Individual agency is necessary for the possibility of rhetoric, and especially for deliberative rhetoric, which enables the composition of what Latour calls a good common world. Drawing on neurophenomenology, this essay defines individual agency as the process through which organisms create meanings through acting into the world and changing their structure in response to the perceived consequences of their actions. Conceiving of agency in this way enables writers to recognize their rhetorical acts, whether conscious or nonconscious, as acts that make them who they are, that affect others, and that can contribute to the common good. Responsible rhetorical agency entails being open to and responsive to the meanings of concrete others, and thus seeing persuasion as an invitation to listeners as also always agents in persuasion.

I use Burkean analysis to show how neoliberalism undermines faculty assessment expertise and underwrites testing industry expertise in the current assessment scene. Contending that we cannot extricate ourselves from our limited agency in this scene until we abandon the familiar “stakeholder” theory of power, I propose a rewriting of the assessment scene that asserts faculty and student agency and leadership for writing assessment.

When Kairos, the god of opportunity, passes by, Metanoia is left in his wake. At first glance, Metanoia is the embodiment of regret, a sorrowful woman cowering under the weight of remorse. However, there is more to the concept of metanoia than feelings of regret. This article looks to the long-standing partnership between kairos and metanoia as a way to better understand the affective and transformative dimension of kairos. The kairos and metanoia partnership can take shape as a personal learning process, a pedagogical tool, and a rhetorical device. Kairos and metanoia stimulate transformations of belief, large and small, that can advance personal understanding and lead to more empathetic responses. As such, this article argues for further exploration of the kairos and metanoia partnership in rhetorical theory and practice.

108 RHETORICA thinkers? No wonder Kirby opines “Quot lectores, tot Platones": There are as many Platos as there are readers of him. McCoy's reading of various dialogues is "partial" both in the sense of partisan and less-than-the-whole. But so are all readings of Plato. To disagree with McCoy over particulars strikes me as simply reflecting the fact that her Plato is not my Plato. I suspect many readers may be persuaded that the most consistent means by which Plato distinguishes sophists from philosophers is by their moral purpose without accepting that Plato's account is true (something McCoy does not claim), and perhaps insisting that the most compelling reading of certain dialogues requires us to accept that Plato did, in fact, try to distinguish the two on other grounds, including by method and doctrine. It is to McCoy's credit that she demonstrates familiarity with a broader body of literature than most philosophers who deal with Plato. Readers of Rhetorica will appreciate McCoy's account as a healthy counterpart to the long tradition ofbooks by philosophers that take every opportunity to equate sophists and rhetoric to the detriment of both. Her book should encourage historians of rhetoric who have not examined certain dialogues as part of the canon of rhetorical theory to include a greater variety of Plato's texts. Lastly, by portraying Plato as a sophisticated rhetor, McCoy facilitates a more candid assessment of what she describes as his most consistent theme. After all, if one does not believe in the forms (that is, if one is not a Platonist), then the only difference between sophist and philosopher is the latter's authentic concern for other people. The fact that Plato's rhetoric privileges Socrates in this regard no longer seems a compelling reason for us to do the same. Edward Schiappa University ofMinnesota Casper C. de Jonge, Between Grammar and Rhetoric: Dionysius of Hali­ carnassus on Language, Linguistics and Literature (Mnemosyne Supple­ ments 301), Leiden: Brill, 2008. xiii + 456 pp. ISBN 9789004166776 Dionysius of Halicarnassus was a Greek intellectual active in Rome in the last decades of the first century bce. Not all of his writings have survived, but those that do include (as well a lengthy work on Roman history) a substantial and interesting corpus of literary and rhetorical criticism, including studies of the classical orators and Thucydides, and a treatise on style (On Composition). Modern scholarship has often treated him with scant respect, but he has begun to be taken more seriously in recent decades. Building on that work, and contributing a distinctive anci original approach of his own, de Jonge has achieved a remarkable further advance in our understanding. His focus is on Dionysius' integration of ideas from the whole range of language disciplines—philology, technical grammar, philosophy Reviews 109 and rhetoric; metrics and musical theory also make appearances, though they are less central to de Jonge's enquiry. After an introductory chapter, de Jonge examines Dionysius' general conception of the nature of language; his treatment of the grammatical theory of the parts of speech, and his critical application of this theory; the theory of natural word-order; similarities and differences between poetry and prose; and Dionysius' use of experimental alterations to word order (metathesis, or "transposition") as a tool of practical criticism. One of the study's aims is to use Dionysius as a source for the state of the language disciplines in the late first century (for the most part known only from sparse fragments), and in particular to illustrate the close connections between these disciplines. But in reconstructing the intellectual context of Dionysius' work, de Jonge prudently resists the temptations (traditionally irresistible to classicists) of Quellenforschung: "instead of assigning partic­ ular passages from Dionysius' works to specific 'sources', I will point to the possible connections between Dionysius' discourse and that of earlier and contemporary scholars of various backgrounds" (pp. 7-8). This restraint does not preclude good observations on specific influences: in particular, there is a powerful argument for the view that Dionysius had read, and been influenced by, Cicero (p. 15, pp. 215-16). A second methodological commitment is the adoption of an "external rather than an...

