History of Rhetoric
English 4/518, Fall 2016, TR 4-5:15, CBW 124
Dr. Justine Wells, jbwells@nmsu.edu, CBW 219, Office hrs: TR 5:15-6:15 and by appt
Rhetorical studies lays claim to a rich Western tradition older than most other academic fields that we
recognize today, and at least as old as its fellow fields of philosophy and poetics. Rhetoric shares key
figures and concerns with those fields, yet it tends to be far less familiar to the American student. This
course is concerned to unpack some of the core themes of the Western rhetorical tradition—themes that
overlap with other more familiar disciplines like literature and philosophy, but that can be approached in a
unique way via the rhetorical canon.
Students in this course will emerge with a solid sense of some of the core figures and concepts in Western
thought—and with an appreciation of how these figures and concepts can be engaged for their rhetorical
importance. You will also gain a stronger command of how to navigate conceptually rigorous primary and
secondary material, in a distinctively rhetorical style of academic inquiry. Finally, you will leave with a
better feel for how to define rhetoric, and how to trace its entanglement with philosophy and literary
studies.
THEMES
Our inquiry in this course will revolve around a set of core themes that recur throughout the rhetorical
tradition and that remain central to the field today. Early on you will sign up to focus your reading on one
of these themes and share your observations with the class. Below are some questions that you will find
connected to each theme as you read. Once you choose a theme, your job will be to explore how these
questions are answered—as well as adding related questions and contemporary connections.
Truth/Language: Does rhetorical practice reveal truth or conceal it? Is truth “out there” to be discovered
by rhetorical practice, or are there other ways to think of things? Do our words represent stable truths and
meanings? Is rhetoric concerned with truth at all, or only opinion? Is philosophy superior to rhetoric?
What is rhetoric?
Ethics/Agency: What are the powers and dangers of persuasion? If rhetoric acts as a kind of magic or
drug, is it ethical? Should it be avoided? Can it be avoided? Does persuasion move people against their
will? Is it like violence? Or more like love? Who is responsible for acts done under persuasion? Is a good
rhetorician a good person? What sort of character should the rhetorician display, and why? Is rhetorical
education ethical? How can rhetorical study guide our encounters with others?
Technology/Writing/Authorship: How is language or writing a kind of technology? What are its powers
and risks? How does technology/language/writing complicate human agency? Is technology somehow
unhuman or extrahuman? What is language/writing, what does it do? (How) is writing distinct from
speech? Can language carry a single meaning? Can we speak of an author?
Democracy/Politics: What are the virtues and risks of democracy? What are the duties of the democratic
citizen, and how can rhetorical education respond to this? To what extent does democracy need rhetoric?
More broadly, how can rhetoric change the established order, and what are the politics of that? For
instance, should rhetorical practice seek to build community or to help express individual identity? How
are rhetoric’s various sites political? How are they gendered? (Public speeches, private conversation,
letters, courts, coffeeshops, salons, etc).
Style/Delivery/Aesthetics: What are the best styles of speaking, writing, and reading? “The best” in what
sense (most ethical? democratic? effective? beautiful?)? Can we describe standards of style? If there are
standards, how can we know them, and where do they come from? Should we speak of standards at all?
What is the role of the body in delivery? What is the role of memory? How should students be trained in
style, delivery, and taste? Should rhetorical study focus on styles of delivery, reception, or both, and what
are the gender politics here?
1
MATERIALS
• Readings to be posted on Canvas.
• Patricia Bizzell, Bruce Herzberg. The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the
Present. *2nd Edition* Bedford/St. Martin's; 2 edition (December 22, 2000). ISBN: 9780312148393.
ASSIGNMENTS
1. Reading (required). The reading load for this course will be heavy and challenging. To assist
with the difficult texts you will encounter, I have assigned the introductory material throughout
The Rhetorical Tradition, as well as key secondary material. Staying focused on your chosen
theme will also help you manage this reading load—giving you something to look for and helping
you decide where to read more closely and more distantly. And be warned: although I have tried
to strike a balance, some of our reading days will simply be heavier than others. Look ahead and
plan accordingly.
