Building on History

In “Rediscovering the Lost Art of Researching The History of Rhetoric,” Richard Leo Enos discusses the importance of returning to a “humanist scholarship”. Enos claims that research has drifted from looking at mostly primary sources to looking at commentary and suggests looking at the history of rhetoric will help to reclaim research as it has been practiced in the past. Enos provides examples of primary sources being or nearly being ignored. This is dangerous because the expulsions of primary sources prevents the development of knew ideas and approaches. Enos’s claims are supported by articles by Edwar Corbett, Maxine Hairston, and James Kinneavy in their articles in Rhetoric and Praxis: The Contribution of Classical Rhetoric to Practical Reasoning.

Corbett, Hairston, and Kinneavy show cultures have built on the ideas of the past and that important techniques are often lost, misunderstood, or ignored. In “The Topoi Revisited,” Corbett argues that Latin rhetoricians built on Greek ideals while applying their own approaches. This shows the importance of researching the history of rhetoric to discover new approaches. The Latin Rhetoricians used their ideas of rhetoric along with the Greek’s to create a stronger form. Corbett uses the topics to prove that generations of rhetoricians have built on ideas from past practices. Quintilian borrows the topics from Aristotle. “Quintilian especially thought of the topics as a valuable training device for callow pupils aspiring to be eloquent orators, but it is also clear that he hoped the maturity that came with experience would wean the pupils from this rather mechanical system of heuristics,” (pg. 46 Corbett). Corbett claims that Aristotle used the topics to organize rhetorical arguments where Quintilian used the topics to teach students rhetoric, but didn’t expect them to continue the practice with the topics. The building on past forms continues through the Renaissance and all the way to Kenneth Burke where Corbett links the dramatistic method to Latin rhetoricians. “Burkes pentad (act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose) for instance, could be viewed as a version of the series of questions like Quis, Quid, Quando, Quomodo, Quare, that the Latin rhetoricians used as topoi when discussing a particular person,” (Corbett 55). In looking at the history of rhetoric Corbett noted how rhetoric has been strengthened by each generation of rhetoricians contributing ideas or alternate approaches.

Hairston and Kinneavy each explore a technique of rhetoric that has been neglected due to inappropriate use, and/or oversimplification. Hairston focuses on enthymeme. She claims that enthymeme is an important method in Aristotle’s Rhetoric that is no longer used by composition and rhetoric teachers because it is misunderstood. It seemed that considering enthymeme dealt with the audience for word choice and how structure. Enthymeme works with some audiences due to beliefs, purpose and time. The notion of time relates directly to Kinneavy’s subject, which was kairos. Kineavy argues that the common definition of kairos doesn’t define the term completely. Kairos is more than the importance of timing, is also incorporates ethics and art. “Levi begins his article on kairos in Plato with this statement ‘the concept of kairos, as we have often observed, is both an ethical and an aesthetic concept,’” (Kinneavy 91). In art and writing what is ethical to a society would be represented as good or “beautiful” like in Greek times. The argument must not only appeal to time but the audience’s ethics as well.

The three articles in Rhetoric and Praxis support Enos’s ideas about using the history of rhetoric to return to “The Art of Research” by revealing the impact of past practices on modern rhetoric and neglected and oversimplified terms. We must explore what has been to continue the growth of rhetoric and discover forgotten and new methods and attempt new approaches.