Guidelines for blog post:
In about 500 words or less, I want you to explore the following questions. Be specific in your responses. You can use direct quotes from Bitzer’s piece (and in fact this might be the most helpful in your explanation of a rhetorical situation). Blog posts are free and open and their language is casual. I should be able to begin to see who you are as a composer—through your voice, style and language choices.
According to Bitzer, what is rhetoric? What is a rhetorical situation? Why are both important in the understanding of how to compose? What do you believe comes first—the writing or the rhetorical situation? Do you believe all writing needs a rhetorical situation in order to compose? Why or Why not?
If you are NOT the first one to post you need to mention at least one or two of your peers’ responses in your entry i.e. you may agree or disagree with what someone else’s definition of what rhetoric is. You cite this person in your response and note why you are citing this person (for example, Kara mentioned that any situation can be rhetorical, but I’m not sure I agree. I believe...). Don't forget to do this as it is part of the assignment.
According to Bitzer, rhetoric is any type of communication of thought, reasoning, or the discussion of a rhetorical situation.
ReplyDeleteA rhetorical situation in Bitzer’s point of view is “the context in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse”. It is the idea or thought that may or not be discussed. Bitzer explains that when asking the question “What is a rhetorical situation?”, he wants “to know the nature of those contexts in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse: How should they be described? What are their characteristics? Why and how do they result in the creation of rhetoric?”.
Rhetoric and rhetorical situations are important in understanding how we compose because rhetoric is the actual process of the communication, and the rhetorical situation is the basis on which the discussion is written or spoken upon.
Bitzer makes it evident that the rhetorical situation comes before writing. He states that “the presence of rhetorical discourse obviously indicates the presence of a rhetorical situation”.
I agree with Bitzer in this sense. Since rhetorical discourse is a spoken or written debate, rhetorical situations must come before writing because they give the subjects to be debated or written about.
Finally, when it comes to the question whether or not writing needs a rhetorical situation in order to be composed, I believe that it does. Since rhetoric is the process of communicating effectively and persuasively, and the rhetorical situation is the context or subject, the rhetorical situation is necessary because it comes before the writing. It is the idea in which the composition is formed upon, the basis of the argument, and the subject of the discussion.
Bitzer refers to rhetoric as “a mode of altering reality... by the creation of discource which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action.” This to me means that rhetoric changes reality because it is mean to alter the mind of those who read it. The ideas shared in rhetoric are, according to Bitzer, always persuasive in a sense. I would agree with this idea that all rhetoric is written in some way as persuasive. Even the simple act of sharing one’s viewpoint on something, may change the way that someone perceives reality. Therefore the rhetoric changed someone’s reality.
ReplyDeleteA rhetorical situation is said to be “a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance.” It appears to be the environment that a writer is in when they are writing. This does not just mean their location, but rather their mental state, the state of the reality that they live in and everything that could affect their view on reality and their writing. This to me seems to almost fall into Marxist views that we are a product of our surroundings. I do agree that a rhetorical situation must be present for rhetoric to be produced. I agree that something has to be in place in order for someone to compose a thought and this is a result of his or her rhetorical situation. Following this line of thought, the rhetorical situation would have to come before the rhetoric. The situation that produces the rhetoric must be in place before the rhetoric is produced.
I agree with what Kaylie Belcik wrote about the situation occurring before the rhetoric. She referenced how a rhetorical discourse must come before the writing because it provides the subjects to be written or debated about. I think this is a valid point and in this sense without the rhetorical situation, rhetoric would not exist at all.
According to Bitzer rhetoric is situational. By situational he means that nothing is fully intelligible until meaning-context and utterance are completely understood.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand rhetoric situation is the cause for rhetoric discourse. Without the knowledge of rhetoric discourse rhetoric situation would not be known, in other words rhetoric discourse is the component that makes rhetoric situation become an object for consideration. I agree with Kaylie, both rhetoric and rhetorical situations are equally important in understanding how we compose. I say this for the simple fact as Kaylie stated rhetoric is the process of communication. In the words of Bitzer, rhetorical situation is regarded to "as a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance; this invited utterance participates naturally in the situation, is in many instances necessary to the completion of situational activity, and by means of its participation with situation obtains its meaning and its rhetorical character." I feel as if the rhetorical situation comes first. I say this because in order for me to expound on something, there must be a situation or event that has taken place for me to write about it. I have to agree with Rachael on this one, that there must be a rhetorical situation in order for someone to begin to compose. There has to be a cause and effect. Something must cause the rhetorical situation which effects how a person will begin to compose. So without the rhetorical situation there will be composition but without a purpose.
