Fahnestock - style

Certain metaphors shape our way of thinking

Repetitions/ forms lead us to fill in conclusions

Writing is not "essentialist" - style is something students have control of.

Crescendo "I came, I saw, I conquered"

Same goes with images - ape to man -- we forget that this is just one conception - other discoveries break single train.  Suggest that we progress smoothly, that time has a direction, that it happens consistently, and that humans are the "end product"

Darwin - evolutionary argument - our emotions, the way we respond to joy etc. derives from animals.
beta and alpha dog- antimetabole ("up" and "down"

see categories of word choice -

Waddell

 141

In the absence of certainty, in the absence of an objective foundation upon
hich to base belief, we must accept that both rational and appropriate are social
:nstructs. In light of the rational bias in Western culture, these two constructs
c e often used almost interchangeably to mean prudent, judicious, or sensible.
~ne goal of this study, however, is to broaden our concept of rationality, with
respect to both arguments and our respons~~s to those arguments, to include
emotional as well as logical appropriateness. 1
'} More accurately, one goal of this
study is to encourage wider acknowledgement and acceptance of the extent to
which our concept of rationality is already shaped by our sense of emotional as
well as logical appropriateness. Thereby, I hope to make the emotional component
of the decision-making process more amenable to criticism. From this
perspective, the question to ask of a behavior, judgment, decision, appeal, or
not "Is it rational?" or "Is it emotional?" but "Is it appropriate?"
which to
then we must simultaneously accept responsibility fOi
a for constructing truths.20 Among the truths we construct are our
determinations of what is rational and what is appropriate. A perennial objection
to constructivist arguments, however, is that they lead to a radical relativism in
which no adjudication between appropriate and inappropriate is possible since
no absolute principles apply across contexts.
Gadamer offers a solution to this problem, however, with his notion of a
"fusion of horizons" between the past and the present (Gadamer 273). From this
perspective, even in the absence of an objective, absolute foundation for belief,
we can still define general principles that cut across immediate contexts because
these immediate contexts are themselves situated within a larger and more stable,
yet still socially constructed, cultural context, what Gadamer calls our "thrownness."
That is, we are born (or "thrown") into a historical context, a culture, a
.... ,_,_,,u·u"' in whose values, prejudices, and presuppositions we are steeped. What
understanding we have, we gain not by freeing ourselves of these prejudices. but
by applying them; for we understand only by virtue of the questions we ask; those
questions are framed by our prejudices. We distinguish appropriate from inappropriate
prejudices when we expose our prejudices to the test of experience
(Gadamer 236-37).
Hence, the prevailing values and presuppositions of a culture cut across
immediate contexts and apply in a wide range of cases much as absolute
principles would. However, unlike moral absolutes, values and presuppositions
are socially constructed and, hence, mutable. The ideal rhetor both embodies and
appeals to what his or her society deems the best and most noble of its sentiments
and prejudices.21 When the times require it, the ideal rhetor helps the society adapt
to new and changing circumstances by helping it to define values that are
appropriate to the issues raised by these new, often more complex, conditions.22

continue on 142!
Appropriateness

Fortenbaugh

158
"And yet you are angry at such a man as myself, who is, I think, [1]26
inferior to no one in knowing and setting forth what needs to be done,
[2] a friend of the city, and [3] superior to money. For [1] the man who
knows [what needs to be done] and does not explain [it] clearly is in
the same condition as if he had not thought of [what needs to be done];
and [2] the man who has both but is full of ill will toward the city, will
not present a [recommendation] with the same loyalty; and [3] if this
too is present and yet conquered by money, everything will be sold for
this one thing.

Here we have Aristotle's triad in only slightly altered form. Practical wisdom
is divided into being able to determine a proper policy and to set it forth;
goodwill corresponds to being a friend of the city; and virtue is narrowed to
being superior to money, i.e., a particular moral virtue much looked for in
politicians. Pericles even anticipates Aristotle by remarking on the harmful
effects of the opposite condition: being unable to set forth a policy clearly,
having ill will toward the city, and being unable to resist money. The first of
these opposite conditions-being unable to set forth policy in a clear manner-
is narrower than Aristotle's lack of sense (1378all),27 but the general
idea is the same: an absence of practical wisdom inhibits counsel, as does an
absence of goodwill and virtue.

