The Rhetorical Situation
Lloyd
f Blitzer explains the rhetoric style in a way that was fairly complicated, but
I think I got the gist. What I took from the article is that the rhetoric
language is made up of three principles.
One of these principles was exigency. I’ve
never heard this word before and I believe it means something that isn’t good
that’s being brought to an audience’s attention. So essentially, it’s like an
argument but with more persuasive aspects pushing the audience to believe
something should be done about a situation.
The second principle was audience. What I
took from this part is that it isn’t as much as the author keeping his audience
in mind because it’s angled towards everyone, but that the audience must be
willing to listen and keep an open mind. When he said an audience must be able
to change, I thought that this was a key factor in the rhetoric style. It was
saying that the writing is meant specifically for those who will be willing to
understand and do something.
The third principle was constraint. This
one I had the most trouble understanding, but from what I understand, it is a
factor that plays a role in the situation. It can show the authors’ beliefs as
well as their proof. This one was harder for me to understand honestly mostly because
of the way it’s worded I suppose.
In general, it is important to have those
three elements for the rhetoric style. Each one has its own important role in
the style. And it is important to have the rhetoric response structured well. It
was also easy to understand that a rhetoric response to a situation was like
and answer to a question. What was confusing to me was when he said all
rhetoric was persuasion, but in another line said that it shouldn’t be confused
with persuasion. My guess is that it’s different because it’s more important
and in-depth then simple persuasion. For the most part it was a little
difficult to understand, but understanding these three elements and how they
applied is what I took from this article.
No comments:
Post a Comment