Reviews 113 Ruth Webb, Ekphrasis, Imagination and Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory and Practice. Surrey, England: Ashgate, 2009. 238 pp. ISBN 9780754661252 The topic of ekphrasis has garnered much attention of late among classi­ cists, literary critics, and visual theorists—so much so that the bibliography on the subject has become unwieldy. Is ekphrasis a humble elementary exer­ cise in description? A w idely encompassing topos for the agon between word and image? An ancient nexus of speculation on the complexities of represen­ tation and the psychology of reception? Bringing together these perspectives and more, Ruth Webb's comprehensive treatment of ekphrasis from a rhetor­ ical point of view will be of interest to historians of ancient Greek and Roman rhetoric but may prove to be less than completely satisfying to those readers who have been following the critical explorations of the term of late. Webb begins with a strong argument: a proper understanding of ekphra­ sis should be grounded in the definition of the term offered in the rhetorical manuals of the imperial period, the 1st to the 5th centuries of the Common Era. Working closely with the Progynmasnmta of Theon, Ps.-Hermogenes, Aphthonios, and Nikolaos, as well as with rich material on the subject in the more advanced treatises by Quintilian, Ps.-Longinus, and Menander Rhetor, Webb insists that ekphrasis be considered in terms of effect rather than sub­ ject matter: it is "a speech that brings the subject matter vividly before the eyes" (Introduction and Chapter 1, "The Contexts of Ekphrasis"). She argues vigorously against a tendency she finds in modern criticism to see ekphraseis as descriptions of art works or as opportunities to explore ideas about the act of viewing in antiquity. Tier careful treatment of the handbook material— usefully presented in Greek and English in two appendices—focuses the reader's attention on enargeia. A vivid impression could be achieved through the detailed description, or narration, of many subjects, including activities such as battles, storms, plagues, earthquakes, and festivals, not only through descriptions of objects such as paintings, sculptures, and architectural won­ ders. Chapter 1 proceeds with historical evidence for a drift in scholarly treatments of ekphrasis away from the ancient rhetorical definition in the writings of nineteenth-century French art historians. A key moment of rupture in the mid-twentieth century for Webb is Leo Spitzer's appropriation of "ekphrasis" to designate a poetic genre. From here, writes Webb, "the rest is history," as ekphrasis is "catapulted" out of "the specialized domain of classical [sic] and archaeology into the world of English and Comparative Literature" (p. 35). The lapsarian tone of the narra­ tive at this point may startle readers who value interdisciplinary approaches to rhetoric and visual theorists who have left new critical poetics behind. The implication that all subsequent treatments of ekphrasis by literary scholars follow Spitzer's new critical lead is inaccurate and unhelpful (see p. 35 n. 63). In the penultimate chapter, Webb acknowledges recent writing on ekphra­ sis from classical scholars working on the ancient Greek novel (by Shadi Bartsch, Jas Eisner, Elelen Morales, Tim Whitmarsh, and others: see p. 178 114 RHETORICA and nn. 27 and 28). Influenced by literary theories such as semiotics, fem­ inism, and post-structuralism, these works, like those of scholars (notably W. J. T. Mitchell) from other humanities disciplines intersect in many ways with the perspectives developed later in Webb's book, but Webb does not pause to consider how they complicate the ancient vs. modern definitional agon driving her argument early on. As she aptly observes, "The connec­ tion between ekphrasis and the idea of visual representation ... runs deep" (p. 53), thus her lack of engagement with scholars exploring that very idea is puzzling. Webb is on firmer ground as she returns to a detailed examination of the treatment of ekphrasis in the handbooks (Chapter 2, "Learning Ekphra­ sis: The Progymnasmata). Emphasizing rhetorical production, she focuses on ekphrasis as "the exercise which taught students how to use vivid evocation and imagery in their speeches" (p. 53) rather than the static reproduction of set passages. Webb here makes an illuminating connection between ekphra­ sis and narrative, citing passages in which the speaker becomes...

Adopting a critical approach to identification in literature pedagogy, this article examines the dynamics of identification in the text, critical history, performance history, and teaching of Othello. The author theorizes a pedagogical approach that interrogates the play's systems of identification while foregrounding ethical responsibility.

The theory of bullshit put forth by philosopher Harry Frankfurt needs to be critiqued from the perspective of rhetorical theory, which can take into account how the identification of bullshit involves analyzing speaker, content, and audience as well as the interactions of these elements. More specifically, bullshit can be seen as an indifferent tampering with conventions of politeness, which makes it the antithesis of the kind of rhetoric we should teach.

The discipline of rhetoric and composition is often defined by binaries: rhetoric/composition, teaching/practice. Our doctoral programs, however, occupy space at both ends of the spectrum through the simultaneous emphasis on composition pedagogy and rhetorical theory. The changing curricula in doctoral programs offer a unique lens through which to interpret some of the forces that have shaped rhetoric and composition as it has developed in the past fifty years. Examining the curricula highlights how our disciplinary identity has been shaped, at least in part, by our various institutional locations.

Abstract This essay uncovers rhetorical processes devoted to rehumanizing the enemy as an antidote to the virulent rhetoric of war. With an eye toward disrupting a problematic process of national identity construction based on otheringand dehumanization, this essay examines Jarhead as a case study that challenges current ideologies of soldiers and their enemies. Using Kenneth Burkes concept of consubstantiality and Linda Hutcheons discussion of reflective oscillation, essay examines Jarhead as a case of rhetoric working to rehumanize enemies, thus providing an example of how film can work against war culture.

To better understand how individuals, groups, and organizations can use information systems more effectively, a research approach closer to the level of social interchange is required. A multiple-level, sustainable, information-technology (IT) learning framework, rooted in patterns of practice and constructed by participatory action research, offers an alternative methodology for investigating sustainable strategies of IT learning. The framework evolved from concrete instances of IT learning across organizational case studies. A patterns-based analysis of the ethnographic data enabled the examination of informal IT learning in community contexts and the identification of IT interventions more likely to produce successful learning outcomes.