Technical proofs - ethos, logos, pathos - creates entheymemes - "techne" - art, greek
Atechnical proofs - "he says" witness, testimony etc ALSO - confessions (by torture)

wisdom, virtue, goodwill - create credibility (according to Aristotle)

Aristotle thought of ethos as separate from other areas of the speech.
Not about prior reputation - the blank slate - prove that you had good will.

Aristotle encouraging people to come to his school - craft art - assure the art of rhetoric with an ethical background.

Issue of taxonomy - he is seperating things out - but some of those work together.

Sayers

 Class notes --
all humans are unique, women are human, women are unique
 this would be the unstated

All humans equal, all men and women humans, all men and women are equal. She never states that.
definitions - equality - picks out
so, equality is another enthymeme
metonmymy - men and women part of the whole

Kaffir and Frenchman - possible and impossible

Arguing against maxims- so pointing out that the maxims are not true

"That is so obvious"...(318) implication

humor

Guides us to the "human being" point! - bits and pieces create the overall enthymeme -  so, a form of repetition - internalization; repetition when effectively done.

The technical communication

318
Even then, issues with being defined as a feminist

aggresive feminism?

meaningless slogans ... calls for qualifiers

Kaffir (ugh  - hate that term) and Frenchman

mechanically minded people and poets - what we are "meant" to do by nature/ inclination

319
"but, that a womanisjust as much an ordinary human being
as a man, with the same individual preferences, and with just as much right
to the tastes and preferences of an-indirid_ual. What is repugnant to every
human being is to be reckoned always as a member of a class and not as\
an individual person."

"What
is unreasonable and irritating is to assume that all ones tastes and preferences
' have to be cond1t10ned by the class to which one belongs. That has ,
been the very common error into which men have frequently fallen about J'r'
women-and it is the error into _which feminisq women are, perhaps, a little inclined to fall about themselves."

The individual woman  wanting education- not based as class

320
women shouldn't try to mould themselves into men's medieval academic world - unsound - ha!
"not even amusing"

"To this we may very properly reply: "It is true that they are u~ing.
Even on men they are remarkably unattractive. But, as you men have discovered
for yourselves, they are comfortable, they do not get in the way
of one's activities like skirts and they protect the wearer from draughts
about the ankles. As a human being, I like comfort and dislike draughts."

"But we are not such abandoned copy-cats as to
attach these useful garments to our bodies with braces. There we draw the
line. These machines of leather and elastic are unnecessary and unsuited
to the female form."

"The only decent reason for tackling any job is that
your job, and you want to do it."

321
Asserts Men, have taken jobs from the women

"It is useless to urge the modern woman to have twelve
children, like her grandmother. Where is she to put them when she has
got them? And what modern man wants to be bothered with them? It is
perfectly idiotic to take away women's traditional occupations and then complain
because she looks for new ones. E~--~()tnan is a human being-one
cannot repeat that too often-and a human being must have occupation, if
he or she is not to become a nuisance to the world."
Too funny!

" But they cannot have it both ways. If they are
1ing to adopt the very sound principle that the job should be done by the J
son who does it best, then that rule must be applied universally"

322
 Men get job and family

the office - everyone hates certain kinds of work

"In fact, there is perhaps
, only one human being in a thousand who is passionately interested in his
job for the job's sake. The difference is that if that one person in a thousand·
is a man, we say, simply, that he is passionately keen on his job; if she iS:
a woman, we say she is a freak."

323
no special knowledge of "a women's point of view"

" Even where women have special knowledge, they may disagree among themselves
like other specialists. Do doctors never quarrel or scientists disagree?
Are women __ ~eally not human, that they should be expected to toddle along
a~HOck llk.e-··sneepH-drink that people should be allowed to drink as
much wine and beer as they can afford and is good for them; Lady Astor
thinks nobody should be allowed to drink anything of the sort. Where is the
"woman's point of view"?"

