Let his mode of reading, however, be, above all, manly, uniting gravity with a certain degree of sweetness.
It's interesting how he conflates spoken reading with personal reading. I remember hearing once that reading at that time, even privately was often spoken aloud
In lecturing on the poets, the grammarian must attend also to minor points, so that after taking a verse to pieces, he may require the parts of speech to be specified, and the peculiarities of the feet, which are necessary to be known, not merely for writing poetry, but even for prose composition.
Sounds like any English class I've ever taken since junior high. Things haven't changed much
READING remains to be considered.
First time this has been addressed explicitly for education, though Cicero did mention the need to be well-read
28.
Why doesn't he address difference in voice and use? Why does he refer to written words by how they sound when on the page it is more important how they look and are arranged?
Custom in speaking, therefore, I shall call the agreement of the educated, as I call custom in living the agreement of the good.
Danger of custom relying too much on past or the vulgar and popular
Words derived from antiquity have not only illustrious patrons, but also confer on style a certain majesty not unattended with pleasure, for they have the authority of age and, as they have been disused for a time, bring with them a charm similar to that of novelty
beautifully written
Some have not hesitated to apply to etymology for the origin of every name or word;
danger of etymology, it can be over done and lead to no deeper insight. should be used with care
Etymology,
The history of words and the way they change is significant and effects our understanding
Etymology, which inquires into the origin of words,
robur, so spoken and written by the greatest authors, are made to change the vowel of the second syllable into -o, because their genitives are roboris and eboris, and because sulpur and guttur preserve the vowel -u in the genitive. For which reason also jecur and femur have raised disputes. 23. This change of theirs is no less audacious than if they were to substitute the letter -o for -u in the genitive case of sulpur and guttur, because eboris and roboris are formed with -o. Consider the example of Antonius Gnipho, who acknowledges that robur and ebur are proper words, and even marmur, but would have the plurals of them to be robura, ebura, marmura. 24. But if they had paid attention to the affinity of letters, they would have understood that roboris is as fairly formed from robur as militis, limitis, from miles, limes, or judicis, vindicis, from judex, vindex,
This is hard to understand. Do these principles translate over to English?
This is all Greek to me, Sorry, bad pun.
But we must remember that the course of analogy cannot be traced through all the parts of speech, as it is in many cases at variance with itself.
Analogy is not a sound basis for argument
Language is based on reason, antiquity, authority, custom. It is analogy, and sometimes etymology, that affords the chief support to reason. A certain majesty, and, if I may so express myself, religion, graces the antique.
beautiful
Custom, however, is the surest preceptor in speaking, and we must use phraseology, like money, which has the public stamp.
Money metaphor. We use our language like currency and must be able to exchange and understand.
Words are proper when they signify that to which they were first applied; metaphorical, when they have one signification by nature, and another in the place in which they are used.
Foreign words, like men, and like many of our institutions, have come to us, I might almost say, from all nations.
Language is formed on complex interactions and has many histories, especially English. It cannot be classified as our language and other language because these so often overlap
They shall therefore be called figures, which are more common among the poets, but allowable also to writers and speakers in prose.
Sounds like he is describing a cliche
These three sorts of irregularity some distinguish from the solecism, and call a fault of addition "a pleonasm," of retrenchment "an ellipsis," of inversion "an anastrophe,
Many rhetorical styles are irregularities in proper grammar
by addition (as nam enim, de susum, in Alexandriam); by retrenchment (as Ambulo viam, Aegypto venio, ne hoc fecit); 39. by transposition, by which the order of words is confused (as, Quoque ego, Enim hoc voluit, Autem non habuit)
Can these faults/errors be deliberately used to our advantage
In sounds also occur those faults of utterance and pronunciation, of which specimens cannot be given in writing;
Speech is a different medium than writing and it is easier to detect differences in voice. We can choose to alter our voice, accent, and tone, or use these to our advantage
A word taken singly is more often objectionable than faultless, for however we may express anything with propriety, elegance, and sublimity, none of these qualities arise from anything but the connection and order of the discourse, since we commend single words merely as being well suited to the matter.
