Neo Aristotelian Criticism PDF

Preview

Summary

USU Rylish Moeller...

Description

Neo-Aristotelian Criticism 

Wichelns suggested that a critic should deal with these elements: The speaker's personality, the public character of the speaker or the public's perception of the speaker, the audience, the major ideas presented in the speech, the motives to which the speaker appealed, the nature of the speaker's proofs, the speaker's judgment of human nature in the audience, the arrangement of the speech, the speaker's mode of expression, the speaker's method of speech preparation, the manner of delivery, and the effect of the discourse on the immediate audience and its long-term effects Critics of neo-aristotelianism suggested, rhetorical principles have undergone change since their formation in classical Greek and roman times, and later cultures have modified or extended those principles Today, critics who use the neo-Aristotelian approach to analyze rhetoric are few, and essays that feature the method rarely find their way into the journals and convention programs of the communication field.

o





Procedures for Neo-Aristotelian method of criticism 1. o o o

2. o

Selecting an Artifact Method was designed for speeches Selecting a discursive text rather than an entirely visual one will maximize the insights your criticism procedures Select a rhetor which some biographical information is available Analyzing the artifact 3 basic steps: 1. Reconstructing the context 1. 3 major components of the context are: a. the rhetor i. Study the individual and discover links between the rhetoric produced and the rhetor's history, experience, and character b. the occasion i. Study how the rhetorical act is affected by factors in the occasion ii. Determine the elements in the occasion that influence the rhetor in choice of subject and approach or the peculiar demands of the time and place c. the audience i. Knowing the audience, then, helps you understand why the rhetor selected particular strategies. ii. Position of the audience, the rhetor's reputation with this audience, and the listeners; knowledge about the attitudes toward the rhetor's subject

2.

Application of the five cannons to the artifact 1. 5 parts, or canons: a. Invention – the location and creation of the ideas and materials for the speech i. Logos – logistical or rational elements of the rhetoric and with the effect of these elements on the audience 1. The rhetor cannot simply present evidence to the audience; something must be done with the evidence to encourage the audience to come to some conclusion based on it ii. Ethos – credibility 1. Effect or appeal of the speaker's character on the audience 2. Credibility is displayed by: a. Moral character or integrity – linking the message and rhetor with what the audience considers virtuous b. Intelligence – evident in a display of common sense, good taste, familiarity with current topics c. Good will – establishment of rapport with the audience through means of identifying with the audience members or praising them iii. Pathos – appeals designed to generate emotions in the audience b. Organization – the structure or arrangement of the speech i. Determine the general pattern of arrangement adopted for the rhetoric 1. Ex. - chronological order i. Determine which aspects are given emphasis through structure 1. Given greater weight at beginning or end, spends the most time on, repeated b. Style – the language of the speech i. How particular kinds of words or other symbols are used by the rhetor to create varying effects and how the symbols are arranged to form larger units such as sentence, figures of speech, images, etc ii. Examine whether the language style contributes to the accomplishment of the rhetor's goal and helps to create the intended response b. Memory – mastery of the subject matter, which may include actual memorizing of the speech c. Delivery – arrangement of the body, gestures, and voice in the presentation of the speech i. Manner of presentation

ii. iii.

Investigate the influence of deliver on the success of the rhetorical artifact Assessment of the vocal skill of the rhetor

Assessing the impact of the artifact on the audience  Determine whether or no the sought after response was met or what happened as a result of the rhetoric  There is no single measure of effectiveness, and how you choose to assess the effects depends on the characteristics of the rhetorical artifact itself, the rhetor's intention, the audience to which the rhetoric is addressed, and the content in which the rhetoric is presented a. Judged by immediate and/or long-term response of the audience – either those changes immediately visible in the audience or those that emerge at a later time 2. Formulating a research question  "Did the rhetor use the available means of persuasion to evoke the intended response from the audience?" b. Writing the essay  Five major components: a. Introduction i. Discuss the research question, its contribution to rhetorical theory and its significance 2. Description of your artifact and its context 3. Description of your method of criticism (in this case, neo-Aristotelian criticism) 4. A report of the findings of the analysis i. In which you explicate the rhetors choices through application of the five canon to your artifact 5. A discussion of the contribution you analysis makes to rhetorical theory i....