Talk about a
hurting brain, I didn’t know one word could have so many concepts! For the last
3 days I have been googleing and youtubing (Rhetoric Strategies) nonstop to find information
on the word Rhetoric. It wasn’t till
late tonight that the articles and videos started making minor sense. To be
honest I had to watch the TEDtalk twice because my first thoughts were “How is
this video rhetoric?” All I got out of it was that maybe I found a new
appreciation for choir that I had hated before. Then I read the Keith
Grant-Davie article and handout on the terms and it dawned on me…that was the
whole point of the TEDtalk, to persuade me to like choir! Eric Whitacre was the
Rhetor and I was the audience, and it was his exigence to open my eyes to the
beauty of choir. The constraints were he was surrounded by a bunch of
technological nerds (me being one of them!) that needed to be convinced that
this “Virtual Choir” was something profound. But he used his credibility as a professional
composer (Ethos) the physical youtube videos (logos) and emotion (Pathos)
through the music and peoples testimonies to make me persuaded. GENIUS! After
that light bulb the articles started making a little more sense. To me Rhetoric
means a speaker or writer knows how to communicate to
persuade an audience to believe something.
After reading,
“What is Rhetoric?” and researching the history of Rhetoric, it seems that the
term is as old as Adam and Eve! It was clearly used during Aristotle’s era and
has now been modified continually throughout history. On page 5 we get to see Covino and Jolliffe’s opinion of
Rhetoric:
“Rhetoric is
primarily a verbal, situationally contingent, epistemic art that is both
philosophical and practical and gives rise to potentially active texts.” Quite
the mouthful, but broken down I think it means Rhetoric is mainly spoken, to an
audience during a certain time in history, that brings new knowledge to the
table and persuades effectively. In the TEDtalk, Whitacre states that he
thought choir was nerdy but once he finally surrendered to it he finally saw in
Technicolor. Whitacre was using his past unbelief to connect to the audience
because he knew we were still colorblind. Then when he shows us the video the
audience stands and applauses him because now they can see in color, all these
voices unified are made beautiful to us! Whitacre persuaded us just like how
the article said it could be done!
When it comes to the
intertextuality article I found it very interesting and I completely agree with
it. Ecclesiastes 1: 9 “Is there anything new under the sun?” Can someone write
or say something completely knew that has not been heard ever before? I agree
on page 2 when it says “bits and pieces of Text which writers or speakers
borrow and sew together to create new discourse.” In film school I had this
professor always tell me, “Stop trying to create a new story, all your going to
do is change dates and names.” Sounds depressing right? But if you actually
stop trying to be the next Shakespeare and focus on making an idea better, then
it is just as rewarding. In the videos Whitacre does not try to create the idea
of a choir. He builds upon it to create a new way to appreciate a choir!
Overall I think I am
getting the idea of Rhetoric. The articles can be confusing because I feel they
could convey rhetoric in a simpler way but let me know if I am completely
missing the whole idea of it! Could someone please explain to me the history of
rhetoric a little better, that is the part I am the most confused about. When
did it start? Who came up with it?
It depends on your point of view who started rhetoric, but you could consider Genesis 3:1– "Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, Yes, has God said, You shall not eat of every tree of the garden?"
ReplyDeleteIf you have or would like to hear an alternative point of view, I put a link on the "look what I found" page on our class website. Rhetoric may have been practiced before language.
DeleteThank you two for the brief history of rhetoric, I don't know why I hadn't thought to look that up. I would not have guessed it had been around quite that long, but it makes some sense.
ReplyDeleteWhat a brilliant thought Dave! So does that mean rhetoric is from the devil? Some in our class might think so! I make my brain crazy when I think about how it is possible that we can actually be persuaded to change our minds. Words are a powerful thing!
ReplyDeleteDave has such a good point with the idea that rhetoric may have been practiced before language! What if we modify this a little bit though. What if rhetoric is practiced in all forms of communication, not just language? Communication is more than just words; it's both verbal and nonverbal. Could rhetoric also be practiced in a nonverbal form of communication such as observing someone's gestures as a mode of persuasion?
ReplyDeleteSavannah, I have been thinking about what you said in your comment about rhetoric being "from the devil". Not only does that apply humorously to our difficulty in studying it, but I also find it an interesting philosophical concept. Is rhetoric an evil or bad idea? I imagine most would not say that, but there exists the possibility that something so powerful could be theoretically evil, or at least used for it. If you can change someone's viewpoint using rhetorical theories, you could alter reality in a negative way. That's an interesting thing to ponder...We should not only question "what is rhetoric?", but also, "What can rhetoric do?"
ReplyDeleteWell from reading what you wrote it really explains more, and not only that but I enjoyed reading it. You had many good points. The different comments being compared to rhetoric was interesting also. Keep up the good work.
ReplyDelete