This paper offers a review and analysis of speeches delivered by President George W. Bush in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. Bush’s motivations, goals, and persuasive strategies are discussed in detail in the following study, with consideration for the cultural and political contexts of American oratory and the idiosyncratic features of the Republican as a public speaker. The characteristics of Bush's 9/11 communication acts are then compared with Franklin D. Roosevelt's Pearl Harbor speech in order to analyze the differences between the two politicians' rhetorical modi operandi as well as the changing political environment of the U.S.

A review of general education at the author’s university led to an effort to include project- and theme-based interdisciplinary courses that addressed the “public good,” but many faculty resisted what they perceived as threats to purely disciplinary knowledge. When knowledge is under attack, professors in all disciplines should help prepare students to address problems in US democracy.

A Review of Rhetorical Work in Emergency Medical Services: Communicating in the Unpredictable Workplace Marissa C. McKinley Rhetorical Work in Emergency Medical Services: Communicating in the Unpredictable Workplace. By Elizabeth L. Angeli. New York, NY: Routledge, 2019. 204 pages, $47.95 paper, $23.98 e-book.

A Review of Bounding Biomedicine: Evidence and Rhetoric in the New Science of Alternative Medicine J. Blake Scott Bounding Biomedicine: Evidence and Rhetoric in the New Science of Alternative Medicine. By Colleen Derkatch. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2016. 238 pages. $55 cloth; $10 e-book.

Research problem: Cultural differences may be increasingly important in technical communication. Research is needed to investigate differences in document design practices and user preferences. This study examines cultural differences between Chinese and Western manuals for household appliances. Literature review: Earlier studies identified a wide range of possible differences between Chinese and Western documents, but the findings are not consistent and do not provide more generic perspectives on cultural differences. Possible reasons are the diversity of the documents used, the rather informal research designs, and relatively small sample sizes. Research question: To what extent and how do Chinese and Western manuals for household appliances differ from each other in terms of content, structure, and use of visuals? Methodology: To overcome these shortcomings, a quantitative content analysis was conducted, comparing 50 Chinese manuals and 50 Western manuals for household appliances. The coding scheme was based on earlier research findings and focused on content, structure, and the use of visuals. Results and conclusions: The results show that the content of Chinese manuals is less strictly confined to the function of user support than that of Western manuals. Compared to Western manuals, the structure of Chinese manuals appears to be fuzzier and less rigid. Regarding visuals, Chinese manuals contain more non-instrumental, entertaining illustrations than Western manuals. Underlying these differences is a more general distinction between highly instrumental Western manuals and more flexible Chinese manuals. These differences seem to point to two cultural dimensions: holistic versus analytic thinking and analog versus digital cultures.

Background: The lab report is a commonly assigned genre in engineering lab courses; however, students often have difficulties meeting the expectations of writing in engineering labs. At the same time, it is challenging for engineering faculty to instruct lab report writing because they are often under-supported in writing pedagogies and usually unfamiliar with the extent of students' prior writing knowledge. Literature review: Literature on technical communication in engineering addresses the importance of a rhetorical approach to writing instruction, as well as an emphasis on genre. Extending this literature, research into writing transfer provides valuable insight for better understanding how undergraduates negotiate the engineering lab report as a new genre within this distinct rhetorical context. Research questions: 1. How effective is a transfer-focused writing pedagogy in supporting students' understanding of the genre conventions of engineering lab reports? 2. How does the transfer-focused writing pedagogy impact students' writing quality in five categories (rhetorical knowledge, organization, evidence, critical thinking, and disciplinary conventions)? 3. What are the rhetorical features that engineering students improve or struggle with the most with lab report writing? Research methodology: Four engineering instructors and two English instructors participated in this study to design and develop the lab report writing instructional module, and implemented the module materials into their engineering lab courses. The module, consisting of lab report writing instruction and assessment resources, shares a rhetorical approach and foundational writing terms with first-year composition courses to emphasize a writing-transfer pedagogy. We collected and analyzed undergraduates' lab report samples to evaluate the impact of the module on students' writing performance. Two sets of lab reports were collected for analysis: the sample sets before (control), during the 2015-2016 academic year; and after (experimental) implementation of the module, during the 2016-2017 academic year. Results and conclusions: Data collected via pre- and post-implementation writing artifacts show that a rhetorical approach to teaching lab reports helped students better understand the expectations of the lab report as a discipline-specific genre, and it developed students' understanding of the rhetorical features of engineering writing. The pilot module positively impacted the quality of students' lab reports, a finding that suggests that using a transfer-focused writing pedagogy can successfully support the transfer and adaptation of writing knowledge into gateway or entry-level engineering laboratory courses.

