Introduction to Rhetorical Theory

RhCS 103

Dr. Mifsud
Fall 2018
mmifsud@richmond.edu
Office Hours By Appointment, typically a week out
402 J-Weinstein Hall

Dept. of Rhetoric & Communication Studies

Course Description and Overview: What is rhetoric? This course is an introduction to the study
of rhetoric by way of its history and theory. We learn to think about language, speech, argument,
and symbolic action at large as social forces, influencing how we perceive ourselves and others,
how we understand our relationship to local and global communities, and how we engage
important issues in politics, law, and culture. We ask questions about how to forge a democratic
public sphere, where we are free to live safe and secure lives in the pursuit of happiness. This takes
us to questions about how meaning and identity are made, how power and authority are
constructed and enacted, how political and cultural change happens or fails to happen. The goal of
the course is to provide students with an historical overview of predominating theories in the
scholarly study of rhetoric. This historical study of rhetorical theory will help us to see that such
questions have been asked for some 2500 years in the Greco-Roman-European-U.S. American
history of ideas. Knowing the predominating theories emerging from this history will help us to see
more deeply various answers to these questions of meaning, identity, power, authority, politics,
law, justice, and culture. In addition to this course being significant for the above expressed
reasons, this course is significant for being a gateway course to the Rhetoric and Communication
Studies major. Agility at the theoretical level of rhetorical studies is essential for the research
sophistication expected in upper division courses. In addition to serving RhCS, this course serves as
well Women, Gender, and Sexuality studies as a special cross listed course. For those students
interested in a WGSS focus for their coursework in this class and WGSS unit towards the major,
please come see me.

Top 5 Objectives:

To learn how to explore theory via various definitions or paradigms of rhetoric: persuasion,
interpretation, argumentation, identification, signification/asignification from different historical
perspectives

To explore theory historically in the canonical primary texts of the Greco-Roman-European-U.S.

American tradition. Other traditions exist and ought to be studied.

To learn how to read and discuss with understanding, facility, and critical astuteness primary text.

To learn how to write with understanding, facility, critical astuteness, and according to MLA Style
scholarly essays in rhetorical theory.

To learn how to navigate the dynamic relations between theory and practice, between theoretical
texts, public texts, and lived experiences.
Books:
Readings will be on Blackboard from the following sources, but can be purchased independently
for the purpose of building one’s library for the major and for life:

James Herrick, The History and Theory of Rhetoric

Timothy Borchers, Rhetorical Theory
Gerard Hauser, Introduction to Rhetorical Theory
Patricia Bizzell and Herzberg, The Rhetorical Tradition
Plato, Gorgias
Plato, Phaedrus
Aristotle, Rhetoric
St. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine
Hayden White, Tropics of Discourse
Kenneth Burke, Grammar of Motives; Rhetoric of Motives; Language as Symbolic Actions;
Attitudes Towards History
Jacques Derrida, Limited, Inc., for the essay “Signature, Event, Context”
Henry Louis Gates, Jr., The Signifying Monkey
Helene Cixous, The Newly Born Woman for the essay, “Sorties”
MLA Style Manuel should be purchased as a reference to guide citations, footnote writing, and the
creation of Works Cited pages. MLA Style is the required style for this class.

Students are responsible for securing most readings for study, though many will be on
Blackboard. Students are responsible for securing citation information for written work.

Daily Class Plan:

Most readings can be located on-line simply by Googling the name of the text and the writer.
Make sure to use only those translations and versions that have legitimate citations. Most
readings will be available on Blackboard as pdfs. Typically these pdfs will be from the Bizzell
and Herzberg anthology of primary texts. Also supplemental readings from textbooks and
scholarly literature in the discipline of rhetoric and communication studies will be added to
Blackboard to offer secondary support for reading the primary text, to offer examples of critical
analysis in the field on major texts, and to offer ideas and to provide additional context for themes
engaged in the class. I will add readings to Blackboard as I see fit for our learning community to
develop along the highest standards of excellence.

Week 1 Introduction to Class and Each Other; Why study rhetoric? What is the study of
rhetoric in terms of its history and theory?

