Rhetoric - The Great Corrupter

Rhetoric is taught with academic pride and flourish atpassions, and thereby mislead the audience's judgment;
major universities around the world, and it's closelyand he claimed that the techniques of Rhetoric are
associated with the prestigious, ancient name of"perfect cheats... wholly to be avoided... rhetoric, that
Aristotle, one of the greatest thinkers that Westernpowerful instrument of error and deceit" (An Essay
Civilization has ever produced. Yet --- though mostConcerning Human Understanding, 1690). What a
people don't know it, including many teachers of writingpowerfully negative statement!
--- Rhetoric has historically been surrounded by aMost probably the most brilliant --- yet commonsensical
tradition and reputation for deceit and corruption.and scholarly --- modern text on Rhetoric is the 1984
Just about everyone knows that Socrates wasbook by C.H. Knoblauch and Lil Brannon, Rhetorical
negative about Rhetoric, as shown by Plato in hisTraditions and the Teaching of Writing. In this largely
Gorgias dialogue. In it, Socrates concludes, "Rhetoric isignored book of keen insights into Rhetoric, the authors
mere flattery and disgraceful declamation." What mostactually attack the revival of classical Rhetoric as
don't know is that even proponents of Rhetoric havebeing a barrier to the creation of a new rhetoric, which
had a lot of negative things to say about it.a lot of experts have been clamoring for.
Negative Statements from PROPONENTS ofWhy? Because, as they show, the ancient creators of
RhetoricRhetoric believed that it merely provides a means of
For instance, the ancient Roman philosopher andpresenting or displaying truths which have been
statesman Cicero (106-43 B.C.) taught Rhetoric to theindependently validated in a traditional but unnecessary
sons of the aristocracy in Rome. And he wrote majorverbal dress, that Rhetoric was largely a ceremonial
works on Rhetoric, including De Inventione (Onexercise. In other words, Rhetoric has always provided
Invention) and De Oratore (a dialogue that discussesmainly the forms of speaking and writing without
the principles of Rhetoric). However, Cicero thoughtsubstance or content --- and what greater
that the most important factor in eloquence is to ---condemnation can you have than that?
exaggerate and amplify the truth!!! In fact, he thoughtStephen Spender (1909-1995) --- English poet, novelist,
that speaking the truth was something that a speakeressayist --- provided an interesting negative insight into
should do only when it suits his purpose! And Cicero'sboth Rhetoric and rhetoricians when he opined,
overarching purpose in life was---"To plant in the world"Rhetoric is the art of deception, isn't it? And when you
an everlasting memorial of myself." What an idealist....become good at using rhetoric on other people, you
Quintilian (35-100 A.D.) also taught Rhetoric to the youtheventually and all unknowingly use it on yourself."
of the nobility of Rome, as his chief occupation. HisRhetoric Corrupted the Roman Empire
master work was Institutio Oratoria, a twelve-volumeThe first interaction of Romans with professional
work on Rhetoric that borrowed from many sources,Sophistic Rhetoricians was to expel them from the
but more from Cicero than from any other. Quintiliancity. How could that happen? Well, even Roman
felt that verecundia (Latin for a combination ofpeasants knew that Rhetors were notorious for
modesty, decency, and restraint) was an absolute vicelacking in values and virtues, being interested almost
in an orator because it would make him hesitate,exclusively in money and fame (like Cicero). And
change his mind, or possibly even stop his talking toSophist Rhetors were widely known to criticize and
think things over! Heaven forbid!tear down everything of moral repute. That's what
Dio Chrsysostom (40-120 A.D.) was a Romanthey had done to the Greek culture.
philosopher, orator, and historian who was banishedBut the Sophistic Rhetors were great entertainers.
from the Roman Empire at one time. He protestedThey persevered and finally broke down the Roman
that he was not a Rhetorician because he did notpublic's prudent resistance towards them through
make money, he was not interested in crooked deals,excessive flattery and through an intensive campaign
and he did not promote things in the market place ---of debunking established values, confounding
for he was not a Rhetorician!commonsense conclusions, and turning on a vast
Another Roman writer who agreed with Dioamount of charm, wit, and synthetic sincerity. As
Chrsysostom was Lucian of Samosata (125-180 A.D.),Rhetors overcame the public's resistance and became
who was formally trained as a rhetorician. Lucianalmost their only source of entertainment, the insatiable
claimed that a Rhetor is a "pushing, driving,hunger of the people for such entertainment
money-chasing operator who leaves any sense ofeverywhere throughout the Roman Empire was
decency, propriety, moderation, and shame at homematched only by an unbridled passion for the spoken
when he goes to work." How's that for putting downword. There was nothing they would not pay for
yourself, your profession, and your fellow practitionerssuaviloquentia, "pleasing speech," the top-selling product
of Rhetoric?of the Second Sophistic period that caught on and
Probably a turning point for Rhetoric was St.stuck.
