intertextuality and rhetoric

7/24/2019 Intertextuality and rhetoric

1/19

Rhetoric and IntertextualityAuthor(s): Heinrich F. PlettSource: Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, Vol. 17, No. 3 (Summer 1999), pp.313-329Published by: University of California Presson behalf of the International Society for the Historyof Rhetoric

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rh.1999.17.3.313.

Accessed: 04/11/2015 13:40

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of California PressandInternational Society for the History of Rhetoricare collaborating with

JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toRhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 23.235.32.0 on Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:40:45 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucalhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ishrhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ishrhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rh.1999.17.3.313?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rh.1999.17.3.313?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ishrhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ishrhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal


2/19

HEINRICHF . P L E T T

Rhetoric and IntertextuaUty

Abstract: IntertextuaUty is not only a l i terary but also a rhetorical

phenomenon. Though la rge ly neglec ted by modem schola rsh ip ,

rhetorical intertextuality nevertheless looks back on a long tradition

in print and communicative practice. I ts manifestations are above all

the c om m onpla c e s (koinoi topoi, loci communes) which represent not

only abstrac t sedes argumentorum but also concrete formulae taken

from pre-texts, l i terary and non-literary ones, that offer themselves

for re em pl oy m en t in texts of a deriva tive kin d, in l i t terature au

secon d deg re (Genette) or , metaph or ica l ly speak ing, in second

hand l i te ra ture . The fol lowing aspects of the commonplaces deserve

closer attention: their place (of publication), their re-cognition, their

disposition, their genres, their multi- and intermediality, and their

normativi ty . These facets const i tute a complex spectrum of an

inter textual rhetor ic leading up to an interrhetor ic wh ich m akes

possible the recognit ion and analysis of such rhetor ica l phenomena

as transcend the limits of a single text and of a single (e.g. verbal)

s ign-system.

t f i r s t s i g h t r h e t o r i c h a s n o c o n n e c t i o n w i t h

in te r t e x tu a l i ty . ' R he to r i c , a s i t s frad ition p ro p a g a te s , i s

b y d e f i n i t i o n t h e a r t of s p e a k i n g w e U {ars bene dicendi)

oi w h i c h t h e q u a l if y i n g a d v e r b w e U (bene) c a n b e

' For a survey of the concepts of intertextuality, see H. F. Plett,

IntertextuaUties , in H. F. P lett ed.,

Intertextuality

(Berlin: W. de Gmyter, 1991) pp.

3-29. The following paper was presented at an international conference on

intertextuaUty organized by Professor Ziva Ben-Porat from the Porter Institute at Tel

Aviv University and supported by the Israel Foundation of Sciences.

The International Society for the History of Rhetoric,

Rhetorica,

Volume

XVIL Number

(Summ er 1999)

313

This content downloaded from 23.235.32.0 on Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:40:45 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/19

314 R H E T O R I C A

hi terp re ted by the syn on ym s persu as ive ly , skUfuUy or even

beautifuUy . Accordmg to classical standards t i ie aun of t i i is art

is a lways the same: the product ion of a text , viz . an orat ion, a

sermon, a le t te r , or a poem. The procedure to achieve th is end

foUows tiie ti-aditional five-phase-sfructure of inventio, dispositio,

elocutio, mem oriaa n d pronuntiatio/adio. Each of these five phases is

character ized by a set of rules which is successively appUed,

ei ther as a whole or m part , durmg the process of text generat ion.

Its result represents an artefact, i .e. an artificially produced

texture of meaning. This can assume an oral or a Uteral (wri t ten,

prUi ted) shape . Manuscr ip t and pr in t cul ture have not , however ,

r e nde r e d memoria a n d pronuntiatio/adio a l together superf luous ,

but have al located to them a different medial s ignif icance. The

same may ho ld tme fo r the da ta banks and the in temet h ighways

of the Electronic Age.

An mter textua l rhe tor ic presupposes in ter re la t ions be tween

two or more texts of a rhetorical const i tut ion. This cormection

basically consists of a repetition of a threefold kfrid: 1. structural,

2.

m ater ia l , 3 . both s t ruc tura l a nd ma ter ia l . S tm ctura l

ui ter textua l i ty is ba sed on a set of rules gene rat ing texts acco rding

to the aforementioned phases or sect ions of the rhetorical process

(inventio, dispositio, etc.) . Material intertextuaUty exists in one or

more s igns or s ign configurat ions shared by two or more texts .

The synthesis of these two Inter textuaUties can be regarded as the

m os t frequent ty pe: cer tain s ign configu rat ions ge ne rated by

certain rules recurr ing ui a textual ser ies of two or more

representa t ives . For s igns wi thout ru les have no s t ruc ture , ru les

wi thout s igns remain abs t rac t ent i t ies . Thus an in ter text may be

defined as being const i tuted by text and texture. Such a s tatement

applies to any kind of inter text and hence to the rhetorical

intertext as well .