How might the rhetorical strategies of ethos, pathos, logos, and kairos play a mediational, intervening role in the successful administration of online surveys? What are the general costs and benefits of conducting survey research? Based on the activity of administering an online survey ( <i xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">N</i> = 334) testing knowledge and understanding of US copyright law among digital writers (both students and teachers) in US technical and professional writing (TPW) programs, I blend Rhetorical Theory with Activity Theory by conducting a rhetorical analysis within an Activity Theory paradigm. I posit that a rhetorically informed heuristic mediates between the researcher and potential participants when the researcher attempts to recruit individuals to respond to an online survey.

Book Review| September 01 2010 Moving Bodies: Kenneth Burke at the Edges of Language Moving Bodies: Kenneth Burke at the Edges of Language. Debra Hawhee. Nathaniel Aaron Rivers Nathaniel Aaron Rivers Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Rhetoric and Public Affairs (2010) 13 (3): 519–522. https://doi.org/10.2307/41936468 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Nathaniel Aaron Rivers; Moving Bodies: Kenneth Burke at the Edges of Language. Rhetoric and Public Affairs 1 September 2010; 13 (3): 519–522. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/41936468 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 CollectiveMichigan State University PressRhetoric and Public Affairs Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2010 Michigan State University Board of Trustees2010 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

For different reasons, composition studies and creative writing have resisted one another. Despite a historically thin discourse about creative writing within College Compositionand Communication, the relationship now merits attention. The two fields’ common interest should link them in a richer, more coherent view of writing for each other, forstudents, and for policymakers. As digital tools and media expand the nature and circulation of texts, composition studies should pay more attention to craft and to composingtexts not created in response to rhetorical situations or for scholars.

EXISTENTIALIST LITERATURE is often referred to as a function of absurdity, alienation and nihilistic despair since the works of this genre are inhabited by unsavory protagonists and gloomy subject matter. The idea of existential dread often dominates our understanding of existentialism, and this is not only unfortunate, but terribly flawed. It is as if the decision to pick up and leaf through any novel by Franz Kafka or Simone de Beauvoir, Jean-Paul Sartre’s Nausea , Albert Camus’ The Stranger or Samuel Beckett’s play, Waiting For Godot , is not just an exercise in leisurely entertainment, but a statement about how one is feeling—and that feeling might be summed up, in the popular imagination, as meaninglessness. Viewed through a Burkean lens, however, one may re-consider existentialist literature as rhetorical acts that provoke the ontological difficulties with which persons negotiate their social environment equipped with only the resources of symbolic action. Instead of viewing this genre as advancing the desolate egoism of individual consciousnesses, applying the Burkean Parlor described in The Philosophy of Literary Form and Burke’s notion of the representative anecdote re-figure these works of fiction as animating a particular orientation and worldview—the point of which is to create a vocabulary that reflects, selects and deflects reality ( Grammar of Motives 59). Burke’s method of literary analysis suggests that literature should be organized “with reference to strategies ” in “active categories” ( Philosophy 303). By adopting Burke’s methodology to analyze existentialist literature, I’d like to move away from the popular reception of the genre and reveal its preoccupation with the ontological struggle of communication which fits squarely within Burke’s dramatistic notion of symbolic action. These works of fiction should not be evaluated aesthetically but as rhetorical acts whose purpose is to intensify the exigencies that arise in human interaction. In this essay I conceptualize the Burkean parlor as a representative anecdote for existentialism and then analyze two works of existentialist literature through a Burkean lens: Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot and Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Notes From the Underground . I’ve chosen these two works because Beckett and Dostoevsky did not write philosophical essays explicating existentialism to accompany their fiction—like Beauvoir, Camus, and Sartre—but instead sought to articulate the ontological tensions of symbolic action through the presentation of dramatic situations in literary form.

KENNETH BURKE IS undisputedly one of the most influential figures in the last century of rhetorical studies. His vast textual corpus has over time established the very bedrock and lexicon upon which much of the discipline has been built. Despite his death and the decades that have passed since his last major publications, Burke remains today a widely well regarded cultural critic and rhetorical theorist. The plainest evidence of Burke’s lasting influence in rhetorical studies is the rate at which he continues to be cited; between the 1970s and 1980s, the number of articles citing Burke nearly quadrupled (from 119 to 400), and this rate has continued to steadily increase since then (Rountree “By the Numbers”). For example, since 2008, far more articles have been published about or using Burke in Rhetoric Society Quarterly than any other rhetorical theorist or figure. 1 Burke is also the only rhetorical theorist to have his own journal. 2 I mention these data only to highlight Burke’s continued and lasting significance for rhetorical scholarship.

Scholarship addressing Burke’s ideas about acceptance and rejection frames is commonplace in modern academia. Often lost in the discussion, however, is the sheer power of Burke’s description of the comic frame. Using the first season of the American television program The Office as its object, this essay hopes to explore the implications of Burke’s vision of the comic for the modern, white-collar, corporate work environment. In highlighting Burke’s notion of comedy as essentially humane, it attempts to demonstrate, through The Office , the importance of this underlying attitude with regard to public discussion, debate, and critique. The essay highlights the tension between corporate tedium and financial necessity and grapples with the consequences of acceptance and rejection frames. It seeks to place to the attitude behind Burke’s notion of the comic at the forefront of public debate and offer a specific example of the relevance and power that such an attitude can possess.

The victimage ritual is a familiar concept to rhetorical scholars. Victimage, as understood by Kenneth Burke and Robert L. Ivie, is a curative rhetoric aimed at easing the guilt associated with symbolic life. By putting Friedrich Nietzsche's theory of the victimage ritual as enumerated in On the Genealogy of Morals in conversation with Burke and Ivie, this essay expands received wisdom by arguing that victimage in presidential rhetoric is often as much about prolonging resentment and guilt as it is at easing these emotions.