Bitzer discusses Rhetoric itself in a few different ways, but his most clear definition is that rhetoric " is a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action. The rhetor alters reality by bringing into existence a discourse of such a character that the audience, in thought and action, is so engaged that it becomes mediator of change.” Bitzer views Rhetoric and its use in terms of its persuasive aspect, which is also reflected in his conception and definition of the rhetorical situation. According to Bitzer, any rhetorical situation is composed of 3 aspects: exigence, audience, and constraints. An exigence, in Bitzer’s words, is “an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be.” The exigence is the most crucial part of the rhetorical situation because in Bitzer’s view, any situation without a real exigence can never be truly rhetorical. Bitzer says that “Rhetorical discourse is called into existence by situation; the situation which the rhetor perceives amounts to an invitation to create and present discourse.” His view is that a rhetorical situation is one created by a real issue or exigence, and that for a response to be rhetorical, it must be able to address this exigency. He clarifies, “imagine a person spending his time writing eulogies of men and women who never existed: his speeches meet no rhetorical situations; they are summoned into existence not by real events, but by his own Imagination. They may exhibit normal features which we consider rhetorical — such as ethical and emotional appeals, and stylistic pattems; conceivably one of these fictive eulogies is even persuasive to someone; yet all remain unrhetorical unless, through the oddest of circumstances, one of them by chance should fit a situation.” Thus, one can see how the exigence is such a crucial aspect of the rhetorical situation. The next aspect of the rhetorical situation, according to Bitzer, is the audience. Bitzer defines a rhetorical audience not as one of passive hearers or readers, but a group of individuals being reached by the rhetor who are capable of being influenced and becoming mediators of change. The final aspect of the rhetorical situation is composed of the restraints, which are defined by Bitzer as being “made up of persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because they have the power to constrain decision and action needed to modify the exigence. Standard sources of constraint include beliefs, attitudes, documents, facts, traditions, images, interests, motives and the like”. Understanding the rhetorical situation is vital to successful composition for a writer because if Rhetoric is using the available means of persuasion to sway an audience, then an individual won’t make it far if they can’t assess the situation to which they need to apply those available means. As far as considering whether writing itself or the rhetorical situation comes first, I believe it is the rhetorical situation, since by Bitzer’s definitions, any situation that is actually rhetorical involves an exigence which needs changing and thus prompts the ensuing rhetoric. However, I do not necessarily agree with Kaylie Belcik’s opinion that all writing must have a rhetorical situation, because I don’t think every bit of writing produced is produced with the goal of addressing an exigence of some particular type. All persuasive writing requires a rhetorical situation, but if I want to write a poem in a journal, I would be writing in a context that doesn’t even include all the aspects of the rhetorical situation, as there may be no situation being addressed by the poem, or an audience that could be moved to enact some particular change by it.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Bitzer, rhetoric is the content itself, i.e the speech, the words, their meaning. He uses the term rhetorical situation to describe the actual circumstances that inspires the rhetoric. I think dprimetime chose the perfect excerpt in describing why rhetorical situation is important: "as a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance; this invited utterance participates naturally in the situation, is in many instances necessary to the completion of situational activity, and by means of its participation with situation obtains its meaning and its rhetorical character." Without the situation, there can never have been rhetoric. Such as without inspiration, nothing can be created. There is no passion without reason. So therefore it would follow that the situation comes before the composition. I dont believe all writing requires a situation before composition but I do believe that all passionate good writing requires some situation. It is just my belief that good writing needs some sort of true feeling or passion for the reader to believe it.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think to define a rhetorical situation, the endless possibilities stop me from coming to a concise definition. Bitzer agrees and says that a “’situation’ is not a standard term in the vocabulary of rhetorical theory. ‘Audience’ is a standard; so also are ‘speaker,’ ‘subject,’ ‘occasion,’ and ‘speech’” (Bitzer, 1). In context he says if he were to ask, “What is a rhetorical audience?’ or ‘What is a rhetorical subject?’