2. Weekly Reading Posts (30% of course grade, 12 total, 300-500 words, strict!!). Weekly reading
posts will examine how your theme is developed through one of the readings for that week. The
post is due by midnight the night before the assigned reading. (So if the reading is for Tuesday,
you should post by Monday midnight. If for Thurs, post by Wed midnight.) Here are the details:
Posts on Primary Sources:
1. First and most importantly: describe an important and distinctive take-away from the reading
that is connected to your theme by doing one or both of the following: (1) summarize a key
argument from the reading (a main claim and at least 2 reasons in support of that claim).
And/or, (2) describe how a key theme is being characterized and interrogated—what
questions are being asked or answered about that theme (for this, it may help to refer to the
thematic questions listed above, or see if you can add to that list).
2. Somewhere you should also respond to this argument or theme in some way: How does it
resonate with or depart from something else we have read? How does it help us analyze a
contemporary example? What questions does this part of the reading leave unaddressed?
Posts on Secondary Material (the articles I assign and provide as PDFs):
1. First and most importantly: summarize a key argument from the reading (a main claim about
how we can interpret the primary source, and at least 2 pieces of evidence in support of that
claim).
2. Somewhere, respond to the interpretation being defended: If you agree with the
interpretation, how does it help us connect the primary source to a contemporary example,
another figure we have read, and/or your theme? If you disagree, how can you convince us
that there is something erroneous or lacking about the interpretation being defended? Is there
an alternative interpretation that you can defend?
Additional Notes:
1. Always imagine that you are addressing your post to someone who has not done the
reading. What you write should tell them something crucial about the reading, one of the
most important things to know and remember about it.
2. Try to avoid including any quotes from the reading. If you include a quote, it should be a
phrase, sentence, or 2 sentences at most.
3. Whenever possible, try to focus your post on your assigned theme. If this is impossible or not
giving you a very interesting post, consider another of the themes.
4. At least one post should respond to someone else’s post.
5. I will collect 3 posts: the first one, and the 2 posts you use for your class presentation.
6. We have 14 total reading weeks and 12 required posts.
3. Participation (10%). Includes productive talking and listening in class, paying attention in class,
responding to others’ posts online, class presentations, and other means of positive participation.
2
4. Class Presentations (part of participation grade; 2 total—1 before midterm and 1 after). As part
of your participation grade, you will present 2 of your posts to the class to get us going on our
thematic explorations. You will have only 3 minutes to give your presentation:
1) Tell us something key about what the piece argues (main claim plus support), or how it
explores a theme (what does it ask about the theme and how does it characterize that
theme).
2) (optional) If time, add your response: a connection to another reading, a contemporary
example, etc.
3) Leave us with a discussion question connected to that theme.
4) Distribute copies of your post to the class.
These class presentations are meant to help us trace the course themes, so your presentation
should be closely focused on one of those (and preferably, your assigned theme). Presentations
will be evaluated for: clarity (would this explain a key part of the reading for someone who hasn’t
read?); relevance to a course theme; interest; and timeliness. You should not read your post.
5. Midterm Essay (25%, 4-5 pgs). In this essay, you will discuss how your theme has been
explored by 3 or more of the figures we have read in Classical rhetoric. You may choose to focus
on how a single thematic question has been asked and answered, or how a cluster of such
questions have been pursued. As with the discussion posts, this essay should be accessible to
someone who has not done the reading. Think of it as an introductory guide to your theme in
Classical rhetoric.
• Undergrads may choose to reference any of the secondary sources we have read, or to
leave them out.
• Graduate students must reference at least 2 secondary sources in rhetoric (ones we have
read or others).
6. Final Essay (35%).
Undergrads (8-9 pgs)
Like the midterm essay, this essay will discuss how your theme has been explored in the history
of rhetoric. You may choose to do more of a survey of periods or to frame your paper on one
specific period. For example, your essay could give a general account of how rhetorical agency
has been explored from the Classical period through the Enlightenment. Or, you could focus on
Enlightenment ideas about rhetorical agency, exploring how these resonate with or depart from
ideas of rhetorical agency in the Classical, Medieval, and Renaissance periods. Either way, you
must discuss in some detail at least 6 of the figures we have read: at least 2 from the Classical
period, and at least 4 after that period. You may use material from the midterm paper, or go in a
new direction. You may choose to reference any of the secondary sources we have read, or to
leave them out.
Graduate Students (14-16 pgs for masters students, 18-20 pgs for PhDs).