In rhetoric a rule-govemed Uiter textuaUty refers to the more

or less dev elop ed sys tem s wh ich hav e eme rge d in the cou rse of i ts

h i s to ry . T hus inventio represe nts a sys tem of d iscove ry pro ced ure s

(topoi), elocutio on e of figures a n d tr op es , memoria one of

mnemonic p laces {loci) a nd una ge s {imagines), pronuntiatio/adio

one of communica t ive mediaeach of them divided in to d iverse

subsystems and their respect ive categories . I f persis tent ly put into

pract ice, these systems generate ser ies of texts which are



4/19

Rhetoric and Intertextuality 315

inter l inke d b y a nu m be r of com m on s t ruc tura l fea tures . T his is the

origin of a rhetorical inter textual i ty whose methodological basis is

not one of shared s igns, but rather one of shared s tructures .

Varieties of the latter extend from the one extreme, thefr total

reproduct ion , through var ious degrees of devia t ion unto the

opposi te extreme, their total inversion. Hence the categories and

genres of rhetorical uitertextuality allow of a broad range of

possible reaUzations. An interesting case is the inversion of a

category l ike frony or of a genre l ike epideixis. Intertextual irony

results from the tropical inversion of a pre-text statement in a

post- text . And inter textual epideixis in i ts negat ive form is caused

by a generic inversion of praise and blame in parodies and

trave st ies . C om m on to aU the s t ruc tural var iet ies of rhetorical

intertextuaUty is the fact that they refer to rules (praecepta), not to

e xa m pl e s

(exempla).

It is these examples on which our principal interest is focused

in the foUowing outline. I ts topic is the rhetorical topics {topoi),or,

to be more precise, the koinoi topoi, loci comm unes, lieux communs,

or Gemeinpldtze, as they are weU known in various languages.

They were rediscovered by Emst Rober t Cur t ius in h is epoch-

m a k i n g s t u d y European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages which

w as first p ub lish ed in G erm an in 1948,^ an d m ad e available in an

E ngUsh tran slatio n b y WiUard T rask in 1953. Its central

hy po thesis the po stula te of his tor ical T oposforschung often

m et with dis ap pro va l an d even hostUity; for un de r this concep t

Cu r t ius su bs um ed such formulae as pu er senex or a rm a e t

Ut terae an d such m etap ho rs as to tus m u n d us agit h is t r ionem

or aU the w o rl d is a stag e . Classical scho lars bla m ed h im for his

his tor ica l in co rre ctn es s , the leftist fritelUgentsia de sp ise d h im for

his aUeged conservat ism. The reproach of his tor ical error was

mairUy dfrected against his abandonment of the theoret ical and

argumenta t ive approach in favour of a mater ia l and pragmat ic

reinterpretat ion of the topoi. In contra st to this phU osophicaUy

insp ired cri tic ism in the w ak e of G erm an Geistesgeschichte

which cont inues up to the present , Roland Barthes in his ar t ic le

^Europdische

Literatur und lateinisdies Mittelalter (Bem: Francke, 1948) 10th edn,

1984.

For a more recent discussion of the topos concept, see the anthology of essays

edited by Lynette Hunter , Toward a Definition of T opos: Approaches to Analogical

Reasoning(Basing stoke: M acmUlan, 1991).



5/19


L 'ancierm e rh et or iq ue (1970) maintafris a two fold defm ition of

the term : 1) ce son t de s formes vide s, co m m un es a tou s les

arguments (plus eUes sont vides, plus eUes sont communes. . .2) ce

sont des s tereotypes, des proposi t ions rebaches . ' I t is t i ie same

reif icat ion d e la T op iqu e w hich also C urt ius h ad in mfrid, an d i t

is this mater ial isat ion of the commonplaces which represents the

centre of our concept of an inter textual rhetoric . This concept is

not based on an Uiterpretat ion of classical authori t ies such as

Aris to tle bu t is ext rac ted f rom the comm onp laces them selves . A s

a textual basis for this enterprise wiU serve the commonplace-

book of the Renaissance which was the heyday of this inter textual

phenomenon. The research performed by W. G. Crane (1937) ,

Sister Joan Mary Lechner (1962) and, recently, Francis Goyet and

Anne Moss supplies empir ical evidence to the formation of such a

concept wh ich reaches as far as the age of P os tm od ern ism .

Collect ions of commonplaces do not consis t of abstract rules

but of concre te examples , l i i i s does not mean, however , tha t such

examples lack a theoret ical foundat ion. Such a foundat ion

undoubtedly exis t s but not in an expl ic i t manner . The axiomat ic

basis is the imitatio audorum oi classical rhetoric. I ts

presupposi t ion i s the idea tha t some authors , works or par t s of

works are more pres t ig ious than o thers and hence can be

regarded as models for future texts . In their ent i rety these

rep rese nt a bo dy of Uterature w hich con st i tutes a W elt l i tera tur

(Goethe) , a m us ee im agin aire (M alraux) or , in sfraigh tforward

term s, the w es te m can on (Bloom). Such a canon w as up he ld by

the antiqui, the classicis ts , and contested by the modemi, thefr

progress ive opponents . I t not only marks a super ior i ty of va lue

but also one of famiUarity. For such works as form part of the

canon are as a rule much bet ter known than the rest . Once they

have achieved this s tatus , they offer themselves readUy for the re

use or , more technical ly speaking, the recycl ing of thefr mater ial .

^ R. Barthes , L 'ancierme rhetor ique: Aide-m emo ire , Communications 16 (1970)

p p .

207-08.

' W. G. Crane, Wit and Rhetoric in tlie Renaissance (repr. Glou cester, MA : P .