Importance of context. meaning only comes through connection
The attention of the learner will then be transferred to syllables,
It builds upon itself
ppear much subtlety on points, which may not only sharpen the wits of boys, but may exercise even the deepest erudition and knowledge
teaches discretion, attention to detail
The grammarian has also need of no small portion of eloquence that he may speak aptly and fluently on each of those subjects which are here mentioned.
Must have a wide knowledge paired with eloquence. Sounds like Cicero
into two parts, the art of speaking correctly, and the illustration of the poets
Grammars two parts. This seems to be how our schools now develop skills with English
When a tutor has observed these indications, let him next consider how the mind of his pupil is to be managed. Some boys are indolent unless you stimulate them; some are indignant at being commanded; fear restrains some and unnerves others; continued labor forms some; with others, hasty efforts succeed better.
Tailor teaching to the student
The next symptom is imitation, for that is an indication of a teachable disposition, but with this provision: that it express merely what it is taught, and not a person's manner or walk, for instance, or whatever may be remarkable for deformity.
imitation, mimesis
The chief symptom of ability in children is memory, the excellence of which is twofold: to receive with ease and retain with fidelity
Memory key link to success
It is of advantage, therefore, for a boy to have schoolfellows whom he may first imitate and afterwards try to surpass. Thus will he gradually conceive hope of higher excellence.
competition is essential to success
25
hough ambition itself is a vice, it is often the parent of virtues.
? Strange logic
First of all, let him who is to be an orator and who must live amidst the greatest publicity and in the full daylight of public affairs
Sociability is required in orators
For the tutor does not stand by the pupil while he is writing, or learning by heart, or thinking; and when he is engaged in any of those exercises, the company of any person whatsoever is a hindrance to him.
Self-learning or teaching. I am a tutor for both a center and granite school district and this is a huge idea right now. children learn better when they discover things themselves and they don't have to rely on someone handing them answers
Hence, rendered effeminate and luxurious, they do not imbibe immorality from schools, but carry it themselves into schools.
Character already formed from earliest experience with parents
Memory (as I shall show in its proper place) is most necessary to an orator and is eminently strengthened and nourished by exercise; and, at the age of which we are now speaking, and which cannot, as yet, produce anything of itself, it is almost the only faculty that can be improved by the aid of teachers.
33
We learn by being surrounded by words, sounds, images. Learn through immersion and association as well as mistake
, as the elements of learning depend on the memory alone, which not only exists in children, but is at that time of life even most tenacious
This sounds like modern psychology, particularly of children's plasticity when young
If I seem to my reader to require a great deal, let him consider that it is an orator that is to be educated, an arduous task even when nothing is deficient for the formation of his character;
Mirrors Cicero. The Romans seem to take rhetoric far more seriously
It is they that the child will hear first; it is their words that he will try to form by imitation.
early experience is the most formative. We learn through imitation
not natural ability, but care, that was wanting
Here he differs from our earlier readings. Suggests genius is not a part of us but a product. It reminds me of Gladwell's book Outliers.
As birds are born to fly, horses to run, and wild beasts to show fierceness, so to us peculiarly belong activity and sagacity of understanding
Uses metaphor to make it seem natural and inborn
We must not, therefore, start from any and every accepted opinion, but only from those we have defined -- those accepted by our judges or by those whose authority they recognize
"Truth" as defined by social opinion.
uneducated more effective than the educated when addressing popular audiences
"in oratory the very cardinal sin is to depart from the language of everyday life, and the usage approved by the sense of the community." - Cicero, De Oratore
e must know some, if not all, of the facts about the subject on which we are to speak and argue.
Well, duh.
The principles of good diction can be so taught, and therefore we have men of ability in this direction too, who win prizes in their turn, as well as those speakers who excel in delivery -- speeches of the written or literary kind owe more of their effect to their direction than to their thought.
He seems to be attempting to degrade delivery simply on the basis that it doesn't conform to his idea of a systematic teaching method.
Although, it may have been a trend of the times, and over-used. So he might just be trying to steer popular opinion to a more elevated level of taste an appreciation.