Background: Although some have noted that combining technical and marketing content is precarious, technical communication professionals are increasingly involved in content marketing, which includes the creation of white papers. Literature review: The little existing literature on white papers provides conflicting guidance about managing the combination of technical and marketing content. Both soft-sell and hard-sell marketing approaches have been recommended. One source of such inconsistent guidance may be the lack of agreement about definitions. Research on print advertisements has described hard and soft selling as multidimensional rather than binary aspects of persuasive appeals. Research question: Which dimensions of hard and soft-sell appeals are predominant in white papers? Research methodology: To complete our descriptive study, we collected a corpus of documents labeled as white papers in TechRepublic, and then selected and trained three raters to complete a series of judgments about dimensions of persuasive appeals in the corpus. We aggregated those ratings, calculating the mean and standard deviation for the dimensions to describe their distribution across the corpus. Results/discussion: Overall, hard-sell dimensions were more prevalent than soft-sell dimensions. However, the soft-sell category of “implicitness” was also dominant. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate the value of treating hard and soft selling as multidimensional, complementary, and combinatory marketing appeals that allow, for example, a single white paper to be both “subjective” (soft sell), and “precise” (hard sell), or both “creative” (soft sell) and “informative” (hard sell).

This book posits that there is a lack of social justice coverage in today’s engineering curriculum. The authors’ fundamental premise is that, while some social aspects may be covered in engineering courses, the general approach to engineering subject matter presents only the technical details, not other aspects. The book examines how culture and other social issues are a part of engineering practice. The authors want to get educators thinking, as well as changing and making courses and programs more aware of cultural, political, and social issues. The authors assert that the social impacts of the engineering curriculum are hidden and generally ignored. The book opens an interesting discussion of social justice and engineering professionals. The underlying message is that professional engineers—and the engineering curricula being taught—are not emphasizing the inclusion of social justice within those programs. Current curricula include social justice as only a minor component in the training of engineers, with the technical aspects overriding social needs except in small doses. The book addresses a truly significant problem to society: Who bears the responsibility of ensuring that social injustice is addressed and corrected? The authors provide thoughts and insights, but the solution is very complex and cannot be solved with one book. Each person needs to accept the responsibility of correcting injustice where they can. Understanding the problem may still not provide a solution that prevents social injustice completely; it’s a start. Introducing a semester course on social justice is insufficient, but it may foster changes in other curricular offerings. Such introductions and changes will take time. Regarding limitations, it would have helped to make the case if the book did more to address potential naysayers. Professors in engineering who do not see the importance of the matter might claim that the engineering curriculum already meets accreditation requirements, and therefore, they might justify not making changes by saying that accreditation agencies must believe that social justice is being adequately covered.

This book is a practical guide for pursuing US federal funding for research. The book is intended for new investigators in the early stages of their career, who are new to grants, or unfamiliar with the structures, priorities, and processes that govern the funding landscape. Rather than merely providing an overview of these processes, the authors aim to help investigators “understand how to work the process to [their] advantage” (p. xi). The book succeeds by offering a detailed overview of the federal funding process while simultaneously explaining how new investigators can use this knowledge to position themselves for success. Hilton and Leukefeld are experienced researchers who have worked as grant and contract administrators for the National Institutes of Health (NIH). As a result, much of the content reflects NIH policy and practice. Investigators pursuing NIH funding will find this guide particularly useful, and investigators who are pursing funding from other federal sponsors (e.g., the National Science Foundation) will find that many of the book’s recommendations are transferable.

