Audience and Presence

The Foss, Foss, and Trapp text addresses many of the major points within Tyteca's and Perelman's theory.  However, one of the most fascinating sections concerns the idea of presence.  Presence occurs when arguers "focus attention on something" (95).  In other words, "the displaying of certain elements on which the speaker wishes to center attention in order that they may occupy the foreground of the hearer's consciousness" (95).  The idea of focusing the audiences attention on something does remain somewhat problematic though because it is tied to the speaker's perceptions of the audience as well as ethical issues.  For instance, one of the examples given in the text is "Caesar's bloody tunic as brandished by Antony" (95).  This physical object allows Antony to establish presence; however, this is also a famously manipulative moment and Antony's perception of the audience is largely negative (i.e. he is moving the mob to violent action).  The idea of presence is very much in keeping with Tyteca's and Perelman's emphasis the speaker's perception of audience.

They believe that every decision a speaker/arguer makes should be audience centered to the extent of the speaker's conception of the audience.  For instance, the nature of the starting point depends entirely upon the audience's position in regards to the speaker's position, but the speaker can only base his understanding of the audience's position by determining whether he is addressing a universal or a particular audience.  A particular audience would require a more specialized approach on the part of the speaker.  For instance, in a tutoring session with a student who has no knowledge of grammar vocabulary I would find a particular and unique starting point--preferably one that avoids phrases like "transitive verb". However, when addressing a universal audience the starting point is largely dependent upon how the speaker conceives of his audience rather than the actual identity of the audience.  Thus, the universal audience is always a speaker centered construct which raises the question of whether or not it is truly helpful in terms of persuasion.  Likewise, this also raises the question of whether or not the universal audience can stand alone.  For instance, it may seem like an academic journal article is arguing toward a universal audience, but really this would not be the case (as evidenced by issues like vocabulary).

I am willing to admit to the possibility that this may be a matter of what the author/arguer/speaker conceives of as "every reasonable being," but in terms of persuasion this would still be problematic (89).     

Jason the Horse

I mentioned in class today that I heard a Coast to Coast interview with a man who believes that he is the reincarnation of a gelding (a male castrated horse).  I was having a hard time finding the actual audio recording (it is in the Coast to Coast online archive, but I don't have my subscription anymore). However, I did find an article about the interview.  I decided to go ahead and post it so that you can all get a better idea of the situation.  What's fascinating about it is the fact that there are so many things you can say in terms of theory.

I know that your instinct will be to assume that this is just a man living with some form of mental illness, but I honestly do not think that is the case.  Likewise, this isn't a sexual attraction to horses because he claims to be asexual.  I think that this might be an extreme form of anthropomorphizing.  In other words, he has projected so much onto the horse that he has actually become the horse (the barrier is gone).  He has identified with the animal instead of other humans.    

 http://www.examiner.com/article/jason-the-horse-the-soul-of-a-horse-trapped-a-human-body

Burke's Emphasis on Form

Burke's emphasis on form coincides seamlessly with his expansive definition of rhetoric.  According to the Foss, Foss, and Trapp text, "Burke defines rhetoric as 'the use of words by human agents to form attitudes or to induce actions in other humans'" (191).  However, rhetoric is "a subset of a larger category, symbolic action, which includes rhetoric, poetics, science, and philosophy" (191).  However, the subcategories at times seem to cross between each other.  For instance, Foss, Foss, and Trapp claim that in addition to "spoken and written discourse" Burke "includes less traditional forms of discourse" within his definition of rhetoric: "works of art," "nonverbal elements," "education," "social etiquette" etc. (194).  Thus, it is reasonable to accept the possibility that "rhetorical form" can be applied, to a larger degree, across the entire category of symbolic action.  As I was reading the section, I couldn't help but think of poetry.  In fact, the three types of form (conventional, repetitive and progressive) all seem to have connections to poetry.  For instance, a sonnet can be viewed as a conventional form because the reader knows what to expect "prior to encountering" the work (196).  However, this is an obvious connection and is, in fact, mentioned later in the section.

The aspect of Burke's argument concerning form which I found most interesting was the idea that "form and content cannot be separated" (195).  This was a new idea to me because, if rhetoric can be internal (i.e. "the self as audience"), then even our most rambling of dialogues is subject to form (197).  This is made doubly fascinating by the fact that we have actually made a literary form out of stream of consciousness, raising the possibility that this was not the creation of a form but rather another instance of art imitating life. 

The two forms of progression, syllogistic and qualitative, are also a continuance of the idea that form and content cannot be separated.  In the Foss, Foss, and Trapp text, the example of formulaic movies as syllogistic is, perhaps, the most useful. Scream is a movie which follows the syllogistic progression form.  However, it is the content itself which is syllogistic because the nature of the movie is formulaic. From the moment that Sidney Prescott is introduced, the audience knows that she will do two things: survive, and eliminate the villain (at least temporarily); this is its content and its syllogism.  Likewise, the qualitative progression movie plot hinges on shock; the Foss, Foss, and Trapp text uses the example of Hitchcock's Vertigo.  Despite the fact that both movies progress in different ways, the end result is the same--a synthesis of form and content.