Where theory and criticism meet: A look at contemporary rhetorical theory

1982 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Oravec
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 48-52
Author(s):  
Deanna Sellnow

Students rarely question the relevance of most communication courses. For example, most students realize that courses focused on improving public speaking and interpersonal skills will benefit them personally and professionally after graduation. Convincing them that a rhetorical theory and criticism course is equally empowering can be a bit more challenging. This essay explores one approach for teaching rhetorical theory and criticism as uniquely relevant in the educational experience of communication students. By applying various rhetorical perspectives to artifacts that resonate with students’ actual lived experiences, students become empowered advocates for positive change.


Author(s):  
Marnie Ritchie

Critical affect theory continues to hold promise for rhetorical theory and criticism. This article revisits the so-called affective turn in rhetoric and addresses subsequent critiques of the idea of a turn. Accounting for scholarship published since 2010, this article then groups critical affect work into six subareas of research in rhetorical studies: feminist, queer, trans, and crip affects; race and affect; Black women’s affective labor; affective publics and counterpublics; new materialism, materiality, and affect; and affective economics. This article outlines affective methodologies in rhetorical studies and highlights the affective dimensions of “theories of the flesh” in rhetorical inquiry. It ends by considering what is critical about affect theory in rhetoric.


Communication ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Pfau

The term “rhetoric” (rhetorike) was coined by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, and systematically elaborated upon by his successor Aristotle. On the basis of these foundational texts in particular, the term has been borrowed, abused, adapted, and transmuted by every culture from the ancient Romans onward to contemporary rhetorical studies and communication scholars. This bibliography conceives of rhetoric as a “metadiscourse,” or a language about language, one that has been used at various times, places, and circumstances in order to enable the production and interpretation of discourse. The Historiography of Rhetoric recognizes that “rhetoric” is a term that is simultaneously enriched, and burdened, by its long history of over two millennia, and the fact that it refers sometimes to practices of language and speech, and sometimes to theories about such practices. On Sophistic and Greek Rhetoric examines the social, political, and intellectual context in which the term rhetoric emerged and was invented. Foundational Primary Texts in Greek and Roman Rhetoric provides a cursory summary of the ancient Greek and Roman texts that have served as the foundation for rhetoric as a metadiscourse. Since the focus of this bibliography is rhetoric and communication, Medieval, Renaissance and Enlightenment Rhetorics provides the thinnest coverage, with an emphasis on some of the earliest texts on rhetoric in the English language. The coverage of the most recent century is itself divided into several sections. 20th Century Rhetoric in Philosophy, Composition, and English reviews some of the major figures outside of communication that helped to give shape to rhetorical studies’ emergence and development within the communications discipline. The next sections (Rhetorical Theory and Criticism from 1914 to the 1960s, Rhetorical Theory and Criticism in the 1970s and 1980s, and Rhetorical Theory and Criticism from the 1990s to the Present) trace some major developments in the fields of rhetorical theory and criticism from 1914 to the present. The distinction between rhetorical criticism, concerning the interpretation of rhetorical texts, and rhetorical theory, pertaining to theories about rhetoric, is not hard and fast insofar as most studies contain critical as well as theoretical aspects; but it will suffice for these purposes. Subsequent sections are organized around some of the emergent subfields and emphases that help to organize scholarship in rhetoric and communication studies (e.g., Rhetoric and Public Discourse, History of Rhetoric, Argumentation, Rhetoric of Inquiry, and Rhetorics of Resistance: Ideological Criticism and Critical Rhetoric). These categorizations may be somewhat imprecise, but will suffice for the purposes and constraints of this bibliographic project.


1975 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 311-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Chesebro ◽  
Caroline D. Hamsher

2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nada Matta

This article is a theoretical critique of the post-Zionist discourse that emerged in Israel in the early 1990s. It examines articles published by a group of leading Israeli intellectuals in Teoriya vi-Bekorit (Theory and Criticism), a Hebrew-language journal which promotes post-Zionist discourse. It focuses on three major components of the discourse: postcolonial theory, identity-politics and multiculturalism. It examines how these terms were imported into Israeli culture and society. The article highlights the problematic of applying these terms to Israel, and applies existing Marxist critique of the three theoretical dimensions. Finally, it argues for a distinctive post-Zionist critique, one that is based on solidarity among people, rather than difference and multiplicity.


1993 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 321-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley Sharon-Zisser

Abstract: The concem with progress and utility is shared by nineteenth-century scientists, philosophers, and rhetoricians, leading to significant correspondences among their discourses. This concern is manifest, for example, in the way in which several rhetorical treatises of the nineteenth century regard the distinction between a figure and a trope, which had been a common part of rhetorical theory since the time of Quintilian, as useless and anachronistic. By examining three nineteenth-century articulations of the justifications for erasing the trope/figure distinction from the cultural repertoire, this essay reveals structural and semantic parallels between these rhetorical treatises and the discourses of evolution and utilitarianism. Thus, the essay locates the source of the synonymity which the terms “trope” and “figure” have acquired in contemporary critical metalanguage in Victorian ideologies of progress and of the unprofitability and consequent discardability of the ancient.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document