This week's reading in the Rhetorical Tradition covered the compartmentalization of rhetoric, beginning with its apparent decline at the start of the twentieth century. The waning interest in the field was temporary, however as a resurgence of rhetoric in schooling manifested in broad rhetorical theories spanning ethics, ideology, language and context. I thought that a distinguishing element of twentieth century rhetoric was the emphasis on creativity as opposed to the perspectives based in the logical end of the spectrum that rhetorical theory embodied in the previous centuries. As the author of RT states: "Students were to express their own meanings, to regard themselves as artists, and to be original in thought and style" (1184). While it is true that this stayed specifically in the realm of elite universities that sought an alternative focus in education, that it was a theme prominent enough to gain recognition lends to the shift in priorities of rhetoric among the higher classes.
Also, I thought it was interesting that the creativity expressed by the students was immediately connected to the field of psycho-analysis in a debate about whether the nature of their writing was purely self-indulgent. Though creative writing was unable to persist as a serious focus of study within institutional settings, it remains an elective to this day- an example of how when a branch of rhetoric's theoretical tree evolves, it is not severed from the field entirely, but merely shifted into a different venue. Whereas in science a theory can be proven wrong, the schools of thought when it comes to rhetoric are more dynamic as is readily expressed in the rapid transformation theories underwent in the course of the twentieth century. Further progress of rhetorical theory is exemplified in the birth of literary studies, which were considered to be more practical than the creative disciplines because teachers could teach the material rather than relying on student self-discovery to produce results. That said, self-expression would reemerge again and again, which in my opinion helps to set the decidedly eclectic tone of this period in rhetoric.
I felt that the emphasis on the creativity that twentieth century rhetoric highlighted is extremely prevalent, especially because the more lax and creative way of thinking, speaking, and writing, applies more directly to language and literature in a more valid way. I agree with the points you made regarding the dynamics of twentieth century rhetoric which were more fluid and useful for language as a whole.
ReplyDelete