It's funny to realize that while I enjoy going round and round on a topic in active discussion, gaining new insight and ideas, I have the hardest time staying interested in recorded conversation - until I actually realized that this was what Cicero was doing. Phaedrus had been very easy to read for me because of the conversation style.
De Oratore touched on many different points that he has deemed important to rhetoric; points that continually circle back to the main topic - and it did feel that way, as though everything kept being repeated in a different manner of speaking. Since the idea that I have in my mind of rhetoric and the classical idea of rhetoric that we have been studying currently seem to differ so much, I was very happy to find this passage:
"But the truth is that this oratory is a greater thing, and has its sources in more arts and branches of study, than people suppose." (Cicero, 291)
While he is speaking directly about oratory in this passage, the idea extends directly into how I feel about rhetoric: that if the time is taken to peel back the different layers of vision aimed at all different walks of life, you will be able to see how it finds it's way into each of them. And I'm starting to see if it in my own day-to-day doings.
I think it's also interesting how we find these philosophers and thinkers in all different aspects of society; how Aristotle is considered not only the "Father" of rhetoric but of science, humanities, all sorts of things; I also wonder why it was him - why he was in such a position to be one of the greatest thinkers of classical history.
ReplyDeleteI also appreciated how this was a dialogue, too - I think it makes it more interesting in terms not only of the subject that they're discussing, because you get all different sides and new ideas, but also because it crosses the line of being fictional, so we can kind of take each character as an archetype for different philosophies at the time, or really hone in on the problem that Cicero was trying to discuss. While the ambiguity is tough, it's almost as if Cicero wants the reader to "do his own digging, and find what he [wants]" (327).
Well put! Rhetoric is everywhere. It is dynamic and adjusts to different disciplines and different situations. Where is the rhetoric in txt (not a typo)? What happens if we think about rhetoric from the perspective of the orator, that is the well-spoken user of language and apply it to SMS messaging? My little brother lives on his phone and his texts all look the same (as in, there is a clear consistency to the structure of his texts). He uses txt as a language and when he types on his virtual qwerty keyboard, his fingers move like lightening. The messages have the appearance of sloppy inconsistency, but it is clear that this new language is a form of shorthand in which all types of conversations take place. I would say that as an orator in txt, my little brother is a good rhetor... imho.
ReplyDelete