biesecker’s main argument is that the trend in women’s status “consisted of a series of changes that were sometimes continuous and sometimes discontinuous from the past” (100). She contests other scholars in the fields of anthropology, history and classics and the ways they depict women’s status in Hellenic antiquity. However, her example of Pericles’s law brings up some very interesting points apart from analyzing the trajectory of change.

I find it interesting how Biesecker did not mention the later overturning of that law by Pericles himself. According to our textbook, he did this specifically to grant citizenship to his children with Aspasia, who was born in Miletus (56-57). Thus, one must wonder if Pericles lowered the status of Athenian women for the sake of a “foreign” woman? This is an interesting twist of fate, if one looks at it that way. Or did the questions on Women’s status already brought up by the implementing of the law continue on after it was overturned? Women seemed to play a slightly larger role in Roman society, so maybe this did get the ball rolling, so to speak.

She also discusses two essays by Gorgias and Isocrates that argue about Hellen of Troy. Gorgias uses forensic rhetoric while Isocrates uses deliberative.  Biesecker states, that “The action that the deliberative orator advocates might challenge established social relations or reinforce the position of those already in power” (106) and argues that Gorgias intends to shake up the establishment while Isocrates does not. Her essays states, “Gorgia’s defends Helen as a victim of four overpowering forces, Isocrates praises her for her beauty” (106).  While it may not have been a huge step for women in Athens, “If the possibility of an opening for women, however small, had been created by Pericles’ law, Gorgias speech shows no inclination to close it” (105). On the other hand, Isocrates relegates Hellen to the role of the maker of superior children. Biesecker states, “Isocrates extols unity among the Greeks, victory in war and excellence of lineage” (106).

“Longinus,” Method, and Chaos

I thought the reading by and about “Longinus” On the Sublime was really intriguing, especially because of his huge influence on European scholarship and literary criticism, two things I have encountered often in my education. I appreciated the fact that “in classical times the study of literature was not divorced from the study of rhetoric…and they went to literature to find material that could help their students…” (344). I personally think this still holds true today in many composition classrooms. The teaching of writing and analysis is not necessarily the same as the teaching of literature, but literature can be used to teach writing and analysis. 

I was specifically struck by something that “Longinus” said regarding method. The text states, “…it is method that is competent to provide and contribute quantities and appropriate occasions for everything, as well as perfect correctness in training and application” (347).  This reminded me of the discussion we were having in class on Wednesday February 6th regarding the usefulness of the humanities. We discussed the humanities as a way to teach empathy as well as critical thinking skill. I didn’t get a chance to express this because we changed topics, but I also think the humanities is useful for teaching theory as a methodology for practical use. For example, I used to privately tutor a nursing student who was getting her Bachelor’s degree, and in her upper division classes she had to look into various “theories of care.” These theories discussed personal autonomy, morality, and different ways to provide care based on these ideals. One that stuck with me was the Self-Care Deficit Theory developed by Dorothea E. Orem. She believed people should be self-reliant, and responsible for their care, as well as others in their family who need care, and that people are distinct individuals. She claimed that nursing is a form of action as well as an interaction between two or more people.  Helping my student understand this theory really opened my eyes to the fact that philosophy actually does have an impact on every day practical matters. People are going to react differently in different situations based on the beliefs and methodologies that they are taught and choose to follow.

 “Longinus” makes a bold claim when he says that method will dictate "appropriate occasions for everything” and “perfect correctness.” These sound like impossible achievements since perfection is not really possible. However, I do agree that method is the foundation for most important activities. The scientific method, for example, is extremely important factor in conducting valid research, and is followed by most reputable scientists. Music theory is another example of a practical application of method. Without it, music would be a bunch of chaotic noise. Business classes too teach theoretical frameworks by which organizations are run. 

“Longinus” also explains that a textbook should do two things: “explain what a subject is, and more important, that it should explain how and by what methods we can achieve it” (346). It is true that, to this day, most of us learn method from textbooks. Without them, we would be looking at a vast body of knowledge without knowing where to start, even with, or especially with, things like Google at our fingertips. “Longinus” disputes the idea that “natural products are very much weakened by being reduced to the bare bones of a textbook” in his assertion that method is necessary for execution of "everything" (347). The debate on whether education restricts or frees one’s mind still rages on to this day. For example, it can be difficult to be creative in the formulaic world of essay writing that academia insists upon. However, without some form of organization, it would be very difficult to follow most people’s train of thought in their writing. I believe one can be both creative and still follow a methodology. Because even with “the power to conceive great thoughts” one must still have “noble diction,” as “Longinus” puts it, to convey their point effectively (350). 

