In his essay "Recovering the Lost Art of Researching the History of Rhetoric", Richard Leo Enos poses the argument that rhetorical studies must struggle towards an activist function in order to be of relevance as an academic discipline.
Enos points out that while the interdisciplinary nature of rhetoric ensures that there will be a continued interest and attention to rhetoric, the actual art of researching the history of rhetoric has been and is dangerously close to being lost.
Enos, argueing that there is a need for historical scholarship in the field and that this methodolgy is often neglected, cites Barnett Baskerville who asserts that "there is a need for scholars who can record accurately and artistically the history of our art as it relates to more general history, to delineate its place and contributions to the cultural history of the nation."
There is something about studying a history of rhetoric that is exciting in the same way that playing with firecrackers is. Something might blow up.
Rhetoric is a living, breathing beast.
Or maybe rhetoric is the music which calms the beast?
Do you have to have a PhD in rhetorical studies to be a superior orator and rhetorician?
History shows otherwise.
The history of rhetoric reveals it to be organic.
What will be the contributions of the dark unheard human masses to the historical tree of rhetoric?
Is there rhetoric in a long desperate wail?
I keep thinking about a point Dr. D makes in class: "Make everything count."
The tie between the oral and the written tradition is one of the great beauties and achievements in human history. It is also one of the great mysteries, there are elements of alchemy in the process of reading and writing.
We can trace currents of thought and a history of rhetoric in the European tradition at least as far back as when the Greeks transferred there history and poetry from oral emory to written artifact. Since then many others have contributed to the evolution of human rhetoric.
We can identify moments in history where the powers of rhetoric where in display.
People are always coming up with new arguments to engage political forces that shape the environments we live in.
Political history is a history of rhetoric.
Matches only start fires; the potential history of rhetoric can set people free.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am striked by your question about 'rhetoric in a long wail?'. When thinking about the speaker's intent to sway his audience, to get the to reflect and perhaps absorb the concept he presents. He is probably the most effective in evoking emotion from his audience; this makes his message both memorable and persuasive. So if a long wail is a cry of help, pain of body or conscience, then it is an effective display of both it's message and evoking emotion to make it's stick in the memory.
ReplyDelete