324

affinity groups - times

Wallace - Topoi

388
The first major category is called the
Starting Points of Argument. These reflect
the premises on which contending
parties are in agreement. The first subclass
is labeled, Facts and Truths. By
facts Perelman means "objects of precise,
limited agreement," such as the
data acceptable in a given case. By
truths he means statements that emerge
from systems of thought, such as the
statements that embody the laws or principles
of a science or an art.

If rhetorical discourse by its
nature is concerned with people in general
rather than with people as specialists,
one wonders whether scientific
knowledge, particularly that represented
by the hard sciences, physics and chemistry,
can logically find a place in a system
of modern topoi. If there are clusters
of scientific generalities that should
be the property of all men, what are they
and who selects them? By refusing to
acknowledge the validity of this problem,
the scientists doomed the general
education movement in this country.
They poohpoohed the efforts of generalists
to decide upon ideas and materials
that should enter into general communication.


data
association and dissociation - "terrorist"  - political discourse - liberal/ teaparty etc.
390
"Topics like these, it should be observed,
demand elaboration through deductive
structures whose content and language
are the outcome of definitions.
The apparatus for finding topics of
disassociation is through the application
of what Perelman labels "philosophical
pairs." I present a few of his pairs:
Appearance / reality

lines of argument - argument/ counter argument

"Take the pair, appearance / reality. It is
a prototype of all conceptual disassociation,
says Perelman, for all our sensations
are responses to an object world.
Appearances are the immediately given;
reality is that which is independent of
experience. As a rule, people attach a
higher value to reality than to appearance.
The outcome is a master topic of
argument: Appearances differ, but reality
is fixed.

Perleman - style and content work in tandem to create an argument (MLK)

Jamieson

Clinton -
Use of enthymeme for Clinton to counter attacks.
Rhetorical creation of audience - women

Hairston

enthymeme
73
" Then the writer can look for places to find those elements.
15 An article by Lawrence Green on using the enthymeme
in writing classes also points out that having students define and
articulate the syllogism that underlies an argument helps them to
see whether their basic premises are value statements, normative
statements, or cause and effect statements. They can then judge
whether they are going to be abie to buiid a piausible argument
from their premises.16"

Rhetoric - syllogism
all men are mortal. Socrates is a man, therefore he is a mortal
BUT, there isn't a definitive "truth"
 
entheymeme- People who don't study fail. John is going to fail the test, he didn't study.
Premises tied into opinion.
so, all parts aren't true
60

First let's look at the ways in which the enthymeme has
misunderstood and oversimplified. Traditionally, both
cians and writing teachers have defined the enthymeme as
an abbreviated syllogism, compressed into a statement that leaves
out one of the premises. For example:
Formal syllogism: All graduates of Harvard are well educated.
Elaine is a Harvard graduate. Therefore she must be well educated.
61
Enthymeme: Elaine must be well educated since she graduated from
Harvard.

Syllogism: Science departments in major universities are controlled
by men. Men scientists discriminate against women scientists.
Therefore women scientists have trouble getting ahead in science
departments in major universities.
Enthymeme: Women scientists in departments at major universities
will have trouble getting ahead in their profession because their de~
partments are controlled by men.
The premise that male scientists discriminate against women scientists
is not expressed.

64
Russia enthymeme
not objective  - science, Russia, pro-technology
73
First, we can show students how to define the enthymeme that
underlies their arguments and then teach them how to identify the
common ground they are assuming exists between them and their
audience and to think about what information that audience has
that they can draw on for examples and support. As Professor
John Gage of the University of Oregon says in an article in Rhetoric
Review, spelling out the central enthymeme of an argument
doesn't necessarily solve the problems of composing that argument,
but it does bring them into view and help the writer to begin
to discover specific elements that can be used to persuade the
audience. Then the writer can look for places to find those elements.
15 An article by Lawrence Green on using the enthymeme
in writing classes also points out that having students define and
articulate the syllogism that underlies an argument helps them to
see whether their basic premises are value statements, normative
statements, or cause and effect statements. They can then judge
whether they are going to be abie to buiid a piausible argument
from their premises.16

Gronbeck

Such
reporters and propagandists must "invent"
viewpoints and material that will
keep the public interested and aligned
with a station's, newspaper's, or pressure
group's position. "Rhetorical invention"
represents a problem of major proportions,
especially for the party man:
How can he avoid mere repetitiousness
and yet keep his judgments before the
public?