—the reader would catch the meaning of my question. (Bitzer, 1)” Mainly Bitzer asks what is a rhetorical situation? He says he wants to know, “ the nature of those contexts of those in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse” (Bitzer, 1). Now that we understand the rhetorical situation, I wonder, what is rhetoric? Bitzer also argues that “Rhetorical works belong to the class of things which obtain their character from the circumstances of historic on text in which they occur” (Bitzer, 2). Bitzer states that, “in short, rhetoric is a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action. The rhetor alters reality by bringing into existence a discourse of such a character that the audience, in thought and action, is so engaged that it becomes mediator of change” (Bitzer, 4). When thinking in terms of composing, the rhetorical situation is the stage and context that the rhetor will use to express his ideas. The rhetoric is the thoughts and ideas expressed through the speaker. I think that the rhetorical situation comes first because this is what inspires the thoughts, the writing. What causes the reason? It is usually controversial, which causes debate and there for need for writing. I think that the majority of writing needs a rhetorical situation in order to compose, it is the inspiration and therefore is essential when composing, to have something to say.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kaylie with the fact that the rhetorical situation comes first. It provides the fuel for the writing. When I think of when I write anything, I always have an inspiration from some event in my life-- it gives me inspiration. I also agree with Rachel that someone's reality can be changed by rhetoric. It goes with Bitzer's definition of rhetoric.
According to Bitzer, rhetoric sets forth various theoretical situations. Many people may find rhetoric more situational, as does Bitzer. Context and meaning must be understood in discourse, and at any point in any story people can be subject to change how they view different situational events. It is any type of thought and communication and also reasoning. When Bitzer says that things are situational, he means that nothing is completely and fully understood until a person can understand the true meaning behind the context of the writing. Bitzer says that rhetorical situations can alter reality, and that discourse is the main element into changing a readers perspective. Rhetoric and rhetorical situations are both completely vital in understanding how to compose for various reasons. Rhetoric is important because it is the proper use of language. It brings such exaggeration and proposes a general idea of the piece of writing. Rhetorical situation is present to create question. It creates question that doesn’t necessarily expect an answer to the piece of writing. Bitzer states, “In order to clarify rhetoric-as-essentially-related-to-sitiuation, we should acknowledge a viewpoint that is commonplace but fundemental: a work of rhetoric is pragmatic; it comes into existence for the sake of something beyond itself; it functions ultimately to produce action or change in the world; it performs some task.” This section of Bitzers piece shows that both are important to composing a piece of writing. You need meaning behind the writing, but you also need the reader left in thought about what he/she just read. I believe that rhetorical situation comes before the writing, because every time a writer sits down to write, they have some sort of idea what they are wanting to present as controversial to their readers. Once you know the point you are trying to make, the rest continues to flow from there. However, I believe that every piece of writing needs rhetorical situations in order to compose, most definitely. Without having meaning behind the writing, there would be no purpose in which a person would want to make. Eric Fisher in his post at the very end mentioned how a poem may not always have rhetorical situation, but I believe every piece of writing has it in some way, shape, or form. I believe that every piece of writing has meaning behind it no matter what the point is or writing may be about.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Bitzer, rhetoric is a mode of altering reality “by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action.” He believes that rhetoric is a means to communicate an idea or message in order to persuade. This is in contrast to what Bitzer believes is the rhetorical situation. If rhetoric is the means by which a person communicates, the context of the rhetoric is the rhetorical situation. The rhetorical situation invokes a response, one that is fitting to the context, in order to move people to action. Take MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech for example. The three constituents involved in this rhetorical situation would apply because Martin Luther King uses exigence, which involves an urgent positive modification in response to the civil rights movement. Also, he addresses a rhetorical audience, one that will listen to what he has to say and is capable and willing to take action. The third constituent of the rhetorical situation, is rhetorical constraints, which can most definitely be applied here because of the people against the movement and the modern thinking of the day that prevented them from moving forward.
ReplyDeleteBoth rhetoric and rhetorical situation are important in the understanding of how to compose because they complement each other. Because rhetoric is essentially persuasion, we can use rhetoric to create a rhetorical situation. In essence, the rhetoric is the method used to persuade people to action, and the rhetorical situation is all elements of the rhetoric. When composing, it is important to note the differences because you can’t just have one or the other. You have to have both rhetoric and the rhetorical situation when composing to get a response through action.