Book Reviews 227 compelling theoretically, the case study did not fully examine the implications of the project's reliance on homonormativity. Bessette concludes with two provocations for the future of queer retroactivism. First, she argues that a near-future task may be to challenge the centrality of corporations in digital media production. And second, she follows Carla Freccero in noting that the hauntological past must be heard, on its own terms. Bessette's work with a variety of grassroots lesbian archives is an engaging read and offers a useful approach to historical scholarship. But I felt that she did not spend enough time parsing out the affordances and limitations of grassroots archives in relation to their institutional counterparts. Fittingly, Bessette's most important insight is her notion of retroactivism, a concept that can hopefully open up more space for reconsidering archival identification, queer or otherwise, into the future. Morgan DiCesare University of Iowa Peter A. O'Connell, The Rhetoric of Seeing in Attic Forensic Oratory. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2017, 282 pp. ISBN 9781477311684 The close connections between rhetorical and theatrical performance as two of the major types of civic spectacle in Classical Athens are well esta­ blished, but we are hampered by the fact that our knowledge of courtroom practice is largely dependent on the surviving texts of the speeches. Unlike their Roman counterparts, the surviving fourth-century Greek treatises have little to say about delivery or about the type of spectacular effects alluded to in Attic comedy and in the speeches themselves, which creates a challenge to the modem researcher. Peter O'Connell's book, based on his PhD disser­ tation, is one of several recent studies to take up that challenge1 and is dis­ tinguished by its focus on sight and visual effects in Athenian trials. O'Connell's book stands out for its focus on the role of vision, both physical and mental, and metaphors of sight in forensic oratory (with a brief foray into the funeral oration). It makes an important contribution to the study of vivid language and visual effects as an integral part of the process of persuasion and underlines the continuing importance of these tools through modem comparisons. The author's solution to the lack of theoretical discussions contemporary with the speeches is to draw principally on an impressively wide range of ancient speeches, giving close readings of ^ee, for example, N. Villaceque, Spectateurs de Paroles: Deliberation democratique et theatre a Athenes a Vepoque classique (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2013) and A. Serafim, Attic Oratory and Performance (London : Routledge, 2017). 228 RHETORICA selected passages (summaries of all the speeches discussed are given in an invaluable appendix). The astute close readings of these passages are supple­ mented by appeals - made with all due caution — to the critical and theoreti­ cal discussions of the Hellenistic and Roman periods. The result sheds a new light on the functioning of judicial oratory as a multi-sensory persuasive per­ formance, though the nature of the material inevitably raises some questions. All the major passages are quoted in the Greek and in the author's own English versions. The choice of a very literal translation style serves to clarify the sense of the words discussed but at the occasional cost of fluidity. The first of the book's three parts asks what was visible to the jury within the courtroom, analysing passages that comment on the impact of the presence and physical appearance of the various parties to the case in the courtroom and of material evidence. Against the background of the close association of vision and knowledge in the Greek language, the second section analyses the importance of vision and of metaphors of vision in Athenian law, forensic oratory, and, beyond the courts, in classical Greek philosophical and medical texts. It is here that O'Connell, through citations from Sophists such as Protagoras, Antiphon, and Gorgias, raises the vital epis­ temological question of how juries could decide upon events they had not themselves witnessed. This is backed up by an illuminating analysis of the lan­ guage of visibility in Antiphon and in Gorgias' Defense of Palamedes, which explores the challenge of proving the non-existence...