Week 2 Rhetoric as Persuasion: The Sophists: Protagoras, various extant fragments,

anonymous, Dissoi Logoi, Gorgias’ “Encomium of Helen”

Week 3 Rhetoric as Persuasion: Plato’s Gorgias and Plato’s Phaedrus

Week 4 Rhetoric as Persuasion: Aristotle’s Rhetoric Book I-II

Week 5 Rhetoric as Persuasion: Aristotle’s Rhetoric Book III and Summary

Week 6 Classical Rhetoric Review: Rhetoric as an Art of Persuasion

Exam Review and Exam: Arranged through Blackboard

Week 7 Rhetoric as Interpretation: Medieval: St. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine

 And Modern: Hayden White, Tropics of Discourse

Week 8 Rhetoric as Identification: Kenneth Burke, Language as Symbolic Action,

“Definition of Man”

Week 9 Rhetoric as Identification: Kenneth Burke: Selections from a Grammar of

Motives, Rhetoric of Motives, Attitudes Towards History Language as Symbolic
Action covering concepts of identification, dramatism, perspective by
incongruity, comic attitude.

Week 10 Rhetoric as Signification/Asignification: Jacques Derrida, “Signature, Event,

Context”

Week 11 Rhetoric as Signification/Asignification: Henry Louis Gates, selections from

“Signifying
Monkey”

Week 12 Rhetoric as Signification/Asignification: Henry Louis Gates, selections from

“Signifying
Monkey”

Week 13 Rhetoric as Signification/Asignification: Helene Cixous, “Laugh of Medusa”

Week 14 Rhetoric as Signification/Asignification: Helene Cixous, “Sorties”

Week 15 Class Review

Final Exam: Will be arranged through Blackboard during final exam period

Essays will be assigned as needed, deadlines determined collaboratively, at least two papers will
be assigned, more if we need more

Final Papers and Digital Portfolio Due before Final Exam.

Brief Overview of Assignments:

Tuesday Posts: To prepare for each week of study and class together, students will post to a
discussion forum on Blackboard. These posts will be responses to assignments I will give to help
you study, learn, prepare for class, and present in class. Thursday classes will extend and deepen
Tuesday’s, continuing discussion of Tuesday Noon posts. [MLA in text citations; works cited]

Discussing: Each class you are expected to join in a conversation about these texts and ideas.

Digital Portfolio: At the end of the semester you will submit a professional digital portfolio of
your work in this class. Be thinking all along how you want to design this portfolio to showcase
your work and your learning. Students do an array of things from blogs, to prezis, to traditional
documents with live links, to web pages, to an array of creative digi-styles for presenting one’s
work to others. Find your digi-style.

Exam Taking: You will take a mid term and a final exam.
Grading Distribution:
Professionalism, Posts, Discussion: 25%
Digital Portfolio: 25%
Exam Taking: 50% Grades assigned on each exam

All grades are assigned on the University of Richmond’s A-F scale:

http://registrar.richmond.edu/faculty-staff/grades/ Individual grading criteria will be included
with each assignment.

Per our Academic Credit Policy at the University of Richmond:

http://registrar.richmond.edu/services/policies/academic-credit.html In sum: To be
successful in this course, you should devote 10-14 hours each week in class reading and
studying the material, and preparing assignments. In a 5 day work week, that means 2-2.8
hours a day (120-168 minutes) including class time on T/R.

The University has tremendous resources to support your learning. Please maximize them:
Writing Center, Speech Center, Academic Skills Center, CAPS, Undergraduate Research, A & S
Student Symposium, RhCS Conference Submission. All of these resources we will discuss in
class, and I will encourage you to bring them to bear on your learning to the greatest effect of
your happiness and excellence.

This is a trust bound space. You are to honor the honor code. You are to write it on all of your
assignments, and sign the pledge. We will talk more in class about what a trust bound space
means and how it supports excellence in your learning.