Augustine's (354-430 A.D.) acceptance of Rhetoric asAs St. Augustine pointed out, the dominating desire of
a major tool in his ministry with the Catholic church. Hepeople through the Roman Empire was to relax and
felt that, since the devil uses the powerful devices ofenjoy themselves at the theaters and games (sound
Rhetoric, those on God's side should also be free tolike anything you're familiar with?). Lucian was more
use it in self-defense (I don't quite understand that logicspecific: He explained that the Rhetors simply got them
--- Let me get this straight, now: So if the devil usesdrunk and went to work on them; the huge audiences
lies and deceptions, then The Church should do so,that filled amphitheatres were paralyzed before they
too? What about murder --- same reasoning? Doesn'tknew what hit them. They were putty in the hands of
sound like very Christian logic to me... ).well-trained Rhetoricians, helpless automatons without
St. Augustine made several statements indicating hea mind or will of their own, as some critics have
was well aware of the deceptive nature of Rhetoric,pointed out.
especially in letters, where he often had to tell hisBecause of the popularity and influence of professional
readers that his enthusiasm was real and truthful, andRhetors, Rhetoric became the chief study in schools
not just rhetorical activities, rather than truthful activities.for the elite throughout the Roman Empire. Parents
A much more modern negative comes fromdidn't want their children to study the hard way. They
Professor Wayne C. Booth (1921-2005) of theinsisted that eloquentia or Rhetoric was the most
University of Chicago, in his last book published beforeimportant thing in the world for their children to learn,
his death, The Rhetoric of RHETORIC (2004). In it,and that's what they were taught, almost exclusively.
Professor Booth points out that, beyond a doubt, in theAnd so schools were not interested in turning out
United States and surely throughout much of the world,experts. They gave their students just enough
we are harmed daily by floods of careless or evenbackground to enable them to follow the main ideas of
deliberately harmful "Media Rhetrickery."scholarly authors. And along with merely the main idea
That term, "Media Rhetrickery," is Booth's unique termof every subject, every treatise, every speech studied,
for the widespread misuse of Rhetoric in the media,they were taught the Rhetorical techniques that
which incessantly employs Rhetoric for tricky, deceitful,allowed them to supply simplistic, entertaining prose
and corrupt purposes. Booth spends a great deal ofthat allowed them to appear knowledgeable when
time in his book talking about various forms ofthey weren't, eventually reducing all scholastic output to
"rhetrickery" (Rhetoric used for tricky and deceitfulimpotence. Thus, the educated elite perpetuated a long
purposes), often apologizing for the demeaning use ofline of Rhetors that achieved wonderful reputations
Rhetoric that occurs so frequently in all walks of life.and acquired great wealth in public activities from cities,
Coming from Booth, this is a heavy indictment ofdynasts, kings, and private individuals. They spoke a
Rhetoric, though he doesn't mean it to be an indictment,great deal, but were sadly lacking in intelligence,
since he has always been a highly respected authorityaccording to Dio Chrysostom, an eye-witness of the
on, and proponent for, the positive values of Rhetoric.times.
Negative Statements from OPPONENTS of RhetoricFrom 100 A. D. onward in the Roman Empire, in every
Of course, opponents have been plenty frank aboutbranch of science and art, there was a universal
their own assessments of Rhetoric, and we'll examineinability to create new compositions, as well as a
a few of their sentiments, as well.complete incapacity to invent anything new, which is
For example, Francis Bacon (1561-1626) --- Englishtypical of an age devoid of all creative power. It's not a
philosopher, statesman, scientist, lawyer, jurist, author ---new story. As Rhetoric came to be the dominant
thought that Rhetoricians of his time were far tooforce in other flourishing cultures, such as Greece,
much interested in the nice arrangements of theirEgypt, Babylonia, and the Arabic empire, the same
sentences, and the decoration of their works withmental and moral degradation occurred as Rhetoric
tropes and figures, than in the weight of matter, worthbegan to dominate each of them.
of subject, soundness of argument, originality, or depthOther forces had their telling influences, to be sure. But
of judgment of their writing and speeches (Theit was the universal worship and practice of Rhetoric
Advancement of Learning, 1605).that corrupted the Roman Empire and brought it to its
John Locke (1632-1704) --- the great English thinkerknees.
and philosopher --- concluded that the purpose ofYou wondered where Rhetoric got its bad reputation?
Rhetoric was to imply wrong ideas, inflame theNow you know.