Book Reviews 229 O'Connell is very effective when analysing the use of vivid language to make the audience imagine scenes they have not witnessed themselves, dis­ cussing Aeschines' passage on the sack of Thebes, Demosthenes on Phokis, and Lycurgus on the scene at Athens after the catastrophic military defeat at Chaeronea. His analyses make use of both ancient criticism and modem lit­ erary tools. Taken together, they make a strong case for accepting the ancient commentators' evaluation of these passages as able to make the audience "see" the scene in imagination. The most stimulating part of this final section however is the final chapter on "shared spectatorship" with its examples of the interaction between the mental images of past actions or absent persons created by the orators' language and the actual sights of the courtroom. O'Connell shows how the orators encourage a type of mental superimposition (my term) of the idea of the sight evoked - and created - by the orator onto the accused present in the courtroom. This is particularly satisfying as an example of actual and virtual sights being used as a sustained strategy throughout a speech and underlines the multiple possibilities for manipulation. One area that could have been addressed in more detail is the sugges­ tion on p. 32 that appearance—real or imagined—might spark a process of enthymematic reasoning (the accused has the commonly accepted characte­ ristics of a murderer/adulterer therefore it is likely that he is guilty as char­ ged). But this rich and stimulating study has a great deal to offer specialists in ancient and modem rhetoric and in ancient Greek literature and culture. Ruth Webb Universite de Lille Harold Parker and Jan Maximilian Robitzsch, eds., Speeches for the Dead: Essays on Plato's Menexenus, (Beitrage zur Altertumskunde 368), Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 2018. 202 pp. ISBN 9783110573978 Plato's Menexenus is a rhetorical masterpiece. That, at any rate, seems to have been the judgment of generations of Athenians, who, Cicero tells us, had someone recite Socrates' funeral oration annually (Orator 151). The speech can be stirring, especially when Socrates speaks in the voice of the dead soldiers and urges their sons to lives of virtue. But is it sincere? Before he delivers the speech, Socrates claims that it is easy to give funeral orations, since all you have to do is praise Athenians to Athenians. The speech misrepresents historical events and doesn't even reflect Socrates own sentiments, since he attributes it to Pericles mistress Aspasia. To make matters worse, Socrates seems to be delivering the speech years after he, and probably Aspasia as well, had died. The puzzles of the Menexenus have no easy answer. Unable to resolve its contradictions in a satisfactory t47av, scholars have tended to focus on its relationship with other surviving 230 RHETORICA Athenian funeral orations and with the rest of Plato's works. This thoughtprovoking volume is no exception. The contributors approach the text from the perspectives of philosophy and political thought, but their argu­ ments will also be inspiring to readers interested in rhetoric in Plato and in Classical Athens. After a brief introduction, Speechesfor the Dead reprints Charles H. Kahn's 1963 article, "Plato's Funeral Oration: The Motive of the Menexenus" Kahn argues that the Menexenus is a political pamphlet, expressing Plato's dislike of the policies of Pericles and his successors, especially the capitulation to Persia in the King's Peace of 386. The eight new essays in Speeches for the Dead are influenced not so much by Kahn's specific arguments as by his approach, which poses five questions about the Menexenus: Why Aspasia? Why the anachronisms? Why the historical distortions? Why did Plato write a funeral oration? Why did that oration continue to be delivered years after it was written? Only some of the authors invoke these questions directly, but a fundamental "why" lies behind each of the essays. They all seek to explain why the Menexenus is the way it is by treating it as a work of serious Platonic philosophy. In "Reading the Menexenus Intertextually," Mark Zelcer takes seriously Socrates' claim that Aspasia composed the speech he delivers by gluing together pieces she had left...

232 RHETORICA concludes it is the definitive guide to the Menexenus that the back cover pro­ mises, there is something here for everyone who wants to think critically about the dialogue and its problems. Peter A. O'Connell The University of Georgia Robert R. Edwards, Invention and Authorship in Medieval England (Interventions: New Studies in Medieval Culture), Columbus: The Ohio State Press, 2017. 230 pp. ISBN 9780814213407 It is a philological distinction commonly invoked by historians of rhetoric that invention, rhetoric's first and arguably foremost canon, has something of a double meaning. The Latin invenire can mean "to find" or "to come upon," or it can mean "to create" or "to contrive." In Invention and Authorship in Medieval England, Robert Edwards shows how medieval authors invented (in both senses of the term) authorial identities that wor­ ked within accepted traditions of literary production and interpretation, and also sometimes questioned or subverted those traditions, showing that "authorship is at once rhetorical and literary, historical and poetic" (xi). Yet, while Edwards observes that rhetorical theory was an important ele­ ment of literary production and of identification with distinct traditions, the relationship between the literary, the rhetorical, and distinct models of authorship remains comparatively underexplored. The result is a deep and compelling literary analysis of canonical English authors such as Marie de France, Chaucer, Gower, and Lydgate, but a somewhat incom­ plete discussion of the intersection of rhetoric and poetics in English literary culture. This incompleteness, however, should not dissuade the prospective reader from engaging with this text. Edwards' deep knowledge of classical and medieval culture is evident throughout all of the chapters of Invention and Authorship in Medieval England. Indeed, the relationship of each literary figure to classical and vernacular traditions is of paramount concern to Edwards, as he notes that "the agency . . . working in medieval English texts consciously foregrounds the decision to write within traditions and conventions" (xv), meaning that authors only achieve authorship by "consciously placing themselves through their works within the interpretive structure of a literary system" (xvi). Each chapter, then, endeavors to place each literary figure within such a liter­ ary system. Chapter 2, for instance, demonstrates how Marie de France "exer­ cises agency to revise her received materials [e.g. primarily those of Ovid] from popular and learned sources and to create a hybrid classicism in which she operates as a counterpart and conscious alternative to a Latin auetor" (34). In general, Edwards' claims in regard to such systems are well-defended; for instance, he thoroughly defends his assertion that "in Ovid's Book Reviews 233 erotodidactic poems . . . Marie finds a topic and conceptual frame for invention and authorship rather than rhetorical adornment and learned allusion" (40). This assessment is itself valuable, as it counters common readings of Marie (and indeed, many other medieval authors) that reduce their receptions and appropriations of classical literary culture to derivate borrowings, as Edwards himself observes (39). Likewise, Edwards' discus­ sion of Gower and his use of elements of scribal and textual culture—such as the accessus,- prologues, paratexts, and others (63-104)—is well-supported and fascinating. Yet, some other chapters, such as the section on Chaucer, do not fully account for the potential influence of contemporary theories of rhetoric and poetics that would have been instrumental for defining attitudes toward lit­ erary authorship. This omission is striking, first, because Edwards observes the connections between literary authorship and rhetoric in the introductory chapters of his text, and second, because his incorporation of scholarship by historians of rhetoric such as Rita Copeland and James J. Murphy suggests a knowledge of this sub-field and how it may have influenced English literary attitudes. For example, while Edwards observes that Chaucer is associated with a catalogue of works by his contemporaries, as well as that these works are largely "generated through forms of poetic imitation," (110) it was sur­ prising to see that he made little connection to the tradition of the medieval artes poetriae (aside from a reference in a footnote citing Murphy, which men­ tioned Geoffrey of Vinsauf and Matthew of Venddme). Arguably these artes represent an early example of the codification of contemporary medieval poets such as Alan of...

