QQC 3

Quote from “western ..... Aristotle”
“The rhetorician can draw material from either universal or particular topics.”

Question:
Can a professional draw material from a new particular topic and turn it into a universal topic. Or can some topics just be too minute for universal attention?

QQC#3

Quote: "Language standards are the property of the ruling class; thus the diction, usage, and pronunciation of the power centers of capital cities tend to be the standards for a national language." (802 RT)


Question: Why is the elocutionary movement so focused on oral pronunciation rather than writing? How does the way you say words change how they are received?

QQC 3

Q: "Words, Sheridan argues, are not the only constituent of language."

Q: Do you think you can still be a successful rhetorician by words alone?

QQC 3

Quote: "Linguistic discrimination is a staple of human interaction-it was once quite deadly to mispronounce shibboleth."

Question: Do you think that today in our society we still hold correctness of pronunciation to such an intense level?

QQC #3

"... Rice called for a type of public speaking that progressed in a hierarchical order beginning with the understanding and ending with the influencing of the will. It was wrong, he added, for parliamentary leaders...to stir the emotions without first instructing the intellect."

Do you find yourself agreeing with, or your current definition of rhetoric abiding by Rice's critique of political rhetoric - that politicians should appeal to the intellect before they (if they ever) should try and appeal to emotions?

QQC #3

"Expressing a comparable opinion, Sheridan described elocution as 'the just and graceful management of the voice, countenance, and gesture of speaking."

With the influence of cell phones, social media, and "text talk", do you find this concept useful in your daily conversations?

QQC #3

Quote: Locke argues terms "must stand for ideas, not things, since the categories to which such terms refer do not have a concrete external existence." He regards ideas as products of interactions or experiences.

Question: Do you agree with Locke that words can be ambiguous? Do you think rhetoric effects how words are obscured in language?

QQC #3

Quote: "Indeed, courses in delivery or elocution became a standard part of the U.S. college curriculum (as they still are in many places) and a large number of treatises and textbooks on proper delivery were published throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries."

Question: Why are courses on elocution and delivery only in college curriculums? Should we be teaching these subjects throughout one's education or only in higher level institutions?

QQC #3: Elocutionary Movement

"The study of delivery, the elocutionists argued, would extend our knowledge of human nature. Whatever we learn about symbolic vocal expressions and gestures assumes importance because these characteristics belong exclusively to man."  (Pg. 192)

In what ways and to what extent do you understand the "art of delivery" as informing us of our own and others' human nature?

QQC 3

Quote: "Those who remained at home became became a ravenous market for the spate of pronouncing dictionaries, hard-word dictionaries, error-hunting grammars, and tracts on elocution produced during this linguistic century. But some leaders went further and attempted educational reforms that would make 'proper' English part of the curriculum."

Question: Do you agree that the concept of "proper" English promoted by the Elocutionary Movement is related to the current disparaging of dialects such as African American Vernacular English (AAVE)? In what ways could the idea of a "proper" English be used to further marginalize groups like the African American community and immigrants?

QQC 3

Quote: "... Sheridan described elocution as 'the just and graceful management of the voice, countenance, and gesture in speaking.' Included within the sphere of elocution were both oratory and oral reading." (193)

Question: The idea that there is a standard or expected rhetoric of  elocution is understandable, however, it is broken on a daily basis. Do you think our society is transitioning away from contemporary elocution ideology? Or how have we remixed away or reinforced traditional elocution?

QQC 3

Quote: "Language standards are the property of the ruling class: thus the diction, usage, and pronunciation of the power centers of capital cities tend to be the standards for a national language. Linguistic discrimination is a staple of human interaction—it was once quite deadly to mispronounce shibboleth" (Bizzell and Herzberg 802).

Question: How are elocution and linguistic discrimination linked in politics today? Is the brash language of populist rhetoric a direct response to the perceived language standards of the ruling class? Or are complaints against the "shrill" or "robotic" speech of (usually female) politicians also evidence of linguistic discrimination?

QQC 3: Enightenment

Quote: "In a separate lecture to a Dublin audience about the special danger of reading to dialect speakers like the Irish, Sheridan also says that what is needed is a better curriculum in Irish elementary schools, one that would include instruction in English, by which he means the polite London dialect."

Question: Do you think that the incredible emphasis on all rhetors using the same exact dialect helped or hurt rhetoric and society?

QQC 3

Quote:  “Indeed, they are more primitive than words, more natural where words are artificial, more universal where words are national, and more expressive of emotion than is the sophisticated language of words”

Question: Taking into the elocutionary movement idea that written word is inferior to spoken word, do you feel this is relevant to society today? Keeping in mind the influence of technology, social media, etc., do you think there was a shift in importance with the invention of these platforms?