Now it was because poets seemed to win fame through their fine language when their thoughts were simple enough, that the language of oratorical prose at first took a poetical colour, e.g. that of Gorgias.
fame or persuasion? Part of persuasion is to engage the listener.
Nobody uses fine language when teaching geometry.
Not true, actually. In teaching, delivery is of particular impact.
Still, the whole business of rhetoric being concerned with appearances, we must pay attention to the subject of delivery, unworthy though it is, because we cannot do without it.
a rather stuffed-shirt attitude distinguishing and elevating some areas of study over others. Acting was not considered a high function at the time. But also, style is something largely developed through observance and mimicry, and given to natural charisma - things that do not lend themselves to teaching and pedagogy
Besides, delivery is -- very properly -- not regarded as an elevated subject of inquiry.
Underrating technique and style as merely theatrics, though admittedly most influential
No systematic treatise upon the rules of delivery has yet been composed; indeed, even the study of language made no progress till late in the day.
emphasis on pedagogy
so it is in the contests of public life, owing to the defects of our political institutions.
all style and no substance; all bark and no bite; context without content; empty or menaingless rhetoric
These are the three things -- volume of sound, modulation of pitch, and rhythm -- that a speaker bears in mind.
in a pleasing way that draws in the listener and enages the audience
A third would be the proper method of delivery; this is a thing that affects the success of a speech greatly; but hitherto the subject has been neglected.
invoking the ethos - style
The second is how to set these facts out in language.
organization and arrangement, placing of emphasis, us of technique to derive desired affect
how persuasion can be produced from the facts themselves.
first form of persuasion is to determine how compelling or persuasive are the facts, and how the facts will be perceived by the audience.
The second is how to set these facts out in language.
with consideration to audience and purpose
For it is not enough to know what we ought to say; we must also say it as we ought;
trope
(1) by working on the emotions of the judges themselves, (2) by giving them the right impression of the speakers' character, or (3) by proving the truth of the statements made.
three types of persuasion
In making a speech one must study three points: first, the means of producing persuasion; second, the style, or language, to be used; third, the proper arrangement of the various parts of the speech. We have already specified the sources of persuasion.
1st, the approach to take, 2nd, consider the audience, and, 3rd, organization and arrangement
Even now most uneducated people think that poetical language makes the finest discourses. That is not true: the language of prose is distinct from that of poetry. This is shown by the state of things to-day, when even the language of tragedy has altered its character.
Poetry does not equal intelligence. Distinct difference between poetry and prose.
the language of prose is distinct from that of poetry.
These are the three things -- volume of sound, modulation of pitch, and rhythm -- that a speaker bears in mind.
ways to make the audience listen and actually hear what you are saying
For it is not enough to know what we ought to say; we must also say it as we ought; much help is thus afforded towards producing the right impression of a speech.
I took a language class once and the intonation that you used when speaking could mean something entirely different if you did not say it correctly.
the language of prose is distinct from that of poetry.
Now it was because poets seemed to win fame through their fine language when their thoughts were simple enough, that the language of oratorical prose at first took a poetical colour, e.g. that of Gorgias.
Gorgias and poetical color.
It is, essentially, a matter of the right management of the voice to express the various emotions -- of speaking loudly, softly, or between the two; of high, low, or intermediate pitch; of the various rhythms that suit various subjects.
Various voices.
We have shown that these are three in number; what they are; and why there are only these three: for we have shown that persuasion must in every case be effected either (1) by working on the emotions of the judges themselves, (2) by giving them the right impression of the speakers' character, or (3) by proving the truth of the statements made.
It is, essentially, a matter of the right management of the voice to express the various emotions -- of speaking loudly, softly, or between the two; of high, low, or intermediate pitch; of the various rhythms that suit various subjects
Tempo of speech as well, to provide emphasis.
Men do speak in this strain when they are deeply stirred, and so, once the audience is in a like state of feeling, approval of course follows. This is why such language is fitting in poetry, which is an inspired thing.
emphatic, colorful, and exaggerated expressions of speech
To express emotion, you will employ the language of anger in speaking of outrage; the language of disgust and discreet reluctance to utter a word when speaking of impiety or foulness; the language of exultation for a tale
Tone of language must match emotions of piece
This aptness of language is one thing that makes people believe in the truth of your story
Your language will be appropriate if it expresses emotion and character, and if it corresponds to its subject.