Smith, 1964) ch. 3, T he English Com m onp lace Books ; Sr J. M. Lechner,R enaissance

Concepts of the Commonplaces(repr. W estport, CN : G reen w ood , 1974); F. Goy et, Le

sublime du lieu comm un : I'invention rfidorique dans I'antiquite d dla

renaissance

(Paris:

Champion, 1996); A. Moss, Printed Com monplace Books and the Structuring of

Rermissance

Thought (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996).



6/19


This means an mtertextual career , f i rs t on a nat ional and then

possibly on an internat ional basis . I t proceeds from popular

collections variously referred to as anthologies, dictionaries,

scrapbooks or , as a generic term, commonplace-books. In these

the works of the canon contUiue to exist , not in thefr entirety but

usuaUy as fragments cuUed from thefr original contexts. Having

become independent ent i t ies by now, they f ind themselves

dependent again, this t ime in a new commvmity of texts of maybe

quite a heterogeneous nature. In this new context they exis t as

virtual fritertexts (or an fritertextual competence) which offer

themselves for a react ivat ion (or an inter textual performance) in

further texts. These texts are not original creations butin one

w ay or other repet i t ions of older texts . Such co m m on place

inter textual i t ies can be describe d by a n um be r of features .

1.T HE PL ACE OF COMMONPLACES

Commonplaces a re no t hapaxlegomerm or s ingular occurrences but

widely circulated meaningful phenomena. Thefr invent ion is

closely cormected with memory. For invent ion provides the

materials for memory and retr ieves them from there, once they

are needed. How often a dictum has to be repeated in order to

become a commonplace cannot be measured by s ta t i s t ics a lone .

The commonplace-book came in to be ing wi th the Gutenberg era

an d qu ick ly ga ined cur rency in W es tem E urope . E rasmu s ' s

Adagia, first printed in 1500, was one of the most successful

commonplace-books in the Renaissance. Though i t displays an

almost inf ini te variety of addi t ions, abbreviat ions, commentaries ,

adaptations, franslations, and formats in i ts publishing history, a

complete bibliography of this work can only give a faint idea of i ts

popular i ty with the readmg public . Before the invent ion of the

pr in t ing press the mnemonic receptac le of the commonplace was

ei ther the individual memory or the manuscript . Classical rhetoric

is cent red on the individual memory by pos tu la tmg a memoria

artificialis composed of places and images. In the Renaissance this

now obsolete technique of an oral cul ture survived m the visual



7/19


and verbal images of reUgious Uterature (emblem, meditat ion)

where it franscended tiie mental subjectivity of its origin. The

manuscr ip t cul ture prepared the ground for a grea ter objec t iv i ty

of s tor ing commonplaces by pen and fr ik on sheets of paper of ten

cal led tables or table boo ks , note bo ok s , or eve n

misceU anies . ' W ha t they sh are d w as thefr usefulness as aide-

memoiresfor thefr respect ive com pilers w h o evide nt ly a d he re d to

the beUef that human knowledge could be epi tomised in br ief

ent r ies . Thus some of the d is t inguished Cambridge poets of the

seventeenth centuryMUton, Herber t , Cowley, Herr ick and

otherskept such pr iva te notebooks , most of which were

pubUshed only in this century. Ben Jonson's famous notebook

with its franscriptions and branslations from his readmg (e.g.

Daniel Heinsius ' s t reat ise Detragoedia w a s p r i n t e d pos t hum ous l y

in 1641 u n d e r th e ti tle Timber, or Discoveries (w ith the further

specification Explorata) m dica t ing thereb y that it rep rese nts an

Uiventory of prefabricated matter (timber) w aitin g for i ts pos sible

reemployment in fur ther texts . Once made public , i t s tar ted a

commonplace-book career of i ts own. The process of t ransi t ion

from the manuscr ip t to the pr in ted book marked a progress f rom

priva te to common mtel lec tua l proper ty . Whereas in the

Gutenberg Ga laxy the commonness o f commonplaces was

restr ic ted by the spat ial and temporal l imits of postal service and

book trade, the Electronic Age effects i t within an instant of t ime.

In ter textua l rhe tor ic becomes an omnipresent v i r tua l i ty in

Marshal l McLuhan's global vUlage (a commonplace in i tself) . Thus

the shif t of place from individual memory to the wri t ten

notebook, f rom there to the pr in ted commonplace-book and agam

from there to the electronic data-bank safeguards the

commonplace an ever widening c i rc le of d is t r ibut ion . This does

not m ean tha t each o lder m nem on ic s tore-h ous e i s entf re ly

su pe rse de d by a ne w er o ne; aU type s ra ther coexis t tog ether .

' See P. Beal, T he Seventee nth-Cen tury Co m m onp lace Book , in W. Speed Hill

ed.. New Ways of

Looking

at Old Texts: Papers of the

Rermissance

English Text Society,

1985-1991 (Binghamton, NY: Me dieval & Renaissance T exts & Studies , 1993) pp .

131-47.