This essay examines the efforts of
party men to invent material for public
consumption during an extended controversy.
The British Regency Crisis of
1788-89—produced by the presumed insanity
of George III and covering almost
five months of debate—generated some
1200 speeches in Parliament, unto tailed
inches of newspaper commentary, and
some eighty-to-ninety pamphlets for circulation
among the public. The Regency
Crisis, in that it polarized the country
and tested the propaganda machines
of both Government and Opposition,
affords us an excellent opportunity to
view the political inventional process at
work; enough pamphlets have survived
to show us ways in which a partisan press
invents substantive materials during a
protracted dispute of considerable rhetorical-
political moment. I shall begin
by examining the concept of "rhetorical invention"


By "rhetorical invention" I mean the
search for descriptive, cognitive, valuative,
or quasi-poetic stances capable of
effecting desired responses.
419

 Handout -

Gronbeck’s focus is on the means of invention during public debate. During national debates, reporters (who take on the role of rhetor) must keep the public interested and invested, and Gronbeck is interested in the patterns that arise from the how—how do rhetors use their relationship with their audience in the exchange of information?

“The rhetor […] ‘invents’ discourse by assuming a stance in relationship to his audience and by accumulating material consistent with that posture” (419).

This “stance” is what Gronbeck refers to as means of “rhetorical invention.”

He categorizes four different types of “stances” (419):

1.      Reportorial - represent as are

2.      Argumentative - intent to argue explicit

3.      Judgmental (valuative)- rhetor infers people's behaviors (allow audience to create a judgement

4.      Quasi-Poetic - use fiction to make a point

Each type of stance affects the audience in a certain way, by playing off of different “psychological processes) differentiation, human hope for external consistency, internal consistency, and analogy… in each case, these desires affect how an individual or group of individuals relates to information they take in.

“The constitutional exigency demanded public information and legal argument; the political exigency required evaluation of the personalities asking to guide the country…” (421).

Gronbeck uses the regency crisis of 1788-89 as his study and divides the crisis into four stages and follows the progression of the four types of stances throughout the stages:

1.      Pre-Parlimentary debate/ before Dec 1788)—Reports (reportorial)

2.      Dec 1788 (actual issues to debate)—Issues need debating (argumentative)

3.      Jan 1789 (Pitts winning)—character attacks/build-up (judgmental/valuative)

4.      Feb-March (Pitts win)—character attacks, and more creative means of doing so (judgmental and quasi-poetic)

The patterns that Gronbeck notices are a movement from potential to actual conditions, a movement from previous to present conditions, and playful to intense writing. Finally, the progression through categories makes sense for national debate as first the public must be made aware of what must be debated (reportorial). Then the information must be debated (argumentative). Then, as the issues begin to elicit a winning/losing side, another way to attack one’s opponent (or reinforce one’s self) outside of debate is to attack/construct character (judgmental). Finally, as the debates come to a close, the issues no longer take precedence, and therefore, the judgments being made by each side can take on more creative forms (quasi-poetic).

potential to actual conditions - previous to potential conditions

Gorgias

66
This essay offers a predisciplinary historical analysis of Gorgias' famous
speech. I call the analysis "predisciplinary" to indicate my belief that
the texts of fifth-century Greek writers, especially those by the figures commonly
referred to as the Older Sophists, ought to be approached with the
awareness that certain "disciplines" were not yet formalized either in theory
in practice. In particular, the dichotomy often used to distinguish between
"philosophical" and "rhetorical" discourse is simply not evident in the texts
of the fifth century that describe sophistic education.4
67
M~ con~ention is that certain persistent questions about Gorgias'
1!elen y~e!d different and perhaps unanticipated answers once the speech
is rep~s1t10ned as a predisciplinary text. I will revisit three questions:
':"hat I~ the spe~ch 's purpose? What are its contributions to fifth-century
d1scurs1ve practices? What are its contributions to fifth-century theory?