QQC #3

"Locke, He said regretfully, wrote in a brilliant and speculative manner about the theoretical nature of a man, but completely ignored the challenge to apply his doctrine to a practical theme such as voice and gesture."

Question: What do you think are key significant components when it comes to delivery in terms of speech and why?

QQC #3

Quote: "there is scarce any particular thing existing, which in some of its simple ideas, does not communicate with a greater, and in other a less number of particular beings."(Locke 821)

Question: While considering Locke's assumptions about how knowledge and ideas work, is it possible for us to ever truly understand the internal world? (The cerebral, the heart/soul, etc.)

QQC 3

Quote: "is wrought through speech itself when we have demonstrated a truth or an apparent truth by the means of persuasion available in a given case." -Rhetoric of Western Thought Aristotle

Question: Is persuasion a good thing, a bad thing or both? Are there elements to it that push it to one side or the other?

QQC 3

Quote: "Despite the power of political oratory and public debate during the nineteenth century in increasingly democratic societies, rhetoric as an intellectual discipline diminished in importance, its theoretical substance dispersed among the related fields of psychology, philosophy, and criticism." (Enlightenment Rhetoric, 639)

Question: Why do you think rhetoric as an "intellectual discipline" or study in school became less prevalent over time compared to the other fields of study?

QQC2

“Quintilian emphasizes that the orator must strive to feel the emotions he attempts to invoke in his audience and must use the skill of the poet to picture scenes that bring forth these emotions”

Do you think a presenter or speaker can be effective and persuasive if he or she is not emotionally invested in his point or cause? 

QQC #2

Quote: "He defines rhetoric as the "art of speaking well," punning on well to mean both effectively and virtuously.... Mastery of rhetoric should be considered a "virtue" because it entails intimate knowledge of the good."

Question: In terms of "the art of speaking well", which would you consider the most predominate aspect in the art of speaking well, effectiveness or virtues?

QQC #2

Quote: "Quintilian's insistence that the good speaker be a good man is usually cited as the only important idea for which he might claim originality." (RT 360)

Question: Quintilian believes that there should be a father and son relationship between teacher and student. How do you think this might affect the process for helping develop oration skills? Would this affect the speech skills of a student learning today if they were taught this way?

QQC2

"Quintilian recommends that the orator study philosophy" He believes that moral philosophy in instruction to rhetoric will result in an uncorrupt use of oratory.
Quintilian discusses the corruptness of Rome during this time. His inability to trust in the morality of men resulted in this implication. Do you believe moral philosophy impacts an orator? Is this still relevant?

QQC #2
Quote: "He defines rhetoric as the 'art of speaking well', punning on 'well' to mean both effectively and virtuously. Oratory that does not move its hearers toward the good is not 'rhetoric,' by  Quintilian's definition."

Question: Applying this definition to today's society, do you think we use our rhetorical platforms in effort to "speak well" both effectively and virtuously? I mean sure times have changed, but from the Twitter and Instagram posts made daily, what does our society idealize rhetorical and how do we translate that through our means of communication?

QQC: #2

"By thoroughly blending instruction with moral philosophy, Quintilian implicitly responds to Plato's fears about the corrupt use of oratory." (Quintilian 361)

This is, indeed, the way to ensure the Hitlers and Trumps (clearly different in their respective magnitudes of detriment, but effectuating detriment nevertheless) of the world do not unethically/immorally run away with their mastery of rhetoric.
This is a quite fine ideology, but how would you begin to implement Quintilian's measure and ensure the "blend" is real and encompassing? 

QQC 2

Quote: “I began writing about Aspasia, for instance, only when I began resisting the Paternal Narrative that assured me she was either apocryphal or a glorified prostitute, that she could not be legitimized because her words appeared only in "secondary" sources, and that she could not and did not represent an entire community of rhetorical women in classical Greece.”

Question: is is possible that rhetoric that isn’t produced from a primary source, is inaccurate or invaluable?

QQC 2

Q: "Quintilian's insistence that the good speaker be a good man is usually cited as the only important idea for which he might claim originality."

Q: With the idea of a good speaker being a good MAN, do you think that this belief is still valid in today's society?

QQC #2

Quote: "Quintilian emphasizes that the orator must strive to feel emotions he attempts to invoke in his audience and must use the skill of the poet to picture scenes that bring forth these emotions."

Question: Based off of this quote, do you think that the best public speakers are the ones who agree with and are passionate about the topic they are speaking on? Can you still deliver an extremely effective speech even if it has to do with a matter you do not believe in?

