Response to 2/25 Readings

The four articles we have read this week vary widely in the time periods they discuss, some focus on ancient and post-Civil War rhetoric, some are contemporary, and others talk about both. Many of the articles focus on how composition and rhetoric was taught in the past, and how they have both changed and still affects our programs today.

The Rise and Fall of the Modes of Discourse
Robert J. Connors
Robert J Connors’ essay “The Rise and Fall of the Modes of Discourse” gives a thorough history of a method of teaching composition that was popular for many years. This method involved teaching students “modes”, listed as Narration, Description, Exposition, and Argument. Although these modes were in existence before George Campbell and Alexander Bain wrote about them, most short histories accredit them to these authors.

Although these modes weren’t especially useful, they were immensely popular for many decades. Connors points out that "a fascination with categories […] became one of the hallmarks of the rigidly formalized rhetoric of the late nineteenth century." (Connors 445) Other reasons that these classifications became widely popular include the fact that Bain used them to organize his book. The changing atmosphere of education was another reason for their popularity.
Bain classified his modes in the following way Description, Narration and Exposition (have the objective of informing), and Persuasion (the means of influencing the will). Different authors gave the four modes various names, but all seemed to place persuasion on the lowest rung. For many decades the modes reigned supreme, but as both culture and composition changed (another author mentions that changes in culture and rhetoric usually go hand in hand), the fall of the modes was imminent.

The various modes were delegated to numerous departments, narration and description to creative writing, and argumentation went to the Speech department. Exposition remained a staple in composition courses.

My favorite two quotes from Connor's paper would have to be "The weakness of the modes of discourse as a practical tool in the writing class was that they did not really help students to learn to write" (Connor 454) and "For years the fact that this schema did not help students learn to write better was not a concern […] we need always to be on guard against systems that seem convenient to teachers but that ignore the way writing is actually done" (Connor 455) Although it may seem that he is stating the obvious, it is important to remember that what is “good” (or easy) for the instructor is not always in the student’s best interest.


Current- Traditional Rhetoric
James Berlin
In this chapter, Berlin outlines the changes in rhetoric that occurred after the Civil War. Both rhetoric and colleges in general were facing new changes, instead of the old aristocratic model, "[t]he new college was to serve the middle class, was to become an agent of upward social mobility" (Berlin 60) Much like Connor's article, Berlin discusses the different modes in composition. Persuasion is removed from composition, as it is assumed that one can only use persuasion in oratory acts.
A part that I found very relevant to contemporary issues is that of the pressure on secondary schools to better prepare students for college. I especially like the quote "[a]s has become the custom in America during such tempests, the schools were ordered to do a better job, but were given neither the money nor the techniques to do so." (Berlin 61) This reminds me of the current controversy over the "No Child Left Behind" act, which holds schools to increased standards, but provides little or no additional funds to help achieve this.
Much like Connor's article, Berlin discusses the different modes in composition. Persuasion is removed from composition, as it is assumed that one can only use persuasion in oratory acts.


Introduction Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student
Edward Corbett
I really enjoyed Corbett's use of both modern and ancient examples. By using an advertisement to illustrate rhetorical analysis, Corbett is providing an example that modern students will be familiar with. Corbett segues from this into an analysis of Odysseus' plea to Achilles in The Iliad. I liked this segment of his chapter, and Corbett does an excellent job providing contemporary examples of the methods both Odysseys and Achilles employ.

Corbett spends the majority of this chapter discussing the five cannons of rhetoric.
Inventio literally means invention or discover. It is the act of finding an argument that will support the speaker's case. According to Aristotle, there are two types of persuasion that can be used, the non-artistic and the artistic. The artistic proof includes rational, emotional and ethical appeal. Once again, I found these ways of classification still relevant to modern rhetoric, although they have more recently been delegated to the realm of philosophy classes.
Dispotio deals with the arrangement of an argument, which involves methods still used today; I’m sure we all remember the five paragraph essays assigned in high school.
Elocutio means style; the following paragraphs on it are somewhat vague. I did like the three levels of style discussed, especially since the words are all cognates of modern day terms such as mediocre and subtle.
Memoria is the act of memorizing speeches, and much like the books Corbett discusses, he gives it little attention.
Much like memoria, pronuntiatio is neglected in its description, even though it is one of the most important aspects of oration.

The Basic Aims of Discourse
James L. Kinneavy

Without his handy diagrams, I probably wouldn’t have found Kinneavy’s essay quite as enlightening as I did. As it stands, Kinneavy, much like Corbett, does a fantastic job tying together ancient and contemporary theories of rhetoric. I think Kinneavy effectively draws from numerous academic fields (such as linguistics and psychology).

Although I agreed with most of Kinneavy’s examples and statements concerning the peril when only one form of rhetoric is taught at the expense of other, I found one of his statements to be condescending and unfounded, until I realized the time period in which he had written the article. “[T]he neglect of expressionism, as a reaction to progressive education, has stifled self-expression in the student and partially, at least, is a cause of the unorthodox and extreme forms of deviant self-expression now indulged in by college students on many campuses today” (Kinneavy 137)

I was irritated at this sentence, until I saw the date of publication, December 1969. If this had been a more recent article, I would have pointed out that college students have been engaging in “deviant self-expression” for many decades, but as one can make the argument that this time period was the beginning of this trend, I decided against it. I am interested to see how my other classmates reacted to this segment of the article, especially those who were alive during this time period.