When I think of rhetoric, I think of the formalized and or negative connotations. From a young age, my father believed that politicians debated in a rhetorical format. He argued with the television during elections to no avail. I was quite young when he screamed at news commentators when Nixon was in the running for president. I did not associate (because of age) that the television was not human or that he needed another human to have a verbal argument. The thought creates questions whether the concept of how rhetoric is used in different mediums today. Given that we debate, argue, and convey across many mediums, do all the definitions apply? Do we need more?
My other daily experiences with rhetoric come from the national news. The news entities often state they bring an unbiased version of the “truth.” As it would happen, I find the daily news driven by someone’s agenda. For example, I do not think I ever heard a commentator state, “The Dow Jones fell sharply today” without supposition or conjecture. Most news comes with negative connotations and is biased. I would love it if the commentators read the news as factual. “The Dow and the S&P 500 fell 30 points, and we do not know why,” the anchor reported! Nevertheless, I think because society needs a reason for everything (my opinion), rhetoric will always be associated with negativity.
My Google searches led me to the following links: http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/ and http://stevefournier01.tripod.com/. Both sites explore rhetoric from both theory and political concepts.
Cited Works
Foss, Sonja. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. Waveland Press Inc., 2002. PDF
Fournier, Steven. "What Is A Taste of Rhetoric." A Taste of Rhetoric. Web. 26 Aug. 2010.
Obama, Barack. "Race to the Top: Remarks on Education to the National Urban League."
www.PresidentialRhetoric.com. 29 July 2010. Web. 26 Aug. 2010.



First--I really like the MacGyver pic!
ReplyDeleteSecond, you write "I think of language as a tool rather than a symbol" and I want to know more. This is really insightful. But how is a symbol different from a tool and/or even a technology?
Ahh! MacGyver! An inspiration because if he can make a motor run on duct tape, I shall overcome my writing challenges...
ReplyDeleteSymbols are generic in a sense. If you look at their original purpose, they are not used as a tools per se...They tell me what to do (Sometimes) but they don't fix my car or my writing...They are reffered as tools but I question that...So maybe I am off base but I think a symbol cannot be a tool if you can't interpret the meaning?