In this webtext, we discuss one powerful way that writing program administrators (WPAs) can start to reshape their basic rhetorical situation, potentially shifting the underlying premises that external audiences bring to discussions about writing instruction. We argue that digital video, when used strategically, is a particularly valuable medium for communicating how writing courses promote student learning.

4QMMT is one of only a few epistles among the Dead Sea Scrolls. It represents the Qumran community's effort to correct impure priestly practice in the Jerusalem Temple, so that when God descends in final judgment at the end of days, his Temple will not be defiled and Israelites will rejoice in their atonement rather than suffer for their wickedness. The authors of 4QMMT create identification by citing scriptural laws that would be commonly agreed upon. Yet they also create distinction by criticizing the Temple priests' incorrect interpretations of more ambiguous laws.

Peripatetic critic Demetrius has received little attention in rhetorical scholarship, but at the University of Chicago in the 1940s and 1950s, the use of On Style sparked debate among the English faculty, whose neo-Aristotelianism significantly articulated departmental direction. This tension centered on the use of the “forcible” style, and the subsequent debate gave rise to a faction of Chicago faculty who were sympathetic to the “New Rhetoric” of Kenneth Burke, who lectured there in 1949. This article demonstrates the significance of institutional context in the creation of critical positions, that these positions are often rhetorical responses to administrative, pedagogical, and political problems.

340 RHETORICA to be monitored by the community and that is balanced by an ethics, psy­ chology, and political theory emphasizing isolated, estranged, and restive individuals (pp. 142-45). The image of the modern Lockean individual that Vogt advances is that of the chastened explorer, conscious of the perils of the voyage of discovery undertaken with imperfect tools, but confident in his ability to overcome as yet unknown challenges. Vogt attempts to formulate a strong version of Lockean modernity in order to shed light on what he terms "the strong attack on Lockean modernity" that he perceives in the work of Burke, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche (p. 6). In those thinkers there is, for Vogt, a more precise pessimism. In their hands, Locke's nautical metaphors entail a much greater risk of disorientation. In this reading, the Burkean sublime is a chaste riposte to Locke's cheerful analogizing, a critique of even a figural empiricism's ability to deal with the measureless. Vogt reads the marine paintings of Caspar David Friedrich and J. M. W. Turner to undermine the notion that maritime life is a storehouse of figures that stand for challenges overcome. Many of the things that Vogt has to say with regard to this strong attack on the strong version of Lockean modernity are suggestive. But it is not clear that a monograph on Locke was the best place to explore these complex issues with the sustained attention that they deserve. David L. Marshall Kettering University Juliet Cummins and David Burchell (eds.), Science, Literature and Rhetoric in Early Modern England (Literary and Scientific Cultures of Early Modernity Series), Aldershot (England) and Burlington (Ver­ mont): Ashgate, 2007. 241 pp. ISBN: 9780754657811 The intent of this collection of essays is to "present new insights" about the "interaction of science, literature and rhetoric" in the development, reception, and dissemination of scientific knowledge in early modernity. The studies emanate from a symposium of scholars held at the University of Western Sydney, Australia. The editors promise in the introduction a wide angled book that will encompass the cultural, political, and social elements of the new science. This has been accomplished to a large degree, even if at times the treatment is a bit parochial in its regional view of science and narrow historical perspective. In addition, rhetoric, left undefined, permits a diffuse sense of the term, and a vague notion that it pervades discourse. But despite these shortcomings, the book offers a rich, lively, innovative collection of essays that illuminate selected literary texts of the period. Several of the essays stand out for their clarity and scholarship. Peter Harrison's "Truth, Utility, and the Natural Sciences in Early Modern Eng­ land" avoids parochialism in its treatment of changing opinions regarding Reviews 341 natural science vis a vis the humanities. Harrison begins his essay with Sir Philip Sidney's weighing of knowledge for its moral usefulness and his elevation of the particular as key to understanding the universal in "The Defence of Poesy. Earlier the studia }iu matiitutis had revamped education for its social and moral utility as well (p. 17). The essay, with apt illustrations from the writings of the virtuosi and their commentators, shows that a similar moral evaluation was being applied to the study of natural philosophy in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. The discipline was thought to aid in the development of virtue through the habits of careful study required of its practitioners. And it turned minds to regard the purpose of their labors as the betterment of mankind. Thus, the moral value of the philosophers' work eventually made the occupation socially acceptable, despite critics' ridicule of experiments performed at meetings of the Royal Society. With impressive erudition, David Burchell analyzes Hobbes' style and its debt to both Seneca and Cicero. His essay, '"A Plain Blunt Man'; Hobbes, Science, and Rhetoric Revisited," has only a tenuous connection to science, but it clarifies the relation of rhetoric to science in the period. Burchell successfully rebuts those who have claimed that Hobbes rejected rhetoric and adopted instead a "clear and perspicuous" style to foster better scientific debate. Burchell shows that Hobbes had, instead, a very broad knowledge of rhetoric and used different...

