Bitzer indicates in several places within the text that he believes that a rhetorical situation is almost quintessential to providing an opening to involve rhetoric. For example, he states, “the situation is the source and ground of rhetorical activity.” (pg. 6) Would you build a house without a foundation? Wouldn’t a house without a foundation be as pointless as rhetorical writing without a rhetorical situation to be borne from? The author indicates that there are three essential parts to provoke a rhetorical response, which are exigence, audience, and constraints. He hints at other parts and conditions of providing a rhetorical response, but these three are illustrated as completely necessary. Although Bitzer discusses the rhetorical situation at length, he shies away from directly defining rhetoric. Despite his avoidance, he defines rhetoric quite inadvertently, referring to a “body of rhetorical literature” including (but not limited to) The Gettysburg Address, Socrates’ Apology, and Burke’s Speech to the Electors of Bristol. Why does he indicate these bodies of text are somehow different from the insurmountable sea of writing that permeates our culture? Because it is “in some measure universal.” (pg. 13) …show more content…
Rhetoric is a method of expressing an argument, or intending to begin a dialogue through persuasive means. I must admit that I have never been quite clear on the exact definition of rhetoric, since it seems to vary and flux depending on who you ask. I am pleased we began with this reading, because Bitzer provides the clearest answer I’ve ever read—which is simultaneously concerning, because it seems to me that he dances quite a bit around the
A Rhetorical Analysis of Lockdown by Evans D. Hopkins. According to the Webster Dictionary, rhetoric is defined as the art of speaking or writing effectively. Rhetoric is made up of three separate appeals that can be used individually or collectively in an attempt to persuade a reader. Ethos is the credibility and qualifications of the speaker or author.
Looking at the readings by Bitzer, Vatz, Morey, and Edbauer-Rice, we can see a connection in some way to each other. First, in Bitzer, we are told that the “situation influences the rhetoric” and that “rhetorical situations must exist as a necessary condition of rhetorical discourse,” (Bitzer 5). But when looking at Vatz, he tells us the direct opposite, that “rhetoric influences the situation” (Vatz 159????) and “meaning is not discovered in situation but created by rhetors” (Vatz 157). Basically, Vatz is telling the audience that “rhetors are responsible for what they choose to make salient,” (Vatz 158) instead of merely being a “reflector of reality,” (Vatz 158). As we continue through the readings, we begin to notice an expansion on ideas, where we can see a similarity in ideas between Bitzer and Morey. Morey expands on Bitzer by first, introducing the original rhetorical triangle, which includes rhetor, artifact, and audience (all three of which as seen in Bitzer) and elaborates on this triangle to make it a tetrahedron. In this tetrahedron, he adds design, medium, and genre to...
Heinrichs had previously worked as a journalist before becoming a full time writer and advocate for rhetoric. He utilizes illustrative examples to convey rhetorical concepts. Furthermore, chapter four reveals the most valuable logos and pathos tactic. Lastly, this book’s use should be continued in this course.
A rhetorical situation can be found in every composition since it serves as the foundation. To further provide evidence towards my claims about the function of the rhetorical situation, I will analyze how three different compositions were influenced by the rhetorical situation.
Lloyd F. Bitzer’s article, “The Rhetorical Situation”, is an account of what he calls the “rhetorical situation” as what he believes to be the conditions necessary for compelling a rhetorician to engage in rhetoric (35). It is Bitzer’s position that a work of rhetoric comes into existence as a response to the call of a certain state of affairs in the world (32). Furthermore, Bitzer claims that when we find ourselves in such “situations”, we are compelled to engage in rhetoric in order to restore the balance that we find lacking (34). He identifies three interconnected elements of situational rhetoric: exigence, audience, and constraints (35). Bitzer argues that a rhetorical discourse, which consists of an engagement with an audience for the purpose of compelling that audience to modify the world so as to repair the problem which is presented (35), is required to solve the problem as the world presents it (34). This lack of balance in a rhetorical situation or state of affairs in the world leads to what Bitzer calls exigence, which he defines as “an imperfection marked by urgency” (36). Bitzer also expands on the notion of a rhetorical audience, which is central to his theory of situational rhetoric. Bitzer defines a rhetorical audience as persons who, through discourse, are subject to influence and as persons who can be compelled to bring about the change called for by a rhetorical situation (37). Bitzer also identifies constraints as being a vital component to his theory, which he defines as anything within the rhetorical situation which has the power to “constrain decision” (38).
