<HTML><HEAD> <META charset=US-ASCII http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"> <DIV> <DIV> <DIV>Recent (brilliant and unapologetically Marxist) work by Dana L. Cloud, and less recent work by Phillip Wander and others, kind of lays to rest the pure speaker-audience transactional model, and even places Lloyd Bitzer's "rhetorical situation" in a decidedly more materialist framework.  Few rhetorical theorists today think they can ignore Herman and Chomsky's propaganda model, Marx, or Gramsci.  There are some neo-Aristotelians left, but they're in short supply.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Kenneth Burke, of course, was a card-carrying communist before McCarthyism forced him to turn his theoretical work towards "dramatism" and other much less radical-sounding paradigms.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Probably the most important article on the ideological turn in rhetorical criticism is Wander's "The Ideological Turn in Modern Criticism," Central States Speech Journal 34 (Spring 1983): 1-18.  Wander refutes both neo-Aristotelianism and postmodern criticism in that article.  Most good rhetorical critics today think we have a responsibility to point out the lies of those in power, even if that forces us into a problematic (but very defensible) ontological dualism.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>stannard</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In a message dated 11/27/2004 12:14:08 PM Mountain Standard Time, furuhashi.1@osu.edu writes:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT face=Arial>Carrol wrote:<BR>>But in this post I'm going to assume that in most, perhaps all, uses <BR>>of the term (not just on this list but by, e.g., Kenneth Burke, <BR>>Deirdre McCloskey, or Wayne Booth) its original senses still operate <BR>>powerfully -- and all those original uses of the term (Aristotle, <BR>>Cicero, Quintilian, Renaissance rhetoricians) make two assumptions: <BR>>(a) that speaker (usually speaker, not writer) and listener <BR>>(audience rather than readership) directly confront each other in a <BR>>framework agreeable to both (e.g., a parliament) and (b) that there <BR>>is _almost_ complete agreement on all the important issues between <BR>>speaker and listener. The "almost" is of great importance, for the <BR>>difference is of course the reason for speaking; but the "[nearly] <BR>>complete agreement" is the context within which the persuasion <BR>>proceeds. The whole of the art is directed to demonstrating that <BR>>this large shared agreement dictates that the speaker's position on <BR>>the small area of disagreement should prevail.<BR><BR>In other words, rhetoric is about narrowcasting, rather than <BR>broadcasting.  Think about each rhetorical situation* first of all, <BR>and then present the ethos, pathos, and logos of your persuasion <BR>accordingly.<BR><BR>* <blockquote>Some elements of the rhetorical situation include:<BR><BR>1. Exigence: What happens or fails to happen? Why is one compelled to <BR>speak out?<BR>2. Persons: Who is involved in the exigence and what roles do they play?<BR>3. Relations: What are the relationships, especially the differences <BR>in power, between the persons involved?<BR>4. Location: Where is the site of discourse? e.g. a podium, <BR>newspaper, web page, etc.<BR>5. Speaker: Who is compelled to speak or write?<BR>6. Audience: Who does the speaker address and why?<BR>7. Method: How does the speaker choose to address the audience?<BR>8. Institutions: What are the rules of the game <BR>surrounding/constraining numbers 1 through 7.<BR><BR><http://rhetorica.net/kairos.htm></blockquote></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <DIV></DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"><I>I wear the black for the poor and the beaten down,<BR>Livin' in the hopeless, hungry side of town,<BR>I wear it for the prisoner who has long paid for his crime,<BR>But is there because he's a victim of the times. - Johnny Cash, Man in Black</I><BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>