Abstract While traditional rhetoric missed opportunities for potent change in the New World, alternative rhetorical theory nonetheless existed. This essay argues that a play by renowned nun Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz is a source of protofeminist, New World rhetoric, prompted by multicultural seventeenth-century New Spain. Immensely respected by the dominant powers of Church and state, Sor Juana was also attuned to issues of nondominance because she was criolla and female. Her religiously orthodox Divine Narcissus is simultaneously a rhetoric of listening that rewrites classical rhetoric's focus on speaking within a community to attend to people at odds with one another. It highlights the need for Spaniards, criollas, and Mesoamericans to go beyond talking at one another, and instead listen with care. The Divine Narcissus is an important text in rhetorical theory, concerned with dominant and nondominant rhetors and audiences in early Mexican society. Notes 1See Merrim and Kirkpatrick on the echo; Stroud's Lacanian reading; Gonzalez, Granger-Carrasco, and Kirk on theology; and Merrim on narcissism. Like me, Ackerman emphasizes the theme of utterance and hearing voices, but stresses this as a means of encouraging an "interpretive devotion to Christ" (73). 2Work on rhetoric and listening is now being explored by rhetoricians such as Royster, Krista Ratcliffe (see "Cassandra," Rhetorical Listening), Michelle Ballif, and Gemma Fiumara. Wayne Booth is one of the few scholars to posit listening as an overlooked but traditional part of rhetoric. See also Cynthia Selfe's recent argument for composition studies to reclaim "aurality," "the reception and production of aural communications" (646, note 1). 3Naming indigenous groups is a fraught endeavor. Current scholarly practice favors using an ethnic group's name for itself when feasible; the specific group Sor Juana refers to here are the Mexica. I use Nahua (of which Mexica are a prominent subgroup) to refer to a wider group of Nahuatl speakers and their religious practices, and I use Mesoamerican as a general term for indigenous peoples of central Mexico and environs. While sensitive to the history of associating native with pejoratives like primitive, I use native as a neutral term for connoting indigenous inhabitants. 4For example, Flower suggests that in composition studies we teach students how to "speak up" and "speak against" but not "how to speak with others" (2). Her rhetoric of public engagement aims for intercultural dialogue in urban settings, often through "hybrid discourse" or nontraditional delivery (32). Ratcliffe investigates rhetorical listening as "a stance of openness that a person may choose to assume in cross-cultural exchanges" (Rhetorical Listening 1). Glenn examines how nondominant groups use silence, "as a rhetoric, a constellation of symbolic strategies" (xi). 5As an auto sacramental, The Divine Narcissus is a one-act play with a prefatory loa. While both are divided into scenes, the numbering of lines is consecutive throughout each respective unit, so my citations specify loa or auto and the line number only. This and subsequent citations from The Divine Narcissus (hereafter abbreviated DN in parenthetical citations) are from the first and only full English translation of the play, by Patricia Peters and Renée Domeier, now out of print. 6For poems in which Mesoamericans speak Nahuatl and Blacks speak their own dialect of Spanish and an African language, see Obras completas 2.14 (translated into English in Trueblood 125), 26, 39, 71, 94, and 138. Sor Juana's use of Nahuatl in these poems reflects a concern for native speakers that is also a rhetorical device, making parishioners feel the Church was also theirs. 7See Pratt's discussion of Guaman Poma's letter ("Arts"). 8Méndez Plancarte, one of the two twentieth-century editors of Sor Juana's collected works, argues against the possibility that this auto was used to explain doctrine or that it had a missionary goal of educating indigenous groups (Juana, OC 3.511). 9 Auto sacramental is a generic designation for a religious play that is often allegorical, and which typically during this period honored the Eucharist (Granger-Carrasco Ch. 1). 10Between 1691 and 1725, The Divine Narcissus was published in Spain several times in collections of Sor Juana's works. It was not reprinted again until 1924, in Mexico. 11Echo plays the part of "Angelic nature, fallen from grace." 12New Spain's literary scene was determined by Spain, where Narcissus was a "ubiquitous" literary presence from the fifteenth century on (Méndez Plancarte in Juana, OC 3.514). Both Méndez Plancarte and Paz aver that Sor Juana's play is not only different from but also far superior to Pedro Calderón de la Barca's play (Juana, OC 3.lxxiv; Paz 351). 14 Yo iré también, que me inclina la piedad a llegar (antes que tu furor lo embista) a convidarlos, de paz, a que mi culto reciban. I offer my own translation because Peters's and Domeier's is quite off the mark: "And I, in peace, will also go/(before your fury lays them low)/for justice must with mercy kiss;/I shall invite them to arise/from superstitious depths to faith." Sor Juana's Spanish is more generous. There is no mention of "superstitious depths"; both Nahua and Spanish religious practices are referred to as cultos (forms of worship; cf. Loa 95, 178). 13My reading contrasts with Gerard Flynn's: "All in all, her attitude towards the Conquest seems neutral. She shows no recrimination for Zeal, and yet the pagan Occident and America are not ugly…. Sor Juana assents to both that which is Spanish and that which is Indian. The Conquest happened, and she accepts it" (74). 15Octavio Paz views Sor Juana's works as crucial to the early formation of criollo identity. It is only recently, though, that Sor Juana's works have been classified as literature of Mexico, not Spain (Granger-Carrasco 15). 16A similar multiplicity of identity is what Gloria Anzaldúa capitalizes on in her twentieth-century rhetorical theory for Mexican Americans. 17The Requerimiento demands allegiance to the Church as supreme ruler, but also tells Mesoamericans that Spaniards "shall not compel you to turn Christians, unless you yourselves, when informed of the truth, should wish to be converted to our holy Catholic faith" (Washburn 308). 18It is this aspect of language that Moraña attributes to Sor Juana, claiming that her "rhetoric of silence" (the capacity for words to persuade beyond their overt reference) is affiliated with the sublime (176). 19Sor Juana seems to be conflating rituals that apply to two different Nahua gods, Huitzilopochtli (god of the seeds) and Quetzalcoatl (to whom human sacrifices were made) (Sabat de Rivers 290–291). 20The incident is quite possibly apocryphal, and at the very least, sculpted to resonate with the stories of St. Catherine of Alexandria and the young Jesus in Luke 2:46–47. 21"An attitude of complete receptivity, of openness to 'any view or hypothesis that a participant seriously wants to advance,' still puts a woman, I believe, in a dangerous stance," Susan Jarratt cautions, quoting Peter Elbow (117). 22"Why is the Devil a woman?," Merrim asks of the play, and reconciles the dilemma by finding parallels between Satan and Sor Juana, who must also dissimilate because divine authorities restrict her voice (114). 23In Spanish, the last line cited here (line 1300) reads, "Suene tu voz a mi oído": "Make your voice sound within my hearing." Sor Juana is playing upon verse 2.14 of the Song of Songs: "Let thy voice sound in my ears" (Douay-Rheims version). The English translation given by Peters and Domeier does not change the meaning, and the use of pour manages to allude to the fountain into which Narcissus gazes. Additional informationNotes on contributorsJulie A. Bokser Julie A. Bokser is Associate Professor in the Department of Writing, Rhetoric and Discourse at DePaul University, 802 W. Belden, Chicago, IL 60614, USA.

Let's begin by taking this title at its words. The dominant word is bodies. This word prompts us to locate our reading of Burke on acts of symbolism and language in the context of bodily experience...

Recently, scholars have argued that oral poetry helped lay the groundwork for the development of rhetorical theory and practice in archaic Greece. I propose that oral poetry played a similar role in archaic Israel. First, I describe the ritual and rhetorical contexts in which psalms were composed and performed in ancient Israel. Second, I analyze two psalms (Ps 22 and Ps 116) to show that treating the psalms as deliberative argument posed by Israelites to God can explain otherwise perplexing problems in interpretation and translation. Finally, I argue that positing an active locus for rhetoric in ancient Israelite culture raises interesting cross-cultural comparisons with ancient Athens regarding the striving for social status and public influence.

Deanna Sellnow's new textbook is Brummett-lite, equal parts rhetorical theory sampler and criticism handbook for popular culture. In both of these parts, it is a valuable book to teach from, with s...

IS KENNETH BURKE'S pentad actually a hexad? The answer is complicated. In the original edition of A Grammar of Motives , Burke discusses just five terms—act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose—as part of his dramatistic vocabulary for discerning human motivation. In fact, Burke likens these terms to five fingers on a hand (xxii; “The Study of Symbolic Action” 13-14). When elaborating the interrelationships of these concepts, Burke explores a separate term—“attitude”—that refers to one’s disposition to respond in a particular way to his or her circumstances. However, he classes attitude under either act, agent, or agency, rather than as a separate sixth term. Attitude, he says in Grammar , may be “the preparation for an act, which would make it a kind of symbolic act, or incipient act.” 3 As it may also be a “state of mind ,” attitude may “be classed under the head of agent ” ( Grammar 20). Additionally, Burke occasionally refers to attitude as a variation of agency ( Grammar 443; “Counter-Gridlock” 367; Attitudes 394; “Questions and Answers” 332). He reinforces his preference for a pentad in at least two other works. In The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences , he calls the pentad “incipiently a hexad” (446). In Dramatism and Development , he expresses some regret that he "had not turned the pentad into a hexad, with attitude as the sixth term. However, the Grammar contains a chapter that implicitly performs this very function. It is entitled ‘Incipient’ and ‘Delayed’ Action” (23). Despite these assertions, Burke's "hand" sprouts a sixth digit. In the 1969 edition of Grammar , he states, “I have sometimes added the term ‘attitude’ to the…five major terms” (443), thereby making the pentad a hexad. In 1984, he admits that, had his view of attitude been “clear” years ago, the “Pentad would have been a Hexad from the start” ( Attitudes 393-394). Burke’s oscillation has undoubtedly contributed to differing views of the hexad. For example, Trevor Melia embraces six terms, pointing out that attitude “was implicit in the pentad from the beginning” and maintaining further that, “were Burke writing the Grammar today [in 1989], he would treat the pentad as a hexad” (72, note 21). However, other scholars—among them Dana Anderson, Debra Hawhee, and Cheryl Tatano Beck—have performed significant scholarship highlighting attitude while working with only five terms, with attitudinal considerations being adequately included under act, agent, or agency.

In 1984 Kenneth Burke particpated in a panel discussion over the nature of dramatism, insisting that it was literally descriptive of human symbol-using, while some leading Burkeans on the panel insisted that dramatism was metaphorical. This essay revisits that controversy and argues that Burke consistently maintained that dramatism provides a universal heuristic of human motives.

Judge Roy Moore brought both condemnation and praise for his attempts to keep his Ten Commandments monument in the Alabama state courthouse building. This study examines the responses to Moore in light of Kenneth Burke’s poetic frames to suggest the existence and impact of simultaneous and contradictory frames. The frames of epic, comic, and burlesque are traced, and implications thereof for Moore’s situation and for Burkean frames.

THE ACADEMY (AND OUR DISCIPLINE) has a love for grand figures. Any type of work with social movements is often seen through and discussed in terms of leaders who are easy to identify, and therefore, easily work as metonymic figureheads for their respective organizations. The speaker in this situation becomes the embodiment of the social movement, and s/he (and the organization s/he represents) is judged by hir ability to speak in accordance with the classic concepts of oratorical performance. Inevitably, this model conjures up images of a leader crafting an oration for public consumption in an offstage space; some text carefully crafted by the individual speaker working alone until the appropriate time of its release. It is easy to imagine all rhetoric, and especially unorthodox or polemic rhetorics, working in this way since it is comforting—it allows rhetoricians to make the unfamiliar familiar by pressing unusual or discomforting rhetorics into a Quintilian-like model of public performance.