Book Reviews Jean Bessette, Retroactivism in the Lesbian Archives: Composing Pasts and Futures. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2017, 202 pp. ISBN 9780809336234 Since queer, feminist, and rhetorical scholars have "returned" to the archive over the past twenty years, Bessette's book brings queer and feminist archival theories to bear on rhetorical studies. Bessette is concerned with how lesbian collectives have composed a past for themselves and oriented themselves toward new possibilities for identification that could challenge "then-present social and political denigrations of same-sex desire and rela­ tionships" (2). The result is a retooling of familiar rhetorical concepts for the study and historiographic consideration of queer and feminist collective pasts. Bessette's rewriting of archival logics through rhetorical concepts is useful for both queer rhetoricians and wider archival studies. Particularly, her read­ ing of identification through retroactivism and the notion of "documenting the search" offer new approaches for any archival engagement (125). The book begins with the theoretical insights of queer and feminist archival scholarship before turning to specific technologies in each chapter that offer insights into the retroactivist impulses of lesbian rhetors and lesbian communities. Bessette begins by drawing on Lucas Hilderbrand's "retroactivism," a concept that Hilderbrand uses to engage his longings for a personal and nostalgic queer past. Bessette links retroactivism to the account of identifica­ tion given by Kenneth Burke to argue that grassroots collectives sought the "displacement—and replacing—of pejorative accounts of lesbianism with new versions of the past" (10). These revisions of the past were marshalled to produce different definitions of lesbianism and open space for alternative futures. She argues that rhetorical studies, and particularly Burke's under­ standing of identification, already offer the requisite tools for engagements with queer archives. Chapter one contends that Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon's influential book LesbianANoman is itself an archive. Bessette reads the short personal stories contained in LesbianANoman as anecdotes that demonstrate the ephemeraUty of the queer archive (26). She argues that these anecdotes were arranged to produce a respectable white middle-class narrative of lesbian identity, in line with the goals of its authors who were leaders in the Daughters of Bilitis. This identity was framed to challenge dominant homophobic social narratives, and Bessette centers the function of exclusion in identification. Rhetorica, Vol. XXXVhl, Issue 2, pp. 225-234. ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 15338541 . © 2020 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Reprints and Permissions web page, http://www. ucpress.edu/joumals.php?p=reprints. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.38.2.225 226 RHETORICA Whereas chapter one addresses a printed text as archive, chapter two turns to a "place-based" understanding of archives through a reading of the Lesbian Herstory Archives (LHA) and the June L. Mazer Archives (JLMA). Bessette argues that classification in the LHA, an archive which accepts "any­ thing a lesbian has touched," operates as a "rhetorical topos" which "blurs the boundaries between archival categories, creating the conditions for a genera­ tive, flexible identity" (61). Bessette contends that the LHA offers the possibil­ ity of making seemingly disparate connections through browsing. Bessette then turns to the JLMA and a photograph collage from Ester Bentley that sits in view outside of the domain of a particular collection. Due to its position, she argues that these photos instill in visitors a sense of possibility for historical connection that crosses the categories of the archive. The chapter concludes with a brief review of the JLMA's recent partnership with UCLA. Bessette suggests that the queemess of the JLMA's collection may be lost when viewing their materials in UCLA's straight, institutional reading room, a point I believe needs additional substantiation. Chapter three turns to documentary films and their "fabrication of the past" (95). Bessette reads these films as allowing for a composition of lesbian histories that challenge "dependencies upon lesbian history for present sexual identification" (97). Bessette analyzes five historiographic lesbian films through a relevant multimodal rhetorical strategy. The films and their respective strategies include "unstable identity categories" in The Female...

Creating her own assignments using openly licensed course materials allows this professor and her students to be more creative and to take greater advantage of digital resources.

Preview this article: Review: The Peacebuilding Potential of Literacy, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/82/4/collegeenglish30581-1.gif