The Greeks Invented Everything

Ok so maybe they didn’t invent everything, but they certainly helped define many aspects of thought that we still use today.  

For example, I found it fascinating how much of our current system of teaching writing is based on these ancient Greek and Roman traditions. Aristotle discusses the three major types of rhetoric as being deliberative (political), forensic (legal) and epideictic (ceremonial). He discusses best practices for all of these that are still pertinent today.  One that really stuck with me was “people afflicted by sickness or poverty or love or thirst or any other unsatisfied desire are prone to anger and easily roused; especially against those who slight their present distress” (Bizzell 215). It so important to know your audience and if you are speaking to an audience full of people in poverty, it would certainly be bad form to insult the poor. Aristotle also defined the basic argumentative essay structure, although then it was applied to speeches. “A speech has two parts. You must state your case, and you must prove it…it cannot in any case have more than Introduction, Statement, Argument, and Epilogue” (240). This is basically the introduction, thesis statement, body paragraphs with evidence, and conclusion format that we use every day in academia. Also, Cicero’s 5 cannons of rhetoric invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery are a major influence in modern studies of composition (Bizzell 35).

Our current US Trail system is based on the Sophist belief that knowledge relies on perception and is therefore flawed. Thus, absolutely truth is not available to human.  However, “probable knowledge” could be achieved by pitting opposing positions against one another and examining the arguments. It is very interesting to examine the different eras of Greek and Roman thought and how they dealt with the concept of truth. Plato felt that the Sophists ignored absolute truth for the sake of manipulating the truth for their own gain. This argument could be applied to today’s advertising and propaganda.

I was also surprised to learn that class struggle and how it goes hand in hand with public education is not a modern problem. As far back as 400 B.C.E aristocrats disagreed with the middle classes ability to purchase education for their children. They believed that leadership qualities came from noble birth and public education should focus on athletics and the military. It was not until Quintillian’s time around 35 C.E.  that grammar school began to be offered to indigent boys and girls. Women were also most excluded until this period as well. Women’s education was often justified by the idea that an educated mother would be a good influence on her male children. This is still reminiscent of problems in America today where the lower classes are encouraged to join the military and professions that involve women are often related to teaching or caring for children. 

What is Rhetoric?

Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric is as follows: “Rhetoric may be defined as the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion…rhetoric we look upon as the power of observing the means of persuasion on almost any subject presented to us; and that is why…it is not concerned with any special or definitive class of subjects” (Bizzell 181).  This is why rhetoric is such an open topic. As a rhetoric student for a number of years I’ve studied technical writing, law, digital writing, journalism, advertising, global English, the language of academia, the language of science, communications, debate, and business writing. Rhetoric essentially encompasses science, law, education and basically all correspondence. In some ways, this makes the subject of rhetoric seem immense and difficult to wrap one’s head around. Conversely, it gives the Rhetoric student freedom to concentrate on many different topics while still remaining under the umbrella of an English/humanities department. I don’t necessarily have to go to medical school to write a paper about the rhetoric of science. The rhetoric student questions all written communication and how it was presented and why it was presented that way. Even if one is unfamiliar with the traditional western concepts of rhetoric, this does not exempt them from having a purpose and an agenda when they write. Rhetoric often forces one to look at the structures of power that often dictate this presentation. Thus, in some ways, all knowledge is suspect based on the presenter of that knowledge and what their agenda is. This is an incredibly important skill, especially in today’s world of “fake news.” I hope to impart this ability, at least in a small way, to my future college freshmen I will be teaching. I want them to understand advertising and propaganda and how they are almost always been sold something, and to at least be aware of that in their daily lives.

Spring 2018-Grad Student Life

So it just felt right to revive this blog that I started back in fall of 2016 in Linda Overman's Amazing class at CSUN English 495: English Subject Matter. It was a class about learning to teach, but also about what it's like being a student. In my opinion, both are things that need to be explored by future educators. Now this blog will be refreshed and renewed for my English 651: Rhetoric and Composition Theory class at CSUN Spring 2018 with the illustrious Professor Iswari Pandey, Ph.D. Things are somewhat different in grad school than they were in undergrad, but in some ways things are a continuation of what I started during my Bachelor's Degree experience. Education and the teaching of writing will be my main focus as always. Enjoy this new chapter!