Condon
Due November 4, 2014
Read v. Memorization
When first learning the
beginning principles and history of rhetoric, it was made very clear
that all of the speeches were memorized and spoken. None of the
speeches were written down ahead of time. It was a reality that I
brushed off because it would never be relevant to me. How wrong I
was. In the imitatios assignment, I quickly learned that memorizing
and delivering a speech with passion is seemingly vital in the
practice of rhetoric. Coming from a background in acting, it has also
been my reality that speeches in which the tone and intention are
made very clear to the audience are the speeches (monologues) that
are most memorable—thus more effective.
In the lens exploring what is
effective in modern rhetoric, it is important to understand how
rhetoric was practiced in the past as well as the methods in which
rhetoric is practiced now. The main difference being that rhetoric
has moved from being a solely oral tradition to one where people pen
their thoughts before reading them aloud. Some problems have arisen
from this matter. Audiences lose attention towards what is being said
because it is not being said in a way that makes an audience
interested. The original well-intentioned penned words have lost
their meaning. Writing a speech and not putting the effort into
making it accessible for those who listen to it, now has modern
orators losing a main rhetorical device—pathos.
In modern day rhetoric, pathos
is becoming more important because attention span is getting smaller
and the public is being bombarded with a lot more speeches and a lot
more opinions. All of these speeches have been first written and then
spoken though. In order for one to stand out in this busy world, it
is important to consider old practices of rhetoric.
I cannot suggest that people go
back to the ways of old rhetoric—but I am asking for people to
consider it. Consider that people are constantly bombarded with facts
and logic by seemingly ethical people. The speeches and campaigns
that make an audience the most motivated are the ones that play to an
audiences emotions. As the class learned through the imitatios
assignment, we wanted to listen to the people who were the most
passionate about what they had to say. The person who looked the most
passionate was the one that had their speech memorized and wasn't
reading off of a piece of paper. That piece of paper acted as almost
a security blanket for the others that were reading.
I have always thought that
theatre and rhetoric have a lot in common. There is a sort of
performance factor involved. In fact Aristotle, a famous rhetorician,
has written about the the different aspects that make up dramas and
how effective they are and the order in which the importance should
be considered. The modern day perspective on Aristotle's views of
theatre still remain true to the source. The order of importance in
which people judge drama goes as such: character, plot, language
music, spectacle. This is something very important to consider in a
rhetoric frame of mind. What is important out of that list is that
character is considered more important than the plot. If this shows
where society places its values then that means that society cares
about the people then it does the issue itself. They care about a
rhetors ethos and they care about the ways in which they use pathos.
Yet, in modern-day rhetoric, rhetors only seem to care about the
logic—when that may not be the aspect that convinces crowds to give
and show support.
In acting, we use something
called the three circles to simplify the three modes of life in which
people usually live. The first circle is the one were people are the
most closed off and shy and not as willing to take in other people.
The second circle, is the one in which people are the most open to
others and the third circle is the one where people are so confident
that they almost steam roll over others. When watching everyone in
class have their piece of paper in front of them, reading off of it,
it was like they were closed off. The people reading off of their
pieces of paper were in first circle and the person who was memorized
was in second. As an audience we felt like we could relate to the
person who was looking directly at us and holding us accountable with
their eyes versus the other people who essentially hid behind their
pieces of paper. When a rhetor is without the penned word—they are
more likely to be received well by an audience.
I also am earning a major in
communications. I am currently taking a class called writing in
communications. In the class we practice writing for broadcast news
and there are all of these ways to write the text so that the person
on the screen will read them properly. I think this is interesting
because in the book Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students
by Crowley and Hawhee, there is a section that explains that
punctuation wasn't originally used in Greek culture—everything was
written in one long stream. Punctuation was first used when teachers
were trying to teach students how to read aloud. In my communications
class, when we write for the news broadcasters, it is a common rule
to write using lots of punctuation.
The
text written by Crowley and Hawhee also gives a description for
usages of certain punctuation that would make it easier for a rhetor
reading off of a piece of paper to give. These are suggestions and
descriptions of puctuation are also used the news broadcasting world.
As well as using different types of types style like, plain, bold,
italic, outline and shadow, news broadcasters also use other types of
punctuation in unconventional ways. In the book, Reporting for the
Media by Bender these ways include using a dash when one wants the
speaker to pause. Where in writing a dash can be used as a visual
emphasis. Certain syllables in the middle of words will be
capitalized—to show which syllables deserve emphasis.
The
text written by Crowley and Hawhee makes the observation that “it
seems to us that practitioners of modern rhetoric sometimes forget
the rhetoric of punctuation in favor of rules about sentence
structure.” This is something incredibly important to consider,
with the development of writing and using writing in the practice of
rhetoric, although punctuation is helpful, it may also be a
hindrance. The aspect of punctuation in modern-day rhetoric, not
helping is interesting to consider. We have used punctuation our
entire lives in writing, so why question it. Yet, when we talk we
don't use punctuation, and these speeches are being delivered aloud.
As
writing is used in rhetoric, it is also important to consider, that
when writing people don't always use the language that they would use
when speaking. In the written word people have more time to think
about the best way and most efficient way that something can be
written. Yet, an audience doesn't always want to hear what is best
and efficient. An audience is more perceptive to something that is
relatable, and people don't always speak in the best and most
efficient ways.
Using the written word in
rhetoric makes it a lot harder to pull an audience in but it is not
impossible. A modern-day rhetor needs to be more intentional about
memorizing and finding those parts of a speech that are the most
important. The written word takes away from the naturalistic side—but
the facts that are written adds more assurance to the orator. The
naturalistic side can be practiced and when the written word is used.
As speeches are successful, the pathos is prevalent.
Works
Cited
Aristotle.
"The Internet Classics Archive | Poetics by Aristotle." The
Internet Classics Archive | Poetics by Aristotle. Trans. S. H.
Butcher. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Nov. 2014.
Bender,
John R., Lucinda D. Davenport, Michael W. Drager, and Fred
Fedler. Reporting for the Media. New York: Oxford UP,
2009. Print.
Crowley,
Sharon, and Debra Hawhee. Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary
Students. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1999. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment