Rhetorical Critique

Neo-Aristotelian Criticism

History

• Neo-classical• Traditional• Neo-Aristotelian

• The Genesis of Rhetorical Criticism• Herbert A. Wichelns, “The Literary

Criticism of Oratory” (1925).– Literary vs. Rhetorical– Rhetoric not concerned with permanence

and beauty but with immediate effect.– Distinguish between Communication and

English departments

The Consequences

• Neo-Aristotelianism became virtually the only method.

• Rhetorical Criticism became the “Study of Speeches”

• Subject matter and Purpose• Effect on the immediate audience• Limited to single speakers• Tended toward “elite men” of

public affairs.

Criticism of Neo-Aristotelian Criticism

• Unchallenged until the 1960’s• Based on Aristotle’s “Rhetoric”

– Not designed for the critic but designed to teach the speaker.

– “Did the speech evoke the intended response?” and “Did speaker use the available means of persuasion?” not necessarily the best questions.

• Otis M. Walter, “On the Varieties of Rhetorical Criticism” (1968) – The Sermon on the Mount.– “Were Jesus’s means of persuasion consistent with his

ethics?”– “What changes in Old Testament morality did Jesus

present?”

• Greece and Rome not Modern Western Culture and too “Rational with “Mechanical Categories”

Selecting & Analyzing an Artifact

• Analyze Speeches and Famous Rhetors

• Three Basic Steps:1. Reconstructing the context in which

the artifact occurred.

2. Application of Proofs and the 5 Cannons

– Ethos, Logos, Pathos– (1) invention, (2)arrangement, (3)style,

(4)memory, and (5)delivery

3. Assessing the impact on Audience

Neo-Aristotelian Critique