Other| February 21 2020 Books of Interest Michael Kennedy; Michael Kennedy Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Mark Schaukowitch Mark Schaukowitch Department of English Language and Literature, University of South Carolina Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Philosophy & Rhetoric (2020) 53 (1): 104–110. https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.53.1.0104 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Michael Kennedy, Mark Schaukowitch; Books of Interest. Philosophy & Rhetoric 21 February 2020; 53 (1): 104–110. doi: https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.53.1.0104 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All Scholarly Publishing CollectivePenn State University PressPhilosophy & Rhetoric Search Advanced Search You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| February 01 2020 Review: The Concept of Conversation: From Cicero's Sermo to the Grand Siècle's Conversation and The Conversational Enlightenment: The Reconception of Rhetoric in Eighteenth-Century Thought, by David Randall David Randall, The Concept of Conversation: From Cicero's Sermo to the Grand Siècle's Conversation. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2018, vi + 266 pp. ISBN 9781474430104David Randall, The Conversational Enlightenment: The Reconception of Rhetoric in Eighteenth-Century Thought, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2019, vii + 288 pp. ISBN 9781474448666 James Donathan Garner James Donathan Garner James Donathan Garner Department of Rhetoric and Writing University of Texas at Austin 204 W 21ST ST Austin, TX 78712 j.garner@utexas.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2020) 38 (1): 122–126. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2020.38.1.122 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation James Donathan Garner; Review: The Concept of Conversation: From Cicero's Sermo to the Grand Siècle's Conversation and The Conversational Enlightenment: The Reconception of Rhetoric in Eighteenth-Century Thought, by David Randall. Rhetorica 1 February 2020; 38 (1): 122–126. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2020.38.1.122 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2020 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Reprints and Permissions web page, http://www.ucpress.edu/journals.php?p=reprints.2020 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| February 01 2020 Review: From Humanism to Hobbes: Studies in Rhetoric and Politics, by Quentin Skinner Quentin Skinner, From Humanism to Hobbes: Studies in Rhetoric and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018, xiii + 432 pp. ISBN 9781107128859 Kathy Eden Kathy Eden Kathy Eden English Department Columbia University 602 Philosophy Hall New York, New York 10027 khe1@columbia.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2020) 38 (1): 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2020.38.1.118 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Kathy Eden; Review: From Humanism to Hobbes: Studies in Rhetoric and Politics, by Quentin Skinner. Rhetorica 1 February 2020; 38 (1): 118–122. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2020.38.1.118 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2020 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Reprints and Permissions web page, http://www.ucpress.edu/journals.php?p=reprints.2020 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| February 01 2020 Review: An Argument on Rhetorical Style, by Marie Lund Marie Lund, An Argument on Rhetorical Style. Denmark: Aarhus University Press, 2017, 220 pp. $25 (paper). ISBN 9788771844344 Arthur E. Walzer Arthur E. Walzer Arthur Walzer Professor Emeritus, Communication Studies University of Minnesota 40 Prospect Park W, 1J Brooklyn, NY 11215 awalzer@umn.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2020) 38 (1): 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2020.38.1.129 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Arthur E. Walzer; Review: An Argument on Rhetorical Style, by Marie Lund. Rhetorica 1 February 2020; 38 (1): 129–132. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2020.38.1.129 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2020 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Reprints and Permissions web page, http://www.ucpress.edu/journals.php?p=reprints.2020 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Rhetoric is a resilient art.Its stability and mutability across centuries attest to its dynamism as a domain of knowledge production and engaged practice.While resilience is understood differentially across scholarly and popular domains, it nearly always addresses questions of how to respond, adapt, and persist through adverse circumstances (for a review of this diverse literature, see Flynn, Sotirin, & Brady, 2012).For example, resilience has become a key trope for describing the practices of (bio)security, sustainability, human health, child development, infrastructure, technological systems, and other common sites of study in rhetorics of science, technology, and medicine (RSTM).Recently, rhetoricians have also taken up resilience; these scholars are interested both in using rhetoric to understand resilience and using resilience to understand rhetoric.This special issue of POROI is intended to further the scholarly conversation on resilience rhetorics.In particular, we hope to highlight the deeply rhetorical, critical, cultural, and materialsemiotic work being done by and with theories and metaphors of resilience.The collection of articles assembled here initially arose from our experience co-chairing the Association for Rhetoric of Science, Technology, and Medicine's (ARSTM) second annual preconference at the biennial Rhetoric Society of America (RSA) conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in 2018.The ARSTM preconferences at RSA and the National Communication Association (NCA) meetings always focus on a core theme; other themes have included trust, evidence, and translation (ARSTM, 2019).

Preview this article: Review: Feminist Rhetorical Questions and the Broadening Imperative, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/82/3/collegeenglish30480-1.gif

This webtext focuses on Lockridge's production of Rhetorlist, an inventory of new books published in Rhetoric and Writing, Composition Studies, Technical Communication, and related disciplines. Tracing the histories and challenges of these disciplines' engagement with digital tools, Lockridge argues for an attention to small, meaningful projects of service to field, and offers strategies for the development of such projects.