This article examines the claim that rhetoric declined precipitously, and perhaps even “died,” sometime in the late eighteenth or early nineteenth century. While various causes have been proposed for the presumed demise, the rise of both Romanticism and nationalism has been advanced as destructive of the rhetorical tradition. Nationalism, in particular, is said to be incompatible with rhetoric because it replaced an older, universal, Latinate culture and thus displaced the classical tradition of which rhetoric was a key part. Contrary to such claims, I argue that the rise of British nationalism certainly influenced rhetoric, but did so in ways that benefited the development of modern rhetoric in Britain. I argue further that classicism and nationalism functioned, not in opposition, but in concert, contributing to a resurgence of rhetoric, elocution, and oratory in Britain in the eighteenth century and beyond.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton is widely regarded as one of the most important women's rights orators of the nineteenth century. She is credited with opening new rhetorical spaces for women through brilliant rhetorical appeals. In her 1854 speech to the Legislature of New York, however, her brilliant rhetorical appeals were also appeals to the racist, classist, and paternalistic biases of her white male audience. A paradox of social reform is the need to simultaneously assert difference and sameness with the dominant classes, and Cady Stanton's efforts to negotiate this paradox ultimately reinforced the social hierarchy she hoped to undermine.

232 RHETORICA Christine Mason Sutherland, The Eloquence of Mary Astell, Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2005. xxi + 202pp. ISBN 1552381536; Jen­ nifer Richards and Alison Thorne, eds., Rhetoric, Women and Politics in Early Modern England, London and New York: Routledge, 2007. x + 254pp. ISBN 978-0-415-38527-5; Jennifer Richards, Rhetoric (The New Critical Idiom), London and New York: Routledge, 2008.198pp. ISBN 978-0-415-31436-7 If early modern men were educated to speak, then early modern women were educated (if at all) to be silent, and the three books under review add to the still growing pile in which modern feminist historians—educated, of course, to be highly articulate—try to negotiate this difficult and troubling fact. They do so in various ways. Christine Sutherland, for example, presents the learned and prolific Mary Astell (1666-1731) as a remarkable exception to the rule. As she is the first to admit, even those enlightened humanist figures who had argued for female education in the sixteenth century did not go so far as to allow women to speak in public or to argue in print. Rather, they endorsed a silence that was, in Sutherland's words, "the feminine equivalent of the masculine virtue of eloquence" (p. 18). In spite of this cultural discour­ agement, however, and a class position that offered her no privileges to speak of, Mary Astell devoted her life to writing—and publishing—a series of re­ ligious, philosophical, and political works. Sutherland's main justification in presenting her subject as above all else a "practising rhetorician" (p. 53) is her claim that, in the course of her writing career, Astell moved from the relatively private genre of sermo to the more public genre of contentio, these two literary modes being gendered as "feminine" and "masculine" respec­ tively. In terms of Astell's publications—which range from works published in the letter format (such as her—originally private—correspondence with John Norris, published anonymously as Letters Concerning the Love ofGod, or her Serious Proposal to the Ladies, addressed to high-ranking women) to what were effectively treatises addressed to a wider reading public (such as Some Reflections upon Marriage, The Christian Religion, or her political pamphlets), this is not particularly contentious. There are times, however, when I think Sutherland overstates her case. The fact, for example, that Astell adapts her style and tone according to her destined audience—developing a "tender" and "maternal" voice when addressing a specifically female readership, and a more strident, argumentative one for everyone else—certainly demon­ strates a sensitivity to and understanding of decorum on her part, but is not in itself the major contribution to rhetorical theory that is claimed for it. This book also shows a (sometimes explicit) tendency toward self-reflection: that is to say, what makes Astell so remarkable a figure—and the natural choice of subject for a book of this kind—seems to be precisely the wav in which she comes to exemplify the feminist writer (otherwise so absent from the early modern scene) and to mirror the feminist academic who is writing or reading about her. Thus Astell's correspondence with Norris, for Reviews 233 example, is said to be an experience of further education that we might compare with the modern graduate school" (p. 42), and to have the same qualities as most good tutorial relationships" (p. 48); the letter-writing that she cultivated was the early modern equivalent of publishing in "learned journals (p. xx, citing with approval an article by Judith Rice Henderson). In her political pamphlets Astell emerges as the model scholar who "had read all the relevant books and documents, had studied all the arguments, and above all was thoroughly familiar with the historical background" (p. 117). By the end of the book, Astell is presented as being of "benefit" to "modern feminist scholars" precisely because she is "one of the earliest of their kind" (p. 153). This is not in any way to diminish Astell's achievement, of course, but only to raise the concern that, in situations where the reader is invited to identify with the subject in hand, a degree of critical distance might be...

Abstract U.S. government agencies are collaborating with outside scholars to untangle disparate threads of knotty technoscientific issues, in part by integrating structured debating exercises into institutional decision-making processes such as intelligence assessment and public policy planning. These initiatives drive up demand for rhetoricians with skill and experience in what Protagoras called dissoi logoi—the practice of airing multiple sides of vexing questions for the purpose of stimulating critical thinking. In the contemporary milieu, dissoi logoi receives concrete expression in the tradition of intercollegiate switch-side debating, a form of structured argumentation categorized by some as a cultural technology with weighty ideological baggage. What exactly is that baggage, and how does it implicate plans to improve institutional decision making by drawing from rhetorical theory and expertise? Exploration of how switch-side debating meets demand-driven rhetoric of science not only sheds light on this question, but also contributes to the burgeoning scholarly literature on deliberative democracy, inform argumentation studies, and suggest new avenues of inquiry in rhetorical theory and practice.

The history of American imperialism, as well as China’s strong presence on the contemporary global scene, should encourage American scholars of rhetoric to look beyond the nation-state and study other rhetorical traditions such as Chinese practices of argument. A debate during the Western Han dynasty over the country’s economic policies illustrates how official-orators discursively engaged one another while representing various philosophical orientations. This debate also reminds us of how important the values of humanity, empathy, and responsibility should be in contemporary rhetorical education.

