English 891TT, Fall 2010

Introduction to Rhetorical Theory

University of Massachusetts Amherst

INSTRUCTOR: David Fleming

CLASS MEETINGS: M, 5:00 - 7:30 pm, Bartlett 456

CLASS EMAIL LIST: english-891tt-01-fal10@courses.umass.edu

OFFICE: 305 Bartlett Hall

OFFICE HOURS: W 1:00 - 3:00 pm & gladly by appt.

PHONE: 545-0610 (o)

EMAIL: dfleming@english.umass.edu

1.  DESCRIPTION.

The study of rhetoric is traditionally concerned with how messages are crafted by authors to achieve desired effects in audiences.  The oldest rhetorical theories are mainly arts of public speech, but rhetoric has also been important as a school subject devoted to eloquence more generally, including arts of written composition.  Today, “rhetoric” is probably best known as a term of political abuse; but, in the academy, it survives in a variety of approaches for looking at the suasory function of discourse.  Whether revived or moribund, capacious or narrow, rhetoric is one of the best developed and most powerful verbal disciplines available to us.

This course is a graduate-level introduction to that discipline.  It will be divided into two parts: In the first, we’ll look at the development of ancient rhetorical theory and pedagogy in classical Greece, especially as that development can be traced in the works of Plato, Aristotle, their forerunners, and their successors.  In the second part, we’ll test the usefulness of ancient rhetorical theory and pedagogy in contemporary life and examine modern and postmodern developments, especially as these have grappled with the new conditions of our lives and new ways of thinking about language, performance, character, community, and reason.

2.  ASSIGNMENTS.

• Reading and Discussion : Expectations for reading – both close and wide – will be high.  I will provide guidance for discussion, but most of the responsibility here will be yours.  To prepare and enrich our discussions, I ask that you come to every class meeting with a half-page (single-spaced) response to the relevant text (or part thereof) that engages it in some way: summarizes a key point, connects it to something you’ve read or experienced elsewhere, analyzes how a particular argument is made, criticizes that argument, locates a problem of some kind in the text, asks a question that might be pursued later in more depth, or makes some other kind of intervention not listed here.  I will collect these responses at the end of class each week and read but not grade them.  Please do not write more than half a page and do not treat this as a formal paper – it’s meant to prepare discussion and jump-start our collective engagement with the texts.
  
  
• Class within a class : Once during the semester, in lieu of a half-page response, each of you will prepare and deliver a class presentation of about 20-30 minutes on that week’s reading.  You may structure this presentation any way you see fit.  A good way to begin is to take one or two sections from the week’s reading and prepare asummary-response for us.  But there are other options: you could flesh out a more substantial “essay” concerning the reading, lead a focused discussion about it, raise issues with it, or have us work through some problem regarding it.  No secondary readings are required for this assignment, though I’m happy to suggest an article or two that might help.  In any case, I’m available for assistance as you plan this presentation.  I’ll pass around a sign-up sheet so you can begin planning these classes soon.
  
  
• Semester Project : As the semester progresses, you also need to develop and pursue an individual research project relevant to this course.  The project should come out of our reading and discussion, but the type of project and motivation behind it are otherwise unrestricted.  The topic should be rich and complex; and it should be something that you’re genuinely curious and excited about.  The project can be historical, critical, philosophical, curricular, bibliographic, or some other type; it can be a proposal for a longer project; it can be a resource of some kind; or it can be a conventional seminar paper.  There will be opportunities to try out ideas and formulate plans for this assignment as the semester proceeds; and I’m always happy to meet individually with you about it.  Your work on this project will be “published” in 3 different forms, the first two serving as intermediate steps toward the last.                     back to top
  

  • an in-class oral proposal for the project, of about 5-10 mins., delivered during either the Nov. 1 or Nov. 8 meeting (week 8 or 9), and accompanied by a 1-2 page written proposal turned in at the same time;
  • an in-class oral progress report, also of about 10 mins., delivered during the Dec. 6 meeting (week 13), and accompanied by a 4-5 page written progress report turned in at the same time; and
  • a final paper of around 15-20 pp (DS) due December 20, two weeks after our last meeting.

3.  TEXTS.

Most of the readings in the course will come from the following texts, all available for loan in the Five Colleges Libraries and for purchase at Amherst Books (8 Main Street, Amherst, MA; 256-1547; www.amherstbooks.com).  They are listed here in the order in which we’ll read them.  At least one copy of each book has been placed on 3-day loan at W. E. B. Du Bois Library; note also that Jarratt’s Rereading the Sophists is available as an e-book through the Five Colleges Libraries online catalog.

• Havelock, Eric A.  Preface to Plato.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1963.
• Plato.  Gorgias.  James H. Nichols, trans.  Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1998.
• Plato.  Phaedrus.  R. Hackforth, trans.  Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1972.
• Jarratt, Susan C.  Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric Refigured.  Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1998.
• Aristotle.  On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse.  2nd ed.  George A. Kennedy, trans.  New York: Oxford UP, 2006.
• Garsten, Bryan.  Saving Persuasion: A Defense of Rhetoric and Judgment.  Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2006.
• Connors, Robert J.  Composition-Rhetoric: Backgrounds, Theory, and Pedagogy.  Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh P, 1997.
• Crosswhite, James.  The Rhetoric of Reason: Writing and the Attractions of Argument.  Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1996.
• Allen, Danielle S.  Talking to Strangers: Anxieties of Citizenship since Brown v. Board of Education.  Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2004.

I’ll have more to say about particular editions, and alternatives to them, on the first day of the semester.  There are likely also to be occasional articles, chapters, or primary texts distributed as photocopies in class or put on reserve in Du Bois Library.

4.  CALENDAR.