8/19

Rh etoric an d Intertextu ality 319

2 . T H E

D I S P O S I T I O N O F C O M M O N P L A C E S

Commonplace-books may consis t of entr ies put together in a

random manner . Such are to be found in pr iva te manuscr ip t

notebooks which often foUow the chronology of the wri ter ' s

reading experience. But i t is a l ready the Spanish humanist Juan

L uis Vives wh o adv ises h is s tud ents to unpo se a cer ta in s t ruc ture

on thefr collections:

Make a book of blank leaves of a proper size. Divide it into certain

topics. In one, jot down names of subjects of daily converse: the

mind, body, our occupations, games, clothes, divisions of time,

dwellings, foods; in another, idioms orformulae

docendi;

in another,

sententiae; in another, proverbs; in another, difficult passages from

authors; in another, matters which seem worthy of note to thy

teacher or

thyself.'

An Ulustrat ion of this procedure is made avai lable by the recent

pubUcation of the ear ly seventeenth-century Southwell-Sibthorpe

m an usc r ip t co mm onplace-boo k (Folger MS. V.b .l98) which

conta ins poems (sonnets , epi taphs) , le t te rs , apophthegms,

abstracts (Pl inius , P lutarch, Suetonius) , paraphrases (Seneca) ,

scr iptural commentaries (on the Decalogue) , and a mini-best iary. '

Greater emphasis than in this manuscript col lect ion was, of

course, placed on the s t ructure or , in rhetorical terms, the

dispositio oi the prui ted commonplace-book. Two pr inc ip les of

ordering are part icular ly noteworthy: 1. the alphabet ical sequence

of topics and 2. thefr division according to hierarchical or general

semantic cr i ter ia {Arbor Porphyrearm,similari t ies an d con trasts ,

binary classifications). The former is the simpler one and can be

fou nd m such boo k subt i t les as set for th fri com m onp laces b y

o rd er of the alp ha be t (B.106)'' or ra nk ed in alpha betical or d er

' Quoted in R. R. Bolgar, The

Classical

Heritage and its

Beneficiaries

(New York:

H ar pe r & R ow , 1964) p. 273.

' J. Klene, C.S.C. ed.. The Southwell-Sibthorpe Commonplace Book (Folger MS.

V.b.l98 (T empe: M edieval & Renaissance T exts & Studies, 1997).

' The registration numbers in brackets are those of H. F. Plett, English

Renaissanc e Rhetoric and Poetics: A Systema tic Bibliograp hy of

Pritrmry

and Secondary

Sources(L eiden: Brill, 1996), w he re full bibliograpical details are available.



9/19

320 RHETORICA

(B.120) but also, as a matter-of-fact, in tiie indices affixed to many

commonplace-books (B.122.B). The latter, more complex one,

presupposes a phUosophical concept, a theological doctrfrie, or an

educational curriculum. Many encyclopaedic works of the

seventeentii century (Alsted, Comenius, Fludd, Keckermaim,

Kfrcher) foUow such a guidelme, which ultfrnately goes back to

Aristotle's

Topica

(I.xiv. 105b). On tiie otiier hand tiie more

popular commonplace-books try to avoid the unpression of being

sfrictly methodical because this may be the source of boredom

and hence defrimental to a commercial success. Thus

metaphorical titles like

Bel-vedere, or The Garden of the Muses

(B.108),The Forest of Fancy(B.113),The English Treasury of Wit and

Language

(B.119),

The Banquet of

Sapience(B.121),

The Golden Chain

of Divine Aphorisms (B.131), The Jewel House of Art and Nature

(B.159.B),

Mel Heliconium, or Poetical Honey

(B.162.A) and

The

Golden Grove (B.170) promise delight, wealth, variety, and

copiousnessfeatures that seem to stand m direct opposition to

the commonness of commonplaces. A compilation by Thomas

Gainsford makes this all the more evident; it armounces The

rich

cabinet furnished with variety oi excellent descriptions, exquisite

characters,

witty

discourses, and

delightful

histories divine and

moral . Here aU the quaUties are assembled that are requfred by

the rhetorical fradition:

copia

(rich),

varietas

(variety),

ortmtus

(exquisite), ingenium (witty), deledatio (delightful). This

commonplace-book addresses itself to poets who do not look for

uispfration but for practical inventories of topical material. Thefr

(evidently courtly) ideal of poefry is the creation of aesthetic

delight by means of styUstic ornamentation.

3. THEG E N RE SO FCO MMO N PL A CE S

Commonplace-books are of two kinds. Some address the

specialist; others offer a mixed assortment of topics. In the chapter

of his encyclopaedia Polyhistorentitled De locorum communium

scriptoribus (I.xxi), Daniel Georg Morhof enumerates



10/19

Rhetoric and IntertextuaUty 321

commonplace-books on h is tory , ' medic ine , the na tura l sc iences ,

and Uterature but also hybrids with a wide variety of topics .

BibUcal and Uterary col lect ions are among the most popular ones,

because they propagate quotable maxims and purple pa tches for

everybody. One of the pr incipal reasons for compil ing

commonplaces i s mora l ins t ruc t ion . In h is Foundacion of Rhetorike

(1563) Rich ard Ram olde mak es this evid ent by the definit ion: A

Common place is a Oracion, dUatyng and amplif iyng good or

euiU, w hi ch e is incid en te or lod ge d m any m an , ' an d iUusfrates i t

by m argin al g losses ad de d to an ora t ion such as : M an born e by

na tur e to soc ie tee or O rde r conserueth com m on w eal th or

T heiue s no t m ete to be in an y societ ie . T he genres of

commonplaces are acadeiruc on the one hand and Uterary on the

other. The Uterary ones are oftengeneram inoraan d e ncom pass , for

ins tance , epigrams, songs , r iddles , jes t s

(facetiae),

aphor i sms ,

apophthegms , p roverbs , maxims , sen tences , d ia rac te r s ,

descript ions, aUegories etc . A mult i tude of these is contained in

E dw a r d P h i U i ps ' Mysteries of Love and Eloquence (1658), a

handbook of poUte wooing and complimenting. As ear ly as 1597

Francis Bacon ha d publ ished a m ixed comm onplace-book un de r

the title Essays. Religious Meditations. Places of perswasion and

disswasion. Indeed, as research has shown long ago, the essay is

f i rmly instal led in the commonplace t radi t ion. This holds t rue not

only for Bacon's but also, though m a different way, for

Montaigne 's essays. That the contact with the rhetorical t radi t ion

w as StiU extan t , is dem on sfrated by Bacon's add i t ion of Places of

perswasion and disswasion to his anthology. Most of these

commonplace genres of Uterature cont inue to exis t untU the

present day. They are not held in great esteem by l i terary

historians and often share the fate of rhetoric. Yet these genres of

rhetorical Uterature prove more durable than their adversar ies

tend to beUeve. That thefr popular i ty has never ceased is

documented by numerous bes t -se l le rs of th is k ind. A modem

instance of interest m this context is John Robert Colombo,

C an ad a ' s bes t -kn ow n m ake r of found po et ry . T he very te rm

' D. G.

Morhof,

Polyhistor Literarius.

Philosophicus

et Pradicus, 2 vols, 4th edn,

Lubeck, 1747 (Facsimile reprint: Aalen: Scientia, 1970) I, pp. 236-58.

' R. Ra inold e,

Foundacion

of Rhetorike,L ondon 1563 (Facsimile reprint: Delm ar:

Scholars' Facsimiles & Reprints, 1977) Fol. xxxiijr.



11/19


already fridicates tiiat tiiis kfrid of poetiy is tiie product of re

discov ery, not ofecritureb u t rati ier of reecriture. His works friclude

not only The Mackenzie Poems(1966),Praise Poems(1972), Monsters

(1977), but also: Colombo's Canadian Quotations (1974), Colombo's

Little Book of Canadian Proverbs, Graffitti & Other Vital Matters

(1975). T he rhetoricity of suc h po etry ha s nev er bee n cal led ui to

que st ion, bu t i ts poet ici ty cer taui ly h as.

4.

T HE MULTIMEDIALITY OF COMMONPL ACES

Commonplaces are not l imited to the verbal ar ts but Uiclude aU

sorts of media. Classical rhetoric provides, above aU in

QumtiUan ' s Institutio Oratoria (Xl.Ui), a highly elaborate topic of

actio, i .e. of body language expressing a wide range of affections.

This provides the s tar t ing point for iconic representat ions in

kinesics , pa int m g, an d sc ulp ture . A Rena issance U lustrat ion of i t is

John Bulwer ' s Chironom ia: or the Art of Maniml Rhetoric (1644),

w hic h h e ou tlines by a series of ca no ns . C an on XXXVII, for

exam ple , run s : Both ha nd s c lasped and w ru n g togethe r is an

act ion convenient to manifest grief a n d sorrow. In addi t ion , a

nu m b er of chiro gram m atic plates pa int affections l ike

Admiratur, Hortatur or Dolebitin rhe torica l p os tu re s of the fingers.

Bu lwe r ' s m an ua l is fr i fact an anth olog y of iconic c om m on pla ces

wh ich are para l le led by E urop ean prac t ices of ac ting and pain t ing ,

above al l in the mult imedial theatre of the Jesui ts Qacob Masen,

Gabriele Paleot t i , Franciscus Lang). '^ Another type of

com m on plac e iconici ty is pr ov id ed by the large-format pa nel

pafrit ings of the Brueghel family Ulustrating Dutch Proverbs, the

Tr iumph of Death , or the Quarre l be tween Lent and Carnival in

thefr manifold appearances. All of them contain visual

Modem edition: J. Bulwer, Chirologia: Or the Natural Language of the Hand &

Chironomia : or the Art of Manual Rhetoric(Carbond ale: So uth em Illinois U niversity

Press ,

1974).

See B. Bauer, M ultim ediales T heater: An satze zu einer Poetik d er

Syn asthes ie bei den J esu iten , in H. F. P lett ed., Renaissance-Poetik/ Renaissance

Poetics

(Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1994) pp. 197-238.



12/19


metonymies which by select ion and combinat ion al low of mult iple

interpictorial configurations. Here the rhetorical principle is

t ransferred to the medium of paint ing. The so-cal led

K un stbu ch , a han dbo ok of reproducible pa t tem s for a r t i sans

(goldsmiths, sculptors , s i lk-weavers) working with more or less

precious mater ials , displays a s t i l l broader spectrum of

appUcat ions . Whereas here the commonplace undergoes an

intermedial t ransformation, the rhetoric of musical commonplaces

has not yet been explored enough to aUow of substant ial

conclusions. Johann Sebast ian Bach's Inventionen certainly derive

thefr term from rhetoric, in the sense not of a methodb ut of the

product oi inve nt ion . W hether these invent ions are com mo nplaces ,

is, however , doubtful . Such are rather present in the musical

ci ta t ions, ad ap tat io ns and franscriptions of the M o d e m a nd the

Pos tmodem Age: in Gustav Mahler ' s F i rs t Symphony ( f rom the

can on Frere Jacqu es, do rm ez-v ou s? ) or in Igor Sfravinsky's

Pulcinella

(from Pergolesi) , in Edison Denisov's Schubert

paraphrases or in Alfred Schnit tke ' s polystyUstic composi t ions. In

Ught music inter tonal commonplaces have always been favouri tes .

To return to Bach again: he is himself the creator of a musical

c om m onp l a c e : B A C H . Its h i st o ry is i nt er tona l, its genes is

inte rm ed ial: the con ve rsion / fransformation of gra ph ic signs

(Bach's pr op er n am e) into acoustic ones (a m usical ph rase) .

5. T HE INTERMEDIALITY OF COMMONPLACE S

Commonplace in termediaUty i s concemed, among others , wi th

th e fransformation of w o rd s into pic ture s, of w o rd s into m us ic, of

pictures into music, etc.and vice versa. I t takes place on a

double axis of communicat ion, the syntagmatic and the

paradigmat ic one . Syntagmat ic u i te rmediaUty extends f rom the

combinat ion of two different media to the mult imedial

s imultanei ty of the Gesamtkunstwerk. A syntagmatic hybrid in the

co m m on pla ce fradition is the em blem boo k in wh ich pictu re

{pidura) and ep ig ram (subscriptio) em bo dy the sam e topic

expressed m the mot to {inscriptio), the one by v isualisation , the



13/19


oti ier by verbaUsat ion. From Andrea Alciat i ' s Emblematum Lihellus

(1531) onwards t i i is type of mtermedial commonplace-book

ga m ed steadUy in po pu lar i ty an d foun d Us w ay frito ev ery

European coun t ry , mc ludmg a mul t i tude o f p ic tu res and

languages, f rom whence fr again became t i ie source of pictor ial

an d Uterary fr iventions. A m o d e m syno psis of em blem atic topics

compUed by Arthur Henkel and Albrecht Schdne under t i ie t i t le

Emblemata m ay serv e as a co nte m po rary s t iady-aid of

coirunonplaces for botii tiie Uterary and tiie art historian. '*

Paradigmat ic in ter textuaUty on the o ther hand descr ibes the

substi tution of sign configurations of different mediali ty. An

outstanding rhetorical gerue pract ised from ant iqui ty to

p o s t m o d e m i s m i s ekphrasis or descr ip t ion for wh ich E uro pea n

poet ics derives i ts Uterary legi t imacy from Horace 's dictum ut

pidura poesis and Suno nides ' s in te rmedia l m e tap ho rs pidura

loquens, muta poesisreferrfrig to p oe try a n d pafritfrig res pe ctiv ely .

T he com m onp lace na tu re of th is exchange has been es tabUshed by

s tandard p rocedura l and mate r i a l topoi wh ich are recu rrent

throughout h is tory . The rhe tor ic iza t ion of poet ics and ar t theory

furth ered the interc han gea ble ch arac ter of t iiese sister ar ts by

claimmg for them such common categories as imitat ion,

invent ion, expression, decorum, insfruct ion and del ight , and, of

cou rse, the co lou rs of rhetoric , that is to say, the rhetorical

f igures . A nar row ly c i rcumscr ibed reper to i re of subjec t -mat ters

taken from the Bible and the classical authors facUitated thefr re

product ion and thef r recogni t ion in e i ther medium. Perhaps the

most popular hybrid genre of this intermediaUty is the

technopaignion or carmen figuratum which ar ranges le t te rs , verses

and stanzas of a poem ui such a way that i t takes the shape of an

object, usu al ly a colum n, an obel isk, a py ra m id , an al tar , a cros s , a

wing, an urn, any kind of geometrical f igure. This object poefry or

konkrete Poesie , though in non-topical forms, cont inues to exis t

For an analysis of a specimen of pictorial/verbal intermediality, see J. M.

Massing,

Erasmian Wit and Proverbial Wisdom: Illustrated Moral Compendium for

Frangois

I(Lo ndon; W arbu rg Institute, 1995).

Arthur Henkel and Albrecht Schone eds , Emblemata (Stuttgart: Metzler, 1976,

2nd edn, 1996).

See W. Steiner, The

Colors

of

Rh etoric:

P roblems in the Relation between Modem

Literature

and Painting(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982).



14/19


even nowadays. I ts twofold percept ive appeal reaUses the

rhetorical ideal of ermrgeia or evidence, that is the co-presence of

both the sensual and the mteUectual faculties of the human mfrid.

6.

T H E

NORMATIVITY OF COMMONPLACES

The commormess of commonplaces i s grounded in the i r

conventionaUty. Once they are firmly estabUshed they are rarely

cal led fr i to quest ion. They are not universals , but dependent on

space and t ime, on cul ture and society, on class , educat ion,

ge nd er , age and the context of com m unicat ion. A bov e aU they are

pa rt of sh ar ed bel iefs an d values in a certain com m un ity. T his acts

as a kind of guardian of such commonplaces by confirming them

time and again through repeated usage . From a rhe tor ica l

viewpoint thefr acceptance is considered as decorum, that is in

accordance with the generaUy acknowledged social (behavioural ,

ethical, aesthetic, etc.) norms. But this normativity is not valid

forever . When commonplaces become out -of -da te and worn-out ,

they become void of thefr content and degenerate fri to

meaningless formulae. In order to s top this process of semantic

decay that finaUy leads to oblivion, systematic techniques have to

be appUed for thefr revitalisation. Such are avaUable from a

secondary rhe tor ica l grammar of addi t ions , omiss ions ,

subs t i tu t ions and permuta t ions imposed on the extant mater ia l .

I ts t ransformations may be categorised according to two stages of

intens i ty. T he f irst, mo re m od era te s tage is bas ed on the rhe torical

principle of variatio, well kn ow n from the tema con variazioni in

music (e .g. , Brahms's Haydn Variations). It means the retaining of

the semantic nucleus of the commonplace s ign configurat ion

while changing its adjuncts. I l lustrations of such alterations are

paraphrases and abstracts , quotat ions and aUusions, col lages and

cen tos . Tom S toppard ' s Rosencrantz and Guildenstem Are Dead

(1966) and hisFifteen Minute Hamlet (1976), Robe rt R aus ch enb erg 's

Quote (1964) and Roy Lichtenstein ' s Cathedral (1969) may serve as

examples . Umber to Eco ' s f amous nove l II nome della rosa is a

pas t icc io of learned commonplace mater ia l f rom mediaeval and



15/19


m o d e m t imes . T he second, mo re radica l s tage au ns a t tiie

de co ns tm ctio n of pre- tex tual m ater ial by i ts sem antic fr iversion.

Such a procedure takes place fr i inter textual f rony. This rhetorical

mode affects medial and fr i termedial commonplaces aUke. When

m his picture L.H.O.O.Q. (1919) M arcel D uc ha m p ad d s a

mous tache to Leonardo ' s f amous

La Gioconda,

he de c on s t m c t s a

commonplace icon of feminine beauty by adding to i t a

characterist icaUy male feature (androgyny). J . S. Bach's

substi tution of a secular text by a spfritual one in his secular

canta tas , as ha pp en ed to a b i r th da y canta ta ( to beco m e P ar t 1 of

his Chris tmas oratorio) , is cal led by musicologists sacred parodia.

And in Gay ' s Beggar's Opera(1728) the rever sed pr oc ed u re takes

place Ui the sub sti tu tion of hero ic texts by low er-clas s on es in

opera music la rge ly composed by Handel (e .g . , in h is Tamerlano).

Both examples demonstrate the working of Uitermedial f rony in

hybrid s ign configurat ions. Their decomposi t ion is foUowed up by

thefr recomposi t ion. Commonplaces of any mediaUty can thus be

revi taUsed and thus obta in a new semant ics tha t wUl perhaps

develop a commonplace normat iv i ty of i t s own.

7. T H E D E - A U T H O R I S A T I O N O F C O M M O N P L A C E S

In an inter textual rhetoric of commonplaces the author is nei ther a

creator ex nihilo

nor a genius of nature laying claim to the

originality of his inspirationsuch are the postulates of ideaUstic

aesthet ics . O n the co ntrary , he is a discove rer o r rathe r a refriever

of som eth ing exis t ing before, of sec on d-h an d U terature , of

pa l im pse sts or of Utterature au seco nd de gr e (Genet te) .

Irrespective of i ts descent, be i t high or low, this Uterature

represents the friviaUty of the trivium. It is offered for sale in a

we ll-sorted em p or iu m (J. Hu izing a) or , in the ter m s of ear ly

capi tal ism, m The Royal Exchange (B.132) wh ic h is th e title of a

commonplace-book by Robert Greene (1590). For here i t is not

s tocks tha t a re t rad ed bu t m ore or less de- au tho r ised texts an d

text segments . In this s tock market the author is a broker or , in



16/19


less m etaph or ica l te rm s, a m edia tor (R . Bar thes) . His

interte xtu alist ic crea tivity is confUied to the reception an d

fransmission of avaUable m ateria l . T hu s his rep uta tion dim inish es

fri pr op or t io n w ith the em ergenc e of the or iginal i ty concept .

QuintUian had already complaUied that orators made col lect ions

of sayings and arguments about subjects l ikely to recur in the

practice of thefr art instead of fortifying themselves with

methodolog ica l topoi by which to d iscover new a rgu m ents tha t

had never occurred to them before. In Sir PhUip Sidney's sormet

sequence Astrophel and Stella (1591) the male protagonist joins the

rheto rician 's com plaint by blam ing himself for oft turnin g oth ers '

leav es (1.7) an d othe rs for br ing ing dict ion ary 's m eth od m to

thefr rhym es; he concludes wi th the w am ing : A nd sure a t length

sto l 'n go od s do com e to Ught (15.5-6, 119). In the tw en tieth

century the same pract ice f inds new support , not only in

Co lom bo ' s found po em s m ent ioned before bu t a l so , to na m e a

G er m an exa m ple , in M ax Ben se's (*1910) con cept of kunstUc he

K un st , th at is an a rt wh ich o w es i ts existence entfrely to

mathematical (synthet ic and analyt ic) operat ions, expressed in his

w o r k s : Semiotik (1969), Nur Glas ist wie Glas (1970) and Kosmos

Atheos

(1985). Richard McKeon names three stages in the

de ve lop m en t: W here as the rhetoric of the Ro m ans took i ts

commonplaces f rom the prac t ica l a r t s and jur i sprudence and the

rhetoric of the Humanists took i ts commonplaces from the f ine

arts and Uterature, our rhetoric f inds i ts commonplaces in the

technology of commercial advert is ing and of calculat ing

m ach ines . In Kare l Cap ek ' s p lay R.U.R. {=Ro ssum 's Universa l

Robots) of 1921 robots take over the rule of the world. WiU the

(allegedly flawless) artificial intelUgence of computers supplant

the (allegedly faulty) natural mtelUgence of human beings in the

ar ts? Computer -genera ted poet ry , music , and pa in t ing seem to

lead fr i this direct ion. Computer generat ion at t r ibutes to poet ,

composer and painter a new role: that of an engineer . In oral

cul ture the poet is a mnemonist , in manuscript cul ture a copyist ,

in print culture a compiler, in elecfronic culture an intemet surfer.

R. Barthes, The De ath of the Au thor in his The Rustle ofLangiMge trans. R.

H ow ard (N ew York: Hill and W ang, 1986) pp . 49-55.

R. McK eon, Creativity and the Com monp lace ,

Philosophy and R hetoric

6

(1973) p. 207.



17/19


C o m m o n

to

tiiese roles

and

professions

is the

aspect

of

m edia t ion ,

frivention is recoU ection tiiat

is the

prerequis i te

of

de-authorisfrig

the authorinthis interrhe toric .

8. THER E - C O G N IT I O N OFCOMMONPLACES

C om m onp l a c e s

as

c om pone n t s

of an

Uitertextual rhetoric Uterally

exist ui common places , tha t is fri spat ial , tem po ral , social and

other contexts shared

by the

c om m on ( w o) m a n . T he y

are, in

Francis Bacon's terms, idols of the m arke t -p lace , or fri t e r m s of

Greek phUosophy,

the

express ion

of

doxa.

To the

rec ip ient

a

commonplace offers an inestfrnable ad va nta ge : the a ppe a l to

acedia

or

men ta l apa thy . What

is

a l re a dy k now n

is the

source

not

of cognition but of re-cognit ion. It conffrms the famiU ar, offers

release from

the

unexpec ted .

It

creates

a

sense

of

identification

a nd s upp r e s s e sanyideaof opposi t ion. Recognit ionof the famiUar

in imitat ions

and

repet i t ions cause s de l ight , cer tainly

not of the

sophist icated sortbutra ther of acomfor table ease . E m pa thymay

beoneconseque nce , ano ther a lossof crit ical distance.Theresu l t

isat best intel lectual s tagnat ion, at w o r s t a to ta l su r render to the

dic ta torshipof commonplaces . These commonplaces ares to red in

m nem onic inven tor ie s : ve rba l

and

non-verbal , v isua l

and

aco ust ic ,

uni- and m ul t imed ia l ones . In the twen t ie th cen tury these

inventor iesmaypossessam enta l , mater ia l ,or digi tal co-presence

of exis tence. T hey en abletheuse rtoselec t am on g va r ious k ind sof

inter textual i ty

and

intermediaUty enforcing

and

reinforcing each

other . Without such cont inuous re inforcements communica t ion is

e n d a n g e r e d

or

even im poss ib le .

For

c om m onp l a c es

are

stabiUsers

of socialUfe and m u t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d at the sam e t ime

ope n

and

h i dde n pe r s ua de r s .

The

same ho lds t rue

for the

percep t ionofthe ar tsingenera l . Inno vat ions on ly take p lace w he n

c om m onp l a c e s

are

rad icaUy ques t ioned . T h i s ha pp en s w he n

discont inui t ies emerge . Then the p r e t e nde d no r m a t i v i ty of

c om m onp l a c e s

is

decons t ruc ted ,

and

ti ie continuous flow

of

recognit ion isd i s r up t e d by a s udd e n s hock a sby the fort iss imo

d r u m b e a t

in the

A n d a n t e

of

J ose ph H a y dn ' s s ym p hon y

no. 94 in



18/19


G major . This does not mean an end to inter textuaUty but a

different way of approaching i t . For the means of

deconsfruc t iondrumbeat , i rony, coUageand the reac t ions to

themshock, c r i t ica l d is tance , bewi ldermenthave been par t of

this fri tertextual rhetoric right from the start . A commonplace

rhetoric (poetics, art theory, music aesthetics) impUes both i ts

topicaUty and its a-topicali ty. This paradox is manifested in

Renaissance commonplace-books by t i t le advert isements l ike

ch oi ce st flowers (B.IOO.B), w it ty ap op h tii eg m s (B.105.C),

w itt y co nc eits (B.106, B.126), or sfrang e de finitio ns (B.132),

inc lu din g ev en a defence of co ntra ries (B.151)certainly a

contradidio in adiedio. I ts only reason is that commonplace

intertextuaUty is the necessary condition for the rise of the

uncommon, for any kind of ar t is t ic i rmovat ion.



19/19

intertextuality and rhetoric

Documents