Contact me in person or via email to schedule an office meeting by appointment only. Do not
expect immediate reply to email. I will respond to email as soon as I can, and typically during
regular business hours, 8:30-5, M-F. My schedule is typically a week out, so plan ahead to
schedule a meeting.
GRADING STANDARDS FOR WRITING AND SPEAKING:

For Writing
Is it designed to persuade? Does it propose a clear, arguable thesis and present a sustained case for it?
Is it well organized? Does it present its case in an efficient and orderly fashion?
Is it clear? Does it convey meaning through carefully chosen words in sentences and paragraphs that can
be easily followed by a good reader?
Is it full of evidence well incorporated? Does it demonstrate thoroughness in collecting all the evidence
relevant to the issue at hand? Does it present evidence accurately? Is the evidence incorporated in a manner that
results in a graceful creation of a cogent, persuasive case?
Is it insightful and imaginative? Does it demonstrate a capacity to see beyond the obvious and
resourcefulness in conveying complex arguments and ideas?
Is it perceptive of the subtleties of ideas? Is it attuned to the nuances and complexities of the ideas we
study, making judgments about them that are appropriately manifold and qualified?
Is it stylistically engaging? Is it written both in a way that draws the reader in and in a tone appropriate to
the subject?
Is it grammatically and orthographically correct? Is it virtually free of errors in grammar, syntax, and
spelling?
Is it properly documented according the guidelines of MLA style manual?

For Speaking:
Is it designed to communicate in a meaningful way with the audience? Does it show awareness of the audience
and make attempts to address potential audience opinions, attitudes, and beliefs? Does it show awareness of the
rhetorical situation, including rhetorical constraints and opportunities? Is it within time?
It is well organized? Does it have a clear introduction that orients the speech to the audience and the audience
 to the speech? Does it have clear and distinct main points? Does it have an appropriate number of main points? Are
main points ordered in the most sensible way? Does it have a clear conclusion that summarizes the speech and ends
decisively? Does it have transitions that signpost movement of the speech, provide internal summaries and previews,
and allow the speech to flow in an understandable and memorable way?
Is it well developed? Does it incorporate ample and reliable supporting materials and evidence in a graceful and
cogent manner? Does it express the subject as fully as possible considering the rhetorical situation? Does it properly
document evidence and supporting materials? Does it creatively present ideas that are not only fully developed but
made emotionally relevant and communicated by a speaker who has made him/herself credible in the rhetorical
situation?
Is it insightful and imaginative? Does it demonstrate a capacity to see beyond the obvious and a resourcefulness
in conveying complex arguments and ideas?
Is it perceptive of the subtleties of issues and ideas? Is it attuned to the nuances and complexities of the subject,
making judgments about them that are appropriately manifold and qualified?
Is it stylistically engaging? Is the language use appropriate to the rhetorical situation? Is the language use
copious, eloquent, and correct?
Is it performatively engaging? Does the delivery flow gracefully from the speaker to the audience? Is memory
appropriate to the situation? If used, are notes, scripts, and visual aids incorporated unobtrusively and
professionally?
In General: As you consider your writing and speaking, please keep in mind that dimensions of rhetoric intermingle (for
example, good use of evidence involves the imagination). Writing and Speaking cannot be judged by searching for separate
dimensions in a check-list. Instead, the above questions should be used to help you understand what excellent rhetoric aims
for. For me to judge your writing and speaking “excellent,” I must respond enthusiastically in the affirmative to all of the
above questions.

A Note on PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT: Students are expected to comport themselves as

respectful professionals and human beings engaged in serious intellectual pursuits and
community building along lines of rhetorical studies. Attendance hence is mandatory, but if ill, do
not come to class. Contact me immediately to notify me, and propose a make-up plan. Classroom
disruptiveness, racial and sexual harassment, etc. will not be tolerated.
Title IX makes it clear that violence and harassment based on sex and gender are Civil Rights
offenses subject to the same kinds of accountability and the same kinds of support applied to
offenses against other protected categories such as race, national origin, etc. If you or someone
you know has been harassed or assaulted, you can find the appropriate resources here
http://studentdevelopment.richmond.edu/student-concerns/sexual-misconduct/reporting.html