QQC2

Quote: "Quintilian compares the teacher-student relationship to one between a loving father and a devoted son... Thus the teacher would inspire love of learning, not fear of punishment."

Question: Why do you think Quintilian's rhetoric had a detailed focus on pedagogy as opposed to his rhetorical predecessors (ex: Plato, Isocrates, Cicero)?

QQC #2

Quote: "Quintilian here prescribes the more advanced exercises of the progymnasmata, exercises in speaking and writing that progress ultimately to the topic "praise of blame of laws."

Question: Why do you think we have gone away from teaching this topic? Was this important to Quintilian because of the political climate of Rome during this time?

QQC #2

"By thoroughly blending instruction in rhetoric with moral philosophy, Quintilian implicitly responds to Plato's fears about the corrupt use of oratory." (361)

Plato's fear of corrupt oratory is based in his dislike of moral relativism as an idea by which orators could operate. Today, wouldn't the end goal of  an unbiased moral philosophy lecture be to showcase the variety or moralistic understanding, therefore reaffirming the very thing Plato wanted to avoid?

QQC #2

"...that the object of oratory is to lead men by speaking to that which the speaker wishes."

Even though most of us are developing broader views on rhetoric than those of the Sophists (referred to in the quote above) and deny that rhetoric has to 'persuade' an audience, is it not truthful, or at least helpful in forming a definition of rhetoric, to think of oratory/rhetoric as a means of leadership?

QQC 2

Quote: “Like Cicero in De Oratore, Quintilian feels he must answer charges that the ideal that he seeks is impossible for mortals to achieve, that such a. good man will be hard to find. Quintilian’s answer is that he will make one, through that often readers might regard as an interdisciplinary effect involving educational psychology, sociology, literary criticism, and moral philosophy.”

Question: Is inspiring a “love for learning” versus of fear of punishment achievable through good moral teachings and can it be used to create a good person?

QQC #2

“Mastery of rhetoric should be considered a "virtue" because it entails intimate knowledge of the good" (Quintilian, 295).

Considering that in Quintilian’s definition of rhetoric, he claims that rhetoric is only mastered when the knowledge is "good", how do you think Quintilian would have argued against influencers such as Hitler who had clearly mastered rhetoric and had effectively used it with what we consider to be bad, yet he thought he was doing good?

QQC 2: Quintilian

Quote: "Oratory that does not move its hearers toward good is not "rhetoric," by Quintilian's definition."

Question: Do you agree with his assessment, that rhetoric only truly rhetoric when it's used for good?

QQC 2

Quote: "Quintilian wishes to call attention not just to the quantity of the orator's reading, but the sincerity with which he applies the ideas to life" This quote makes Quintilian seem lime a great teacher. It makes it sound like he didn't want his students to just regurgitate what they read but instead learn from what they are reading and find their own ides from that reading.

Question: Does this form of teaching work today?

QQC 2

Quote: "He defines rhetoric as the "art of speaking well," punning on well to mean both effectively and virtuously. Oratory that does not move its hearer toward the good is not "rhetoric," by Quintilian's definition. Natural ability and learning contribute equally to rhetorical skill (a departure from the views of Isocrates and Cicero, who gave natural ability primacy). Mastery of rhetoric should be considered a "virtue" because it entails intimate knowledge of the good." (Quintilian, 295)

 Question: Do you agree with Quintilian's definition of rhetoric? What are some ideas that could be included in his argument to make it a bit stronger? If you do or don't resonate with Quintilian's definition of rhetoric explain why or why not.

QQC 2

Quote: "Thus when Antonius, in his defense of Manius Aquilius, exhibited on his breast, by tearing his client's robe, the scars of the wounds which he had received for his country, he did not trust the power of his eloquence, but applied force, as it were, to the eyes of the Roman people, who, it was thought, were chiefly induced by the sight to acquit the accused" (Bizzell and Herzberg 386).

The above quote is intended to illustrate that oratory or rhetoric is not merely the art or worker of persuasion, for one can be persuaded by other means, such as a compelling action or visual.

Question: Taking Glenn's argument for the remapping of rhetoric into account, how might Quintilian's privileging of oratory over all other forms of rhetorical practice work to exclude other rhetorical practices from history? If oration against the emperor "could be fatal" (Bizzell and Herzberg 359) in Quintilian's Rome, then could "[applying] force...to the eyes of the Roman people" become a rhetorical act for those rendered voiceless by the Roman Empire?

QQC 2

“Quintilian emphasizes that the orator must strive to feel the emotions he attempts to invoke in his audience and must use the skill of the poet to picture scenes that bring forth these emotions”

What do you think Quintilian’s ideal leader of “corrupt Rome” looks like?