Writing in rhetoric brings change to a situation. I feel there are two ways of looking at this. First, you can write something without knowing you are using rhetoric. Therefore, the writing would come first and then the rhetorical situation. On the other side, a person could have a rhetorical situation in mind, a message they want to get across to the audience, and begin to formulate and mold a piece of writing to get the most effective effects of action in the audience.
Kaylie has a point about writing needing to have a rhetorical situation in order to be composed, but I have to disagree. I do not believe all writing needs to be rhetorical because there are many different types of genres and ways of writing. Rhetoric is a means to persuade, but not all writing is persuasive. I do agree with Stacey that any good, passionate composition needs to have a rhetorical situation, but I do not believe that all writing has to be rhetorical.
Blitzer describes rhetoric as communication and language dependent a situation in need of response. Blitzer defines “a situation in need of response” as the rhetorical situation. In simpler terms, the rhetorical situation is considered the context for communication/rhetoric. Blitzer further breaks down his definition of the rhetorical situation by splitting it into three parts: The exigence, the audience, and the constraints. All of which are necessary in building a persuasive and believable composition.
ReplyDeleteBoth rhetoric and the rhetorical situation are necessary for composition because without the use of either, no reader would be able to understand or comprehend the message of the writer. For example, lets take President Obama’s inauguration speech. In this speech, the president outlines his plans for the country of the United States in the early years of the 21st century. This speech is considered one of the greatest and historical moments in United States history, as President Obama is the first official African American President. Now, considering the context of the speech, what would happen if the speech was not held in Washington D.C. but instead in Cambodia, and three months prior to voting day? The speech itself looses its historical, and political significance, and most importantly, its audience. The same loss of significance could be seen for rhetoric as well. What if the Presdient’s speech didn’t touch at all on the situation of the United States, but on the outcome of the previous year’s Super Bowl? Yet again, the speech looses its historical prowess.
Both rhetoric and the rhetorical situation are needed as equals in composition because without either, a composition can be virtually incomprehensive, as proven with the above situation. One cannot exist without the other. With that said, I don’t necessarily agree with Amanda’s post. Writing cannot come before the rhetorical situation, and vise versa. Yes, rhetoric is essentially persuading the audience to believe in some sort of change, but can one really convince an audience to take action for a situation that someone simply created out of thin air? Blitzer refers to the existence fictional discourse that can be created in a novel, but for the audience, the conflict and resolution is purely fictional. Fictional discourse’s purpose is not to convince the readers of the novel to take action, but for the characters created in the novel to take action. With that said, I believe that rhetoric and the rhetorical situation should be treated as equals in a symbiotic relationship of sorts. One cannot be greater than the other, or exist without the other.
According to Bitzer, rhetoric is defined as “a mode of altering reality... by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action.” Rhetorical situation on the other hand, is "a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigence." Without rhetoric, there would not be a rhetorical situation. Each one is important in understanding how to compose, rhetoric is the actual process of the communication, while rhetorical situation is the basis on which the discussion is written or spoken upon. When it comes to needing a rhetorical situation in order to compose writing, I'd have to agree with Rachel who says there must be a rhetorical situation in order for someone to begin to compose. Something must cause the rhetorical situation which effects how a person will begin to compose. Without the rhetorical situation there will be composition but without a purpose. I think the rhetorical situation comes first because in order for you to expand on an idea, you must have an idea to go off of. I look at the rhetorical situation as the prompt or idea, that then the writing can be composed. Writing without a prompt, or in this case a rhetorical situation, is disorganized and a bit pointless because there is no motivation behind it. Inspiration is what drives good writing, therefore a rhetorical situation is necessary in the world of rhetoric according to Bitzer.
ReplyDeleteThe main idea of Bitzer's piece is that rhetoric is purely situational. Rhetoric cannot be composed without the happening of a situation. Bitzer uses the example of the Kennedy Assassination. When the president was killed, reports and eulogies needed to be written for the public to have a clear explanation of what had happened. A situation occurred, and rhetorical discourse was used to explain it.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Bitzer, rhetoric can be used no matter how simple or artistic the utterance is. The reports and eulogies of the Kennedy Assassination were big, important rhetorical utterances. But the fisherman in Malanowski's piece was using rhetoric in his simple commands to his crew members. Rhetoric has quite a range and can be very simple or very complex, depending on it's elements such as exigence, audience or constraints.