The stated goal of the speech is to exonerate the legendary Helen of the
charge of deserting her husband Menelaus and running away with Paris-the
act that precipitated the famous Trojan War.
68
Gorgias - show that blame on Helen is unjust

epideictic "display"

What happened to these speeches?

rhetoric or philosophy?
70
79
"I want to address several hermeneutic practices that have obscured
some of the ways Gorgias' Helen affected the content and practice of later
theorizing. Specifically, I want to identify those features of the text that can
be described as paradigmatic; that is, that serve as exemplars for later theorists.
Kuhn describes exemplars as "shared examples": practical, concrete
"problem solutions," the methods or procedures of which are imitated by
~thers.43 The virtue of such an approach is that it emphasizes that theorizing
~s .a form of praxis. Gorgias' Helen is not only a set of interesting concepts;
it is also a way of conceptualizing. His text not only provides us with another
chapter in the history of thought, but in the fifth century B.C.E. it enacted a
novel means of thinking. In short, in addition to asking the question "What
did Gorgias say?" we need to ask, "What did his speech do?" Advancing new
ways of theorizing about the world is at least as important as the content of
the specific theories we might associate with specific figures. It well may be
the case that Gorgias' most important theoretical contdbution is his act of
theorizing rather than any particular theoretical statement per se.
Though Gorgias' speech is filled with statements that we
81
In short, we underestimate the significance of the earlier \Vriters' efforts
to come to grips with the process of theorizing itse(f by overestimating the
sophistication of such early "theories." When predisciplinary theoretical efforts
are treated as if the authors were educated in methods and language
developed much later, their role in transforming intellectual practices is missed.

Notes from Karl:

“Toward a Predisciplinary Analysis of Gorgias’ Helen”

Edward Schiappa

Historiography

·         “Predisciplinary historical approach”

o   Predisciplinarity-the idea that when studying early texts, it is unfair/unjust/invalid to saddle them with analysis based on disciplines and theories not yet formalized or even invented.

o   In particular, predisciplinarity here means “avoiding vocabulary and assumptions about discursive theories and practice imported from the fourth century when analyzing fifth-century texts” can't use other terms -- like rhetoric that hasn't been invented yet - but it is ok to use terms to decide what is going on--to look at it in context

Research Questions:

1.      What is the speech’s purpose? Looks like he is trying to exonerate

2.      What are its contributions to fifth-century discursive practices?

3.      What are its contributions to fifth-century theory?

Arguments:

1.      Identifying Gorgias’ Helen as an “epideictic” speech is a misleading characterization.

2.      The speech is not a veiled defense of the art of rhetoric.

3.      Gorgias may have inaugurated the prose genre of encomia.

4.      Gorgias advanced fifth-century rationalism by enacting innovations in prose composition. Move from mythos to logos - move to prose

5.      Helen’s most significant “theoretical” contribution is a secular account of logos

Didn't have a theory of rhetoric, but was able to theorize

Apagogic—proving indirectly by showing the impossibility or absurdity of the opposing view

Apologia—a work concerned with justification or defense of a person or action

Encomium—a work concerned with praising a person or thing

Epideictic—speech of praise or blame

Epideixis—a speech written for presentation/demonstration

Logos—reasoned speech/”expression in prose”

Praxis—putting theory into practice

Predisciplinary - difference between philosophy and rhetoric (theory and practice). --  not just a teaching speech, display speech, teaching speech...it defies definition

Placement in time predates

display - advertising- educating, entertaining

- Schiappa - classicist - looking into historical backgrounds -- care not to force a meaning in interpretation

Corbett - topoi

 hueristics for invention
topoi - line of argument
44
It has been only since the shift of interest from the finished
product to the generating process that many teachers of composition
have developed a curiosity about how their students go about
writing the papers that they are assigned to write.

research - Janet Emig/ Linda Flower
psychologists/ sociologists

Aristotle - topoi

46
forms of arguments
47
The Latin rhetoricians picked up on the notion of the topics
and, as we have been shown by scholars like Elbert W. Harrington
and Michael C. Leff, put their own distinctive stamp on the
topics.2 They preserved the notion that the topics were places that
one consulted to find suitable arguments by using the Latin word
loci as the equivalent of the Greek word topoi. That metaphor of
places is preserved in some of the other images that rhetoricians
like Cicero and Quintilian used when referring to the topics: "seats
(sedes)," "regions," "veins or mines," "storehouses or thesauri."