discussed the rhetorical skills in the writing styles and analysis. The main components of this learning was to be able to differentiate and understand the ethos, logos, and pathos appeals associated with the particular feeling and help develop understanding. Using the ethos, logos, and pathos appeals the writers and speakers can convince their readers to some image or understanding regarding the group or association. Every one of us is associated with different discourse communities that have different specialties and meaning. Everyone must have to learn the ways the communities interact with their members and how the communities understand a person from outside the community. Being outside from the community there is need to learn regarding
In The Rhetorical Situation, Lloyd F. Bitzer argues that what makes a situation rhetorical is similar to that which constitutes a moral action as he writes that, “an act is moral because it is an act performed in a situation of a certain kind; similarly, a work is rhetorical because it is a response to a situation of a certain kind”.(3) By defining the rhetorical situation in this way, Bitzer further contends that rhetoric is a means to altering reality. (4) It is through the use of discourse that one is capable of changing reality through thought and action. (4) Bitzer then elaborates upon the nature of a rhetorical situation by explaining that rhetorical discourse enters a situation when: providing a response to its state of affairs; rhetorical discourse is given significant presence by the situation; the situation exists as a necessary condition for rhetorical discourse to have effect; a rhetorical situation or event may mature or decay over time; the rhetorical situation invites the use of discourse to alter its reality; the rhetorical response given to the situation is appropriate; and the situation controls the response of the discourse. While Bitzer notes that these are parameters for a situation to qualify as being rhetorical, he further discusses three constituents that are present in any rhetorical situation prior to the presence and manipulation of discourse. (6) Exigence, audience, and constraints are seen to be necessary elements in a rhetorical situation for Bitzer. Exegince, “is an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be undone, a thing which is other than it should be”. (6) An audience whose members may function as mediators of change is required, as rhetoric alw...
The question of what is rhetoric and what does it do has been a question since stories were even being recorded. However, now there are multiply different scholars who believe that they understand what rhetoric is and how to use it. For someone to use rhetoric correctly they must first have a definition of rhetoric that either they have made to fit themselves or they find a previous definition that suits them. In order for me to become an improved rhetor and be able to rhetorical discuss and evaluate pieces of literature or speeches like General Douglas MacArthur’s Farewell address, I must first define rhetoric in how I understand it. Rhetoric is the art of persuasive speaking aimed to sway your audience in a direction that has been chosen by the rhetor. The way in which a citizen uses rhetoric can change over time. The need to argue the same problem is invalid so the need to use the same rhetorical situations is invalid. You can use rhetoric in a multitude of different areas within our life however; we must choose to use it for good or for evil. In order for rhetoric to still be used in speech today one of two things must be true. There must either be a Truth in life and rhetoric or the more likely choice, that rhetoric changes throughout time and situations. You are not trying to change someone’s mind about something however; you are trying to convince them that you are also correct. I will be using multiple pieces of works that are defining rhetoric to support my definition and finish by evaluating General Douglas MacArthur’s Farewell Address using my definition of rhetoric.
A rhetorical analysis can be defined as the breakdown of components used to make a persuasive argument or judgment on a particular subject or topic. The ability to make a conclusion or decision on a given thought or idea in a moment of seconds is a result of rhetorical analysis. “Because media rhetoric surrounds us, it is important to understand how rhetoric works. If we refuse to stop and think about how and why it persuades us, we can become mindless consumers who buy into arguments about what makes us value ourselves and what makes us happy”. In Carroll’s essay “Backpacks Vs.
In this essay, I will be analyzing the Traditional method of rhetorical criticism and the Narrative method of rhetorical criticism.
Rhetoric is the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, and its uses the figures of speech and other compositional techniques. It’s designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience.
In the story, What is Rhetoric by William Covino and David Jolliffe, there are a wide variety of topics discussed that are inextricably interwoven with the concept “rhetoric.” Rhetoric, as defined by the authors, is “the study and practice of shaping content.” Consequently, my first thought was: Ok, this is a rather broad and opaque description; my successive thought, however, was one of astonishment, inasmuch as the authors went on to further elucidated this jargon. In doing so, the authors distilled the most crucial elements of what is rhetoric— the prevalence of discourse community, and how appealing language is often a precursor to persuasion.
The author’s main argument in “Rhetoric: Making Sense of Human Interaction and Meaning-Making” is that rhetoric does not need to be complicated if writers incorporate certain elements to their writing. Downs further analyzed the elements that contribute to rhetoric such as symbols and signals, motivation, emotion, ecology, reasoning and identification. The author emphasized that writers can learn how to deliver their writing effectively once they are more aware on how rhetoric works. Downs constantly assures that rhetoric is quite simple and does not need to provoke fuzziness. Even though the term rhetorical is applied to everything, the author of the article made it clear that the “rhetorical” thing is situated. The example provided by the author in this article, further guides our understanding on what rhetoric
Clark (2016) suggests that rhetoric isn’t limited to oral communication, but currently has a permanent foothold in written works: magazine or newspaper excerpts, novels, and scientific reports. Not only written
Rhetoric is the art of effective speaking or writing, and persuasion. Most people use rhetoric numerous of times in their everyday life without their concern or knowing.