It is important to understand that both rhetoric and rhetorical situation go hand in hand when it comes to composing. Rhetorical discourse cannot be uttered without a situation to give it meaning. I agree with Jay in that one cannot expect an exigence to be modified or an audience to take action from an utterance about something that never even occurred. There is nothing to persuade or guide someone in a certain direction towards that change.
Because of this, I believe that writing cannot come before the rhetorical situation. Fictional pieces may be written with no real account of a situation, but the author creates a fictional situation with the rhetorical discourse that follows. The characters in the story make decisions and take action because of the events that occur and what beliefs are formed because of them. But I do not believe that action can be taken on the basis of something that never occurred. This piece brings to mind the cliche, “Everything happens for a reason”. People cannot have opinions about things that never happened, nor can they take action. There must be a rhyme or reason to writing, even if it is simple and insignificant to the world as a whole. Without it, there is simply no purpose for it at all.
-Amanda Murphy
Bitzer describes rhetoric as a “mode of altering reality” through thought and action and is both persuasive and pragmatic. Also, the situation which invites the rhetoric is “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence” and is constituted by this exigence as well as its audience and constraints.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, I think that rhetorical situation goes beyond just a collection of people in a room listening to a speech about any given event; there has to be a need. More than that, the use of rhetoric when the situation arises should complete the action in some way. For example, this completion of action occurs when Bitzer describes Malinowski’s example of fisherman, “The verbal responses imposed by this situation are clearly as functional and necessary as the physical responses.”
I agree with Gabrielle that rhetorical sitaution comes before rhetoric. Without the situation, there would be little use for rhetoric. How can we effectively compose and express ideas if we don’t have a good reason to? If there is no situation but there is rhetoric, it is probably less successful, less meaningful and maybe even idle speech. On that note, I find it interesting that Bitzer claims that, “While the existence of a rhetorical address is a reliable sign of the existence of situation, it does not follow that a situation exists only when the discourse exists.” I agree that there can be, as Bitzer explains, a rhetorical situation that does not necessarily cause an accompanying rhetorical address, but that rhetorical discourse is almost always, if effectively used, completely dependent upon rhetorical situation. To me, this excerpt underscores the importance of rhetorical situation to any discourse. Rhetoric is brought about by situation, but there is an abundance of unrealized situations out there as well just waiting to be used.
Bitzer refers to rhetoric in several different ways throughout this article. One of them being that "rhetoric is a mode of altering reality, not
ReplyDeleteby the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation
of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of
thought and action." He describes it as "pragmatic" and that "it comes into
existence for the sake of something beyond itself."
When talking about a rhetorical situation, Bitzer implies that it "may
be defined as a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations
presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be
completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the
situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring
about the significant modification of the exigence."
Bitzer believes that both are important in how we compose because rhetoric is how we communicate, and a rhetorical situation is the base of the written discussion.
In terms of what comes first, the writing or the rhetorical situation, I believe that the rhetorical situation comes first because it is what the writing is based off of.
And when it comes to a writing to need a rhetorical situation I believe that it does because of the fact that it is what the idea is formed upon and is the basis of its inspiration.
Rhetoric, according to Lloyd Bitzer, is spoken or written discourse in response to or in the midst of a rhetorical situation. It is the concrete content of a message. A rhetorical situation is presumably more complex because it is the setting in which rhetoric takes place and/or the reason for rhetoric to exist. Bitzer defines rhetoric as “a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance”. He then goes on to describe the three elements of a rhetorical situation. The first is exigence, which is mainly “an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be”. The second component is the audience to whom the rhetoric is directed. The third and final piece of a rhetorical situation is the set of constraints. These have the ability to confine the actions, decisions and direction of the rhetor.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kaylie Belcik in that the rhetorical situation comes first because it is the reason for the writing to exist. All components of the writing such as tone and structure will be centered around the rhetorical situation. Also, the situation will dictate the message and direction of the writing.