48
topical systems
Although the Latin rhetoricians appropriated the Greek cuc:i1rt:>"n'"m
of the topics and impressed it with their own stamp, they
advanced the discipline of the topics. Both Cicero and ""'u.u . .ttu.u;,,.u
advocated a reliance on the fruits of a liberal education more than
on the mechanism of a topical system.
49
Middle Ages
Topics - guiding principles vs.  devices for principles
common themes for conventions
became stale
50
Locke - empiricism
 There was a widespread revolt, especially in the eight~
eenth century, against the epistemology practiced by the so-called
scholastic philosophers, and the syllogism became the symbol
the mode of thinking that the Age of Reason was rejecting.
The Grecian sophists were the first inventors of this artificial system
of oratory; and they showed a prodigious subtlety and fertility in the
contrivance of these loci. Succeeding rhetoricians, dazzled by the plan,
wrought them up into so regular a system that one would think they
meant to teach how a person might mechanically become an orator
without any genius at all. They gave him recipes for making speeches on
all manner of subjects.
51
Blair's depreciation of the topics could stand as an articulation of
the reasons many teachers today have declined to use this heuristic
system in the composition classroom. In their view, the topics
are unduly complicated, stifle creativity, and produce dull, trivial
discourse.
52
renewed interest 1960s

Pike/ Young - retrieval of what is known, analysis of problematic data, discovery of ordering principles

Topics
m
56
shaping data
modern topoi - Dudley Bailey
57
inferential reasoning - the computer (won't work if you don't put in the "proper" commands)
limitations of the computer
"Until computers can be programmed to make that kind of
discrimination, they may continue to work faster and more indefatigably
than people do, but they will not be "smarter" than
people are. I suspect that computers will not acquire that kind of
"smarts" until they develop a "topical sense." Then, and only
then, will the computer become a "rhetorician," and then, and
oniy then, will the computer become the generator of relevant
ideas and arguments and proofs that the topoi have been for
generations of speakers and writers."

9/4/13

Selzer
Rhetorical analysis - critical enterprise
HOW of using rhetoric
social situations
crafting messages
Aristilean concept -
textual - singular term - discrete
contextual - part of larger communicative chains

forensic
ceremonial
5 cannons - invention/

Get terms from list

Enos
- primary concern is "definition"
context of persuasion
intro - sets us up to take a look at context
frames the conversation of context - use of archeological rehetoric - how we look back on historical texts
"This principle holds for our~
approach to histori()gr~phy as well. The point of archaeological rhetoric is~
not only to diS"Zc;;;~~"'andr;~~'n8truct physical artifacts that provide insights
to the context within which rhetoric took place, but also to reconstruct the
mentalities of the culture that produced such discourse. In these two senses,
archaeological rhetoric is more than a mere search for observable, empirical
evidence; it is also an effort to construct the epistemic processes that invent
rhetoric. It is this effort to reconstruct the 12~~,igl.~~~tive that
will enhance our current methods of reseaich in classical rhetoric.
One of the primary points of reflection in seeking to evaluate the limitations"

physical/ cognitive processes

without "exigence" - limited to make errors of the past

He points out that the modern perspective is limited - must be acknowledged as a lense

Look beyond the predetermined context
- reconstruct mentalities

Epistemic - how one comes to knowledge
How is rhetoric invented
It is formed
 - scholar looking at spaces - how does that create "speech" - rhetoric

Differences - rhetoric between Greeks, SPartans (Symbolic belt), Athenians

Where are women in this - who is excluded? But we don't need to assume that they don't have rhetoric. - leads into hegemony

What hegemonies do we create/ value when we read?
Self reflection

Overall goals of archeological rhetoric?
- consider constructing "archeology of a mind" -- this is how to explore the cognitive context.  How do you figure out what that mentality is? Difficult to get there.