This will be a standard, argumentative seminar paper on a topic of your choosing (whether your
chosen theme for the course or another theme/concept of your choosing). Here you will defend an
original argument about how to understand one or more figure(s), movement(s), and/or theme(s)
in rhetoric, and/or the importance of that figure, theme, or movement (e.g., for rhetorical history,
theorizing something in rhetoric, understanding something in the world, etc.). The majority of
your essay should focus on a figure or movement we have studied, and you must include at least
3 secondary sources in rhetoric beyond the ones we have read. You may choose to make a
connection to a contemporary object (Trump’s campaign style, rhetoric of the Zika virus, etc.),
but the majority of your essay should focus on an argument for how to understand and/or interpret
the figure/movement. A paper proposal and annotated bibliography will be due several weeks
before the essay. Of course, I am happy to meet with you throughout the semester as you
brainstorm your topic.
3
COURSE POLICIES
1. Grading scale: Your final grade will be scaled as follows: A (93-100); A- (90-92); B+ (87-89);
B (83-86); B- (80-82); C+ (77-79); C (73-76); C- (70-72); D+ (67-69); D (63-66); D- (60-62); F
(59 or lower).
2. Attendance:
• Undergraduates: I do not distinguish between excused and unexcused absences. Your
course grade will be lowered one step (e.g. from a B+ to a B) for each absence after 3. 6
or more absences will result in failing the course. If you are facing an emergency or other
extenuating circumstances that may cause you to miss more than 2 classes, please let me
know so we can discuss how to respond.
• Graduate students: are expected to be in class. If you are facing an emergency or other
extenuating circumstances that may cause you to miss more than 1 class, please meet
with me so we can discuss how to respond.
• Everyone: If you have to miss a day of class, please find out what you missed. First see
how much you can piece together from other students’ notes, then meet with me.
3. Lateness and sleeping: 3 times late=1 time absent. Sleeping in class=absent from class. If you
are late, it is your responsibility to make sure I’ve recorded your attendance and find out what you
missed when class is dismissed.
4. Cell phones: Keep cell phones off and stowed away for the duration of the course. You are
welcome to step outside to send/receive emergency messages.
5. Computers/Tablets: You may “apply” to use computers/tablets: that is, you may use your
computer/tablet until I see you smiling at it.
6. Assignment formatting: Work should be printed, stapled, titled, in Times New Roman, 12-point
font, with one-inch margins all around. If you fail to meet the formatting requirements on an
assignment, your grade will be lowered one step (e.g., a B+ paper will become a B).
7. Late assignments:
a. Weekly Posts: Weekly posts are meant to demonstrate your reading before class. Posts
submitted after class will receive ½ credit if they are submitted within 1 week of the
reading. Posts more than 1 week late will not receive credit. Posts that are regularly late
for the midnight deadline will receive ½ credit.
b. Midterm Essay: One full letter grade will be deducted for every day that the midterm
essay is late; after 1 week, you will receive a zero.
c. Final Essay: Final essays will not be accepted late.
8. Plagiarism. Plagiarism is using another person’s work without acknowledgment, making it
appear to be one’s own. Intentional and unintentional instances of plagiarism are considered
instances of academic misconduct and are subject to disciplinary action such as failure on the
assignment, failure of the course or dismissal from the university. The NMSU Library has more
information and help on how to avoid plagiarism at http://lib.nmsu.edu/plagiarism/ (Links to an
external site.) (Links to an external site.)
Class Syllabus Notice:
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act
(ADAAA) covers issues relating to disability and accommodations. If a student has questions or needs an
accommodation in the classroom (all medical information is treated confidentially), contact:
Trudy Luken, Director Student Accessibility Services (SAS) - Corbett Center, Rm. 244, Phone: (575)
646-6840 E-mail: sas@nmsu.edu, Website: http://sas.nmsu.edu/ (Links to an external site.) (Links to an
external site.)
NMSU policy prohibits discrimination on the basis of age, ancestry, color, disability, gender identity,
genetic information, national origin, race, religion, retaliation, serious medical condition, sex, sexual
orientation, spousal affiliation and protected veterans status. Furthermore, Title IX prohibits sex
discrimination to include sexual misconduct: sexual violence (sexual assault, rape), sexual harassment and
retaliation. For more information on discrimination issues, Title IX, Campus SaVE Act, NMSU Policy
Chapter 3.25, NMSU’s complaint process, or to file a complaint contact:
• Gerard Nevarez, Title IX Coordinator; Agustin Diaz, Title IX Deputy Coordinator; Office of
Institutional Equity (OIE) - O’Loughlin House, 1130 University Avenue, Phone: (575) 646-3635,
4
E-mail: equity@nmsu.edu, Website: http://www.nmsu.edu/~eeo/ (Links to an external
site.) (Links to an external site.)