I agree with Eric Fisher in that I do not think all writing needs a rhetorical situation. Writing to address a rhetorical situation would of course require such a situation to exist. However, writing to express one’s creativity or ideas, such as poetry or a journal entry, is not in response to a certain exigence. This type of writing may also lack a specific audience and have few constraints, both of which suggest a non-rhetorical situation.
According to Bitzer, the characteristics of a rhetorical situation is "the context in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse." Rhetoric appears with a situation and is persuasive, generally given as a speech, but not always. Acording to Bitzer, rhetoric is "a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action". Bitzer gives certain examples of rhetoric such as The Declaration of Independence which is the document (discourse) provided when the United States received its independence (situation). However, he also explains how rhetorical discourse is not always needed for a rhetorical situation. A situation can exist without discourse, but discourse cannot create the situation. Obviously, the situation must come first rather than the writing. How could one compose rhetorical discourse if there is no rhetorical situation present to write about? It is important to understand both rhetorical situation and rhetoric in composing because a rhetorical situation is generally an event or situation of importance that takes place, and rhetoric is the style of writing or communicating that is needed to explain that event for a better understanding of it and as a formality. I do not think rhetorical situation is neccessary for all writing. Rhetoric is merely one type of writing. More creative writing tends to steer away from rhetoric when writing a fiction novel or short-story for pleasure, composing a song, or anything like that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Amanda when she wrote, "The main idea of Bitzer's piece is that rhetoric is purely situational. Rhetoric cannot be composed without the happening of a situation." Some of this essay was difficult to grasp the concept, but I understood this part perfectly when he is describing how rhetoric is situation and cannot occur with a rhetorical situation. It makes sense that a situation can occur without discourse, but not the other way around.
When Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I have a Dream” speech, it was highly affective because of the emotionally charged subject matter of his rhetoric. The tragic rhetorical situation of segregation and discrimination bred the proper grounds for the effectiveness of King's rhetoric. If he had delivered the same speech in a society where peace was promoted and people lived harmoniously, the speech would have made no sense. Rather than being praised for his now famed work of rhetoric, his repetitive language probably would have earned him the label of a nut case. The majority of people would have viewed his words as pointless ramblings about dreams that have already been achieved. Therefore when weighing the importance of rhetoric and rhetorical situation, rhetorical situation will tip the scale. Bitzer acknowledges the importance of rhetorical situation, “a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance.” and explains that rhetorical situation is in fact, “a controlling and fundamental concern of rhetorical theory.” So there would be no purpose for rhetoric, the actual words or speech delivered, without the spurring of a rhetorical situation. In agreement with Amanda who stated, “there is no passion without reason”, every writing needs a rhetorical situation in order to compose. Whether that rhetorical situation be a physical situation or a mental state, its presence is pertinent to affective writing. A successful work, such as Martin Luther King Jr.'s, as well as countless other rhetoricians, would not have have been notable without motivation. Their rhetoric would be viewed as ambling and insignificant, rather than concise and powerful.
ReplyDeleteBitzer says that rhetoric is “discourse used to alter reality through mediation and thought.” To put it another way he means that rhetoric can have an effect on the minds of those who listen (The Audience) and through a rhetorical audience this can motivate change in reality through the actions of the audience that has been altered as well. In this rhetoric is a form of persuasiveness in discourse.
ReplyDeleteThe rhetorical situation is one that, to put it simply, requires a rhetorical response. Rhetorical situations are those that present a problem or an imperfection that can be changed if rhetorical discourse can be used to influence an audience and make them act and “alter reality” so that the exigence can be modified or resolved in some way. Rhetorical situations have three factors. The most important, the aforementioned exigence is the start of a rhetorical situation. The problem or development that needs to be addressed presents an opportunity for a rhetorical discourse. The audience for a rhetorical situation is important as those who are there must not only be listening but they must be the type of audience that will create change through action. Constraints like beliefs or interests which can combat with the advances of the rhetr and stall action by the audience yet the rhetr can use their advantage as well.
Rhetoric and the rhetorical situation are important to composition, I would think because the situation gives a composer reason to write. Rhetoric in itself as a theory is in a way involved with all forms of writing when you bring it down to the basics of persuasion. I believe that there must always be a rhetorical situation in order to write. If you have nothing to address then what reason is there to write in the first place. I also believe that the situation must always come before the writing as it inspires it and the rhetr.