Identifying the specific complexities and historical context of post-Mao Chinese literary women’s rhetoric, along with ways they have been misread, the author argues in general that Western feminist critics need to be cautious about applying their concepts to non-Western women’s literature.

This essay interrogates the concept of “clarity” that has become an imperative of effective student writing. I show that clarity is neither axiomatic nor transparent, and that the clear/unclear binary that informs the identification of clarity as a goal of effective student writing is itself unstable precisely because of the ideological baggage that undergirds its construction. I make this argument by finding the traces of composition’s insistence on student writers’ clarity in the attacks on the writing of critical theorists.

In 2003, the U.S. Air University published “The Role of Rhetorical Theory in Military Intelligence Analysis: A Soldier’s Guide to Rhetorical Theory” written by Air Force Major Gary H. Mills. In this essay, Mills argues that the rhetorical theory of French historian and philosopher Michel Foucault “serves as a powerful military-intelligence force multiplier.” Foucault is described by Mills as a “reluctant, unintentional military tactician.” Likening Foucault’s rhetorical theory to a weapon used by a combat force might strike rhetorical and critical scholars as bizarre given Foucault’s theoretical and political project. Therefore, in this essay, I attempt to understand the meaning and accuracy of Major Mills’s claim, as well as consider the broader implications of Foucault’s rhetorical theory in relation to U.S. intelligence and national security organizing.

This essay critiques and creates metaphoric genetic rhetoric by examining metaphors for genes used by representatives of the lay American public. We assess these metaphors with a new rhetorical orientation that we developed by building onto work by Robert Ivie and social scientific qualitative studies of audiences. Specifically, our analysis reveals three themes of genetic metaphors, with the first two appearing most frequently: 1) genes as a disease or problem 2) genes as fire or bomb, and 3) genes as gambling. We not only discuss the problems and untapped potential of these metaphors, but also we suggest metaphorically understanding genes interacting with the environment as a dance or a band. This essay has implications for rhetorical criticism, science studies, and public health.

This article argues that the conceptualization of the notions of character and characterization in ancient rhetorical treatises can serve as a hermeneutical tool for the analysis of characterization in narrative literature. It offers an analysis of ancient rhetorical loci and techniques of character depiction and points out that ancient rhetorical theory discusses direct, metaphorical, and metonymical techniques of characterization. Ultimately, it provides the modern scholar with a paradigm for the analysis of characterization in (ancient) narrative literature.

This article examines the disappearance of the student as a site for theoretical investigation. It considers the ramifications of this development for the disciplinary self-identification of composition studies and for a larger understanding of pedagogy as self-reflexive praxis.

Research Article| January 01 2010 The Brussels School of Rhetoric:From the New Rhetoric to Problematology Michel Meyer Michel Meyer University of Brussels mimeyer@ulb.ac.be Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Philosophy & Rhetoric (2010) 43 (4): 403–429. https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.43.4.0403 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Michel Meyer; The Brussels School of Rhetoric:From the New Rhetoric to Problematology. Philosophy & Rhetoric 1 January 2010; 43 (4): 403–429. doi: https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.43.4.0403 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 The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2010 The Pennsylvania State University. All rights reserved.2010The Pennsylvania State University Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Research Article| January 01 2010 A Bibliography of the New Rhetoric Project David A. Frank; David A. Frank Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google William Driscoll William Driscoll Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Philosophy & Rhetoric (2010) 43 (4): 449–466. https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.43.4.0449 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation David A. Frank, William Driscoll; A Bibliography of the New Rhetoric Project. Philosophy & Rhetoric 1 January 2010; 43 (4): 449–466. doi: https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.43.4.0449 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 The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2010 The Pennsylvania State University. All rights reserved.2010The Pennsylvania State University Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

While scholars have begun to write a history of reports and instructions, little scholarship exists on the history of proposals. To fill this gap, I analyze proposals written by Dorothy Wordsworth and Anne Macvicar Grant, ca. 1800. My analysis uses contemporary rhetorical theory to determine how they structured their writing and incorporated rhetorical appeals to achieve their goals. My findings show that their texts should be placed on a continuum of the history and development of the proposal genre. Further findings suggest that their use of contemporary rhetorical theories authorized Wordsworth's and Grant's discourse to successfully affect change.

In her essay "Collaboration, Control, and the Idea of a Writing Center," Andrea Lunsford offers a much-needed critique of the traditional "garret" and "storehouse" models for writing center instruction, and she argues for a collaborative model in which students work together in groups to discuss, question, write, and revise.In contrast to the storehouse and garret models that reinscribe rigidly authoritarian or naively libertarian beliefs about language use, this collaborative model dramatizes the "triangulation" or "dialogism" that theorists such as Donald Davidson, Mikhail Bakhtin, and Ann Berthoff place at the heart of composing: as students seek to join in a conversation that precedes and takes place around them, as they seek to understand, complicate, and communicate their perceptions with and through others.In the collaborative writing center, Lunsford writes, students learn how knowledge and reality are "mediated by or constructed through language in social use . . . the product of collaboration" (4).Through collaboration, Kenneth Bruffee writes, students come to internalize those social conversations; they develop "reflective thought" and learn to play "silently, in imagination, the parts of all the participants in the conversation" as they write and reflect (5).While these aims of collaborative learning are ones I enthusiastically support, I find myself resisting jumping on the "collaboration bandwagon" (Lunsford 4) if by collaboration we mean only and always peer-group writing and response or conversation with another person.Peer groups can produce discussion, negotiation,