Other NMSU Resources:
• NMSU Police Department: (575) 646-3311 www.nmsupolice.com (Links to an external
site.) (Links to an external site.)
• NMSU Police Victim Services: (575) 646-3424
• NMSU Counseling Center: (575) 646-2731
• NMSU Dean of Students: (575) 646-1722
• For Any On-campus Emergencies: 911
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE. This is likely to change somewhat.
Below is our Schedule, which will be updated with details and changes regularly. This plan is likely to
change somewhat to meet our needs
Week 1: Introduction
R 8/18:
no readings for today
Week 2: Introduction, Classical Rhetoric, Sophists
T 8/23:
General Introduction; Classical Rhetoric (RT 1-40)
Due Monday by midnight: Email to me: What are your research/interests? Top 2 themes
and why?. (Undergrads: why are you an English major, and what is your area of
interest? What has been your favorite English course and why?; Grads: What are your
area(s) of interest in rhetoric, or your plans for the masters thesis/dissertation?)
R 8/25:
Gorgias, “Encomium of Helen” (RT 42-46)
Poulakos, "Toward a Sophistic Definition of Rhetoric"
Jarratt, "Introduction” (Rereading the Sophists)
Due Wed by midnight: This week, I would like everyone to do a post on Wed night on 1
of the 3 readings above. I will give individual and class feedback on this post.
Week 3: Sophists and Historiography
T 8/30:
Dissoi Logoi (RT 47-55)
Jarratt, "Chapter 2: Between Mythos and Logos"
Boyarin, "The Scandal of Sophism"
R 9/1:
Aspasia (RT 56-66)
Jarratt and Ong, “Aspasia: Rhetoric, Gender, and Colonial Ideology”
Schiappa/Poulakos exchange:
• Schiappa, "Neo-Sophistic Rhetorical Criticism or the Historical Reconstruction
of Sophistic Doctrine"
• Poulakos's response to Schiappa
• Schiappa back to Poulakos (optional)
Week 4: Isocrates; Helen
T 9/6:
Isocrates (RT 67-79)
Hawhee, Intro, Bodily Arts
Hawhee, Chap 6, Bodily Arts
Rollins, “Isocrates Future”
R 9/8:
Isocrates, “Encomium of Helen”
Sterk, “In Praise of Beautiful Women”
Stormer, "Encomium of Helen's Body"
5
Week 5: Plato
T 9/13:
Plato’s Gorgias (RT 80-109)
McComiskey, "Disassembling Plato's Critique of Rhetoric in the Gorgias (447a-466a)"
R 9/15:
Plato’s Gorgias (RT 109-138)
Kastely, "In Defense of Plato's Gorgias"
Week 6: Plato
T 9/20:
Plato’s Gorgias continued: no new reading, but see “Discussions” for info on required
post
R 9/22:
Plato’s Phaedrus (RT 138-168)
Richard Weaver, "The Phaedrus and the Nature of Rhetoric" (RT 1361-1371)
Week 7: Plato; Aristotle
T 9/27:
Derrida, Dissemination (read pgs vii-xviii from the Translator's Intro and pgs 63-119
from "Plato's Pharmacy")
R 9/29:
Aristotle’s Rhetoric: 1.1-1.3 (pgs 179-86), 2.1-2.17 (pgs 213-26), skim 2.18 (pgs 226-32)
Kinneavy & Warsauer "From Aristotle to Madison Ave"
Reynolds, "Ethos as Location. New Sites for Understanding Discursive Authority"
Week 8: Cicero
T 10/4:
Cicero, De Oratore (RT 283-320)
Wisse, "De Oratore: Rhetoric, Philosophy, and the Making of the Ideal Orator"
R 10/6:
Cicero, De Oratore (RT 328-335)
Remer, "Rhetoric, Emotional Manipulation, and Political Morality. The Modern
Relevance of Cicero vis-à-vis Aristotle"
Week 9: Quintilian
T 10/11:
Quintilian, Institutes: 2.13-21, 7.I-2 (RT 383-400, 412-22)
Quintilian, Institutes: extra selections (Preface, 3.8, 11.1) (3.8 and 11.1 are optional)
Walzer, “Moral Philosophy and Rhetoric in the Institutes: Quintilian on Honor and
Expediency”
R 10/13:
Week 10:
T 10/18:
R 10/20:
Quintilian, Institutes: 2.4, 2.7, 2.10, 10.1-10.5, 10.11 (in RT, starting on pg 369)
Friend, “Pirates, Seducers, Wronged Heirs, Poison Cups, Cruel Husbands, and Other
Calamities: The Roman School Declamations and Critical Pedagogy”
Terrill, “Reproducing Virtue: Quintilian, Imitation, and Rhetorical Education”
No class today
No class today: work on Take-home exam
Click here for the full Take-home exam
Week 11: Medieval Rhetoric: Augustine, Christine de Pizan; Renaissance Rhetoric: Castiglione,
Wilson
T 10/25:
Take-home exam due in class!