However, I do have rather mixed feelings about AlexAron’s view:
“Writing to address a rhetorical situation would of course require such a situation to exist. However, writing to express one’s creativity or ideas, such as poetry or a journal entry, is not in response to a certain exigence. This type of writing may also lack a specific audience and have few constraints, both of which suggest a non-rhetorical situation.”
While agree that situations must first exist in reality in order to be a rhetorical situation I do not agree with there being no address of exigence in creative works. Exigence and imperfections are addressed all the time in fictitious and creative works and while the audience receiving the message may not always be the kind to carry out change it does more than occasionally happen where creative works influence change. These works can never be considered truly rhetorical but they can serve greater purposes than mere entertainment and creative expression the behalf of the author.
Lloyd Bitzer begins his essay by positing that rhetoric is “spoken or written discourse in response to or in the midst of a rhetorical situation”. Thus begins this blog, a rhetorical situation according to Bitzer is a “natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigency which strongly invites utterance.” Primitive, not oratory utterance, participates naturally to the situation, and is completely necessary for the completion of situational activity; meaning it obtains its meaning and rhetorical character. Finally, Bitzer charges that saying rhetoric is situational means several things, One, Rhetorical discourse comes into play as an answer to situation, much like a solution to a problem; Two, a speech is given rhetorical significance by the situation, and Three, a rhetorical situation must exist as an essential condition of rhetorical discourse. Also, Four, many rhetorical situations mature and decay without giving birth to utterance; Five, rhetorical situation invites discourse capable of altering reality; and Six, the situation controls the rhetorical response, much like the question controls the answer. So as we can see, the relationship between rhetoric and a rhetorical situation is somewhat related to the relationship between a question and an answer. As the composer of this blog, I agree with AlexAron by stating that the situation gives arise to the discourse, it allows the room for the writing to exist. It came first therefore; I believe that the situation is the birthplace for utterance. I would have to disagree with Blake Johnston; however, as he states that the situation forms the writing instead of being a naturally logical happenstance.
ReplyDeleteIn summation, Blitzer says that rhetoric is persuasive language intended for an audience. He ultimately views rhetoric as directly related to situation. Rhetorical situation, according to Blitzer, is "a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigence" (Blitzer, 7). It is important to consider rhetoric and rhetorical situation as a tool for composition because unlike the work of a scientist or poet, rhetoric calls upon the audience to act as a mediator of change, instead of as mere recipents of knowledge or art. We want the sort of work we'll be doing to be effective in solving an exigence by affecting the way our audience thinks. That's when writing is truly great. In the same way that rhetorical discourse is brought about by a situation, I believe writing, if indeed rhetorical, is brought about by a rhetorical situation. In agreement with Blitzer, I would say that not all writing requires a rhetorical situation because the rhetorical audience is different from other audiences. However, I would say that it's nearly impossible for any sort of work, rhetorical or not, to not leave some sort of impression on the audience that manipulates their attitude towards an exigence. It'd be too easy to categorize something as rhetorical if we scrutinized the tiny details.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with gbyrne4 in their statement regarding rhetorical situation and writing, Gbyrne4 says " they have some sort of idea what they are wanting to present as controversial to their readers." I don't believe all writers necessarily want to point out things that are wrong in the world. I think the error with this statement is the use of the word "controversial". In my opinion, "controversial" denotes something larger than what is often seen.
I also disagree with Blake Johnson who suggests that all writing requires a rhetorical situation since in my opinion, not all writing is rhetorical. As Blitzer said, there is such thing as an audience that does not act as a mediator of change. Therefore, whatever they are receiving is not rhetoric, but rather aesthetic or knowledge.
A rhetorical situation is an event or social issue that sparks the interest of a large group of people. In order for something to be characterized as a rhetorical situation it must consist of three fundamental characteristics. First is an exigence which is vital in creating a rhetorical situation because it is the issue that intrigues an author to write about it. There is some sort of idea that needs to be explained in order for people to develop a new opinion so that an audience (the second characteristic) can be formed. Once an audience is formed, a group of supporters can invoke some sort of influence of change. Changes are limited by the third characteristic, constraints; which are people who are knowledgeable or are some way involved with people, events, or objects that have to do with this issue that has sparked interest. With the combination of these three factors we have a rhetorical situation; a sort of question, issue, or predicament for an author to answer.
ReplyDelete