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.