Enoch
1. Address current methods
2.  from class:

In her article titled “Releasing Hold: Feminist Historiography Without the Tradition,” Jessica Enoch addresses current methods of feminist historiography in rhetoric and showcases two methods that she calls “historiographic ‘outliers’” (59).  Enoch describes how feminist historians seek to revise rhetorical history

by creating scholarship that falls into two dynamic and robust categories: (1) histories that recover the work of female rhetors and rhetoricians, and (2) histories that reread the rhetorical tradition through the lens of gender theory (58).

Though Enoch provides alternatives, she makes it clear that she does not seek to undermine or disregard recovery and rereading, but provide two other, not so mainstream, ways of addressing feminist historiography.  She examines these “outliers” to see “what this kind of work is doing, how it’s doing it, and how it might speak back to the larger project of feminist historiography” (59).  Enoch’s two rhetorical processes are remembering and gendering.  For Enoch, remembering works within recovery and yet expands upon this historiographic recovery (60).  Gendering, too, is an “extension of and elaboration on gender analysis” (60). 

            Enoch begins with remembering and provides examples of first recovery (Sappho’s poem in Ritchie and Ronald’s anthology), then shows several examples of remembering and how they participate in the same traditions as recovery, but also expand upon those methods.  She first provides Buchanan’s “Sarah Siddons and Her Place in Rhetorical History” as an example of remembering because Siddons was once considered canonical, but is now a “ ‘forgotten figure’” (61).  Enoch focuses on public memory in her explanations of remembering.  She discusses dominant public memories versus coutnerpublic memories which shape and inform our interpretations of the world.  Public memory is important because it affects memorialization (Maddux’s example of Iron-Jawed Angels) (63).  Enoch notes the importance of understanding how we remember and what are the uses of those memories because “memory…is seen as a rhetorical act in and of itself” (65).  Enoch ends her discussion of remembering by noting that forgetting is an act of erasure and feminist historiographic practice should work towards understanding and valorizing “ ‘the contributions of women to public life…and to critique the way these contributions have continued to be marginalized’” (67). 

            Next Enoch addresses gendering as an extension of gendered rereading or gender analysis.  She discusses the differences between studying gendered hierarchies versus rhetorical gendering, the latter of which she discusses further.  Enoch gives examples from Palczewski, Jack, and herself.  Jack’s example of WWII women and the rhetorics of time and body show how “varied rhetorical strategies… constituted and reconstituted gendered difference at the moment when these differences had the potential to be challenged”(Women as nibble, but women need to be back in the home when the war is over) (69).  Palczewski’s example of anti-suffrage pamphlets shows how men and women were portrayed to switch roles and “underscores how historical agents have enthymematically leveraged the anticipation of gendered change” (Women will start smoking, be sexualized, men will be emasculated) (70).  Enoch then shows that gendering can bring together feminism with queer and transgender rhetorics to “underscore the need for inquiry not just into the rhetorical process through which gendered norms are established but also into the rhetorical means necessary to protest them” (71). 

            Enoch ends with the plea not to ignore other categories in rhetoric—race, culture, class, physical ability, and sexuality.  She concludes that feminist historiography needs to release its hold of rhetorical tradition and see more broadly the different rhetorical problems in feminist scholarship.

So, basically:

            Enoch identifies two alternative methods to recovery and gendered rereading—remembering and gendering of rhetoric—not as replacements but as alternatives that provide deeper meaning for feminist historiography.

Enoch, Jessica. “Releasing Hold: Feminist Historiography without the Tradition.” In Theorizing Histories of

Rhetoric. Baillif, M. (Ed.). Carbondale, IL: SIUP (2013): 58-73.

Look beyond the space! Part of a rhetoric - the school house example, look at the space.