Medieval Rhetoric (optional: RT 431-47); Augustine (optional/skim RT 450-85);
Christine de Pizan (RT 540-551)
WR Johnson, "Isocrates Flowering: The Rhetoric of Augustine"
Redfern, "Christine de Pisan and The Treasure of the City of Ladies: A Medieval
Rhetorician and Her Rhetoric"
6
R 10/27:
Renaissance Rhetoric (optional, RT 555-80)
Castiglione, The Courtier (RT 651-73, sections from Book 3 on the courtly woman to be
divided up in class)
Rebhorn, "Baldesar Castiglione, Thomas Wilson, and the Courtly Body of Renaissance
Rhetoric"
Week 12: Ramus, Erasmus, Scudery
T 11/1:
Erasmus, Copia (RT 597-613)
Brown, "The Machine that Therefore I Am"
Erasmus, The Praise of Folly: read pgs 7-28 (recommended: Foreword, pgs. vii-xxii)
Bizzell, "The Praise of Folly, the Woman Rhetor, and Post-Modern Skepticism"
R 11/3:
Scudery (RT 761-79)
Donawerth, "Conversation and the Boundaries of Public Discourse in Rhetorical Theory
by Renaissance Women"
Ramus, Arguments in Rhetoric Against Quintilian (skim RT 674-697 for main
takeaways)
Week 13: Enlightenment Rhetoric: Kant, Locke, Hume, Astell, Vico
T 11/8:
Enlightenment Rhetoric (optional: RT 791-813)
Locke, Essay Concerning Human Understanding (RT 814-27)
Hobbs Peaden, "Understanding Differently: Re-reading Locke's Essay Concerning
Human Understanding"
By today at the latest: submit and meet with me about brief paper idea (100-200 words,
required for undergrads, optional for grads)
R 11/10:
Astell, A Serious Proposal to the Ladies (RT 841-61)
Perry, "Mary Astell and the Feminist Critique of Possessive Individualism"
Week 14: Vico, Campbell
T 11/15:
Vico, On the Study Methods of Our Times (RT 865-80)
Hartelius, "Revisiting Vico’s Pedagogy of Invention: The Intellectual Entrepreneurship
Pre-Graduate School Internship"
Hobbs, "Vico on the Threshold: Modern Language and Rhetoric" (optional)
Due today: Annotated Bibliography and Paper Proposal
R 11/17:
Campbell, The Philosophy of Rhetoric 1.1 (RT 902-5); 1.5.1 (907-12); 1.7 (923-36)
Walzer, "Campbell on the Passions: A Rereading of the Philosophy of Rhetoric"
Bator, "The 'Principle of Sympathy' in Campbell's Philosophy of Rhetoric" (optional)
Week 15: Thanksgiving; No class
Week 16: Hume, Blair, Kant, Foucault
T 11/29:
Hume, "Of the Standard of Taste" (RT 828-40)
Blair, Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres Lectures I & II (RT 947-62); Lectures III
& IV
Agnew, "The Civic Function of Taste A Re-Assessment of Hugh Blair's Rhetorical
Theory"
R 12/1:
Kant, "What is Enlightenment?"
Foucault, "What is Enlightenment?"
Schott, "The Gender of Enlightenment"
Latour, "Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam?" (optional)
Week 17: Paper submission
7
T 12/6, 4 pm:
Final papers or take-home essays due (Take-home Essay Questions)
8
Justine Wells