Your language will be appropriate if it expresses emotion and character, and if it corresponds to its subject. "Correspondence to subject" means that we must neither speak casually about weighty matters, nor solemnly about trivial ones; nor must we add ornamental epithets to commonplace nouns, or the effect will be comic, as in the works of Cleophon, who can use phrases as absurd as "O queenly fig-tree." To express emotion, you will employ the language of anger in speaking of outrage; the language of disgust and discreet reluctance to utter a word when speaking of impiety or foulness; the language of exultation for a tale of glory, and that of humiliation for a tale of and so in all other cases.
The duty of the Arguments is to attempt demonstrative proofs. These proofs must bear directly upon the question in dispute, which must fall under one of four heads. (1) If you maintain that the act was not committed, your main task in court is to prove this. (2) If you maintain that the act did no harm, prove this. If you maintain that (3) the act was less than is alleged, or (4) justified, prove these facts, just as you would prove the act not to have been committed if you were maintaining that.
And once again Aristotle seems to be giving advice on using rhetoric regardless of the morality of its use.
As to the place of style: the right thing in speaking really is that we should fight our case with no help beyong the bare facts
It seems like Aristotle keeps changing his mind about this.
The duty of the Arguments is to attempt conclusive proofs.
Arguments=proof
Three chief features of these clever, pointed sayings are: (1) antithesis, (2) metaphor, and (3) actuality or vividness (i.e. the power of "setting the scene before our eyes").
The simile is a full-blown metaphor. Similes are useful in prose as well as in verse; but they must not be used often, since they are of the nature of poetry.
Simile=poetic devise
Rare, compound, and invented words must be used sparingly in prose; in which, over and above the regular and proper terms for things, metaphorical terms only can be used with advantage, and even these need care.
Use common terminology
Upon the subject of delivery (which presents itself here) no systematic treatise has been composed, though this art has much to do with oratory (as with poetry).
Style; differentiating prose from poetry
Smart and popular sayings.
Periodic style.
The best rhythm for prose is the paean, since from this alone no definite metre arises.
Appropriateness.
Impressiveness of style.
correctness of language
The proportional (as definined in the Poetics) metaphor must always apply reciprocally to either of its co-ordinate terms.
Some discussion of metaphor
Style, to be good, must be clear
Four faults of prose style
Conclusion). This has four parts. You must (1) make the audience well disposed towards yourself and ill disposed towards your opponent, (2) magnify or minimize the leading facts, (3) excite the required kind of emotion in your hearers, and (4) refresh their memories by means of a recapitulation. --
Make them remember what you talked about and want to side with you
The best moment to employ interrogation is when your opponent has so answered one question that the putting of just one more lands him in absurdity. In replying to questions, you must meet them, if they are ambiguous, by drawing reasonable distinctions, not by a curt answer.
questioning your listener/audience
A speech has two essential parts: statement and proof
Each kind of rhetoric has its own appropriate style. The style of written prose is not that of spoken oratory, nor are those of political and forensic speaking the same. The written style is the more finished: the spoken better admits of dramatic delivery -- alike the kind of oratory that reflects character and the kind that stirs emotion.
Different rhetoric styles
Tact and judgement are needed in all varieties of oratory.
I agree
The foundation of good style is correctness of language, which is discussed under five heads: (1) right use of connecting words; (2) use of special, and not vague general, terms; (3) avoidance of ambiguity; (4) observance of gender; (5) correct indication of grammatical number.
foundation of style has 5 points
Four faults of prose style, with illustrative examples: (1) misuse of compound words; (2) employment of strange words; (3) long, unseasonable, or frequent epithets; (4) inappropriate metaphors.
Style, to be good, must be clear; it must also be appropriate, avoiding both meanness and excess of dignity.
how to be 'style'ish
the right thing in speaking really is that we should fight our case with no help beyong the bare facts; and yet the arts of language cannot help having a small but real importance, whatever it is we have to expound to others.
Interesting point.
Through the influence of the poets, the language of the oratorical prose at first took a poetical colour, as in the case of Gorgias. But the language of prose is distinct from that of poetry
Gorgias said that you should kill your opponents' earnestness with jesting and their jesting with earnestness;
This will only work, though, if your audience looks to you as some sort of authority figure - if you don't seem to know what you're talking about, I think that doing what Gorgias suggests would only make you look foolish.
Chapter 13 (1414b) (B) Arrangement. A speech has two essential parts: statement and proof. To these may be added introduction and epilogue. Chapter 14 (1415a, 1415b, 1416a) Introduction. The introduction corresponds to the prologue in poetry and the prelude in flute-music. The most essential function and distinctive property of the introduction is to indicate the aim of the speech. An introduction may (1) excite or ally prejudice; (2) exalt or depreciate. In a political speech an introduction is seldom found, for the subject is usually familiar to the audience.
Not much has changed.
Chapter 7 (1408b) Appropriateness. An appropriate style will adapt itself to (1) the emotions of the hearers, (2) the character of the speaker, (3) the nature of the subject. Tact and judgement are needed in all varieties of oratory.
Chapter 5 (1407b) The foundation of good style is correctness of language, which is discussed under five heads: (1) right use of connecting words; (2) use of special, and not vague general, terms; (3) avoidance of ambiguity; (4) observance of gender; (5) correct indication of grammatical number. A composition should be easy to read and therefore easy to deliver; it should avoid (1) uncertainties as to puntuation, (2) zeugma, (3) parenthesis.
In your closing words you may dispense with conjunctions, and thereby mark the difference between the oration and the peroration: "I have done. You have heard me. The facts are before you. I ask for your judgement."
!!
Appropriateness. An appropriate style will adapt itself to (1) the emotions of the hearers, (2) the character of the speaker, (3) the nature of the subject. Tact and judgement are needed in all varieties of oratory.
contextual intelligence, adaptability, and agility.
Four faults of prose style, with illustrative examples: (1) misuse of compound words; (2) employment of strange words; (3) long, unseasonable, or frequent epithets; (4) inappropriate metaphors.
Depended on audience.
To declare a thing to be universally true when it is not is most appropriate when working up feelings of horror and indignation in our hearers; especially by way of preface,
So, here Aristotle is laying down rules for when it is appropriate to lie?
ustice is like silver, and must be assayed by the judges
So justice ISN'T inherently noble and black/white?
No; things that are true and things that are better are, by their nature, practically always easier to prove and easier to believe in.
I would go as far as to say that human nature makes this statement untrue.
for we must not make people believe what is wrong
Aristotle is pretty clearly endorsing that rhetoric only be used in defense of truth.
forbid talk about non-essentials.
Anything other than the facts is inadmissible in certain courts
Accordingly all men make use, more or less, of both; for to a certain extent all men attempt to discuss statements and to maintain them, to defend themselves and to attack others.
Everyone rhetorics.
things that are true and things that are just have a natural tendency to prevail over their opposites,
Enthymeme? Is this idea an assumption held by the public?
pervert the judge by moving him to anger or envy or pity -- one might as well warp a carpenter's rule before using it.
The judge is only human, though - sometimes it seems like the Greeks' concept of achieving the ideal got in the way sometimes.
Now strange words simply puzzle us; ordinary words convey only what we know already; it is from metaphor that we can best get hold of something fresh. When the poet calls "old age a withered stalk," he conveys a new idea, a new fact, to us by means of the general notion of bloom, which is common to both things
Interesting observation. The impact and usefulness of metaphor vs ordinary and unfamiliar words.
"It is fitting that Greece should cut off her hair beside the tomb of those who fell at Salamis, since her freedom and their valour are buried in the same grave." Even if the speaker here had only said that it was right to weep when valour was being buried in their grave, it would have been a metaphor, and a graphic one; [1411b] but the coupling of "their valour" and "her freedom" presents a kind of antithesis as well.
It is also good to use metaphorical words; but the metaphors must not be far-fetched, or they will be difficult to grasp, nor obvious, or they will have no effect. The words, too, ought to set the scene before our eyes; for events ought to be seen in progress rather than in prospect. So we must aim at these three points: Antithesis, Metaphor, and Actuality.
Effective metaphors are easy to understand.
but in a speech we need dignity and the power of taking the hearer out of his ordinary self.
A right balance in rhythm to gain this effect.
The metrical form destroys the hearer's trust by its artificial appearance, and at the same time it diverts his attention
Interesting. This reminds me of a previous comment I had made on Gorgias' style in Econium of Helen. I made mention that his word choice had aroused suspicion. I wonder also if it was 'metrical', lending to its artificial appearance.
We have now seen that our language must be rhythmical and not destitute of rhythm, and what rhythms, in what particular shape, make it so.
balanced rhythm
a short syllable can give no effect of finality, and therefore makes the rhythm appear truncated. A sentence should break off with the long syllable: the fact that it is over should be indicated not by the scribe, or by his period-mark in the margin, but by the rhythm itself.
Interesting.
Prose, then, is to be rhythmical, but not metrical, or it will become not prose but verse.
Prose vs. verse.
The form of a prose composition should be neither metrical nor destitute of rhythm.
Diviners use these vague generalities about the matter in hand because their predictions are thus, as a rule, less likely to be falsified. We are more likely to be right, in the game of "odd and even," if we simply guess "even" or "odd" than if we guess at the actual number; and the oracle-monger is more likely to be right if he simply says that a thing will happen than if he says when it will happen, and therefore he refuses to add a definite date
A premise or argument is meaningless if it is unfalsifiable; ex. It's either going to rain, or it isn't.
The foundation of good style is correctness of language, which falls under five heads. (1) First, the proper use of connecting words, and the arrangement of them in the natural sequence which some of them require. For instance, the connective "men" (e.g. ego men) requires the correlative "de" (e.g. o de). The answering word must be brought in before the first has been forgotten, and not be widely separated from it; nor, except in the few cases where this is appropriate, is another connective to be introduced before the one required. Consider the sentence, "But as soon as he told me (for Cleon had come begging and praying), took them along and set out." In this sentence many connecting words are inserted in front of the one required to complete the sense; and if there is a long interval before "set out," the result is obscurity. One merit, then, of good style lies in the right use of connecting words. (2) The second lies in calling things by their own special names and not by vague general ones. (3) The third is to avoid ambiguities; unless, indeed, you definitely desire to be ambiguous, as those do who have nothing to say but are pretending to mean something.
Use of language in good style.
express plurality, fewness, and unity
distinctions also must be correctly given
avoid ambiguities
calling things by their own special names
the proper use of connecting words, and the arrangement of them
Obscurity is also caused if, when you intend to insert a number of details, you do not first make your meaning clear; for instance, if you say, "I meant, after telling him this, that and the other thing, to set out," rather than something of this kind "I meant to set out after telling him; then this, that, and the other thing occurred."
It is better to be concise and clear rather than long-winded and obscure.
It is a general rule that a written composition should be easy to read and therefore easy to deliver.
I agree. I have a hard time reading some people's work in group editing situations
Obscurity is also caused if, when you intend to insert a number of details, you do not first make your meaning clear; for instance, if you say, "I meant, after telling him this, that and the other thing, to set out," rather than something of this kind "I meant to set out after telling him; then this, that, and the other thing occurred."
This is so different from prose writing that I'm used to. I tend to embed clauses and who knows what it labyrinths of punctuation, but it makes sense that speeches need to be more straightforward. I was listening to a book that was completely confusing me, I could not follow it. I soon realized that this book could probably be easily read, but not easy to follow when listened to because we listen differently than we read.
The foundation of good style is correctness of language, which falls under five heads. (1) First, the proper use of connecting words, and the arrangement of them in the natural sequence which some of them require. For instance, the connective "men" (e.g. ego men) requires the correlative "de" (e.g. o de). The answering word must be brought in before the first has been forgotten, and not be widely separated from it; nor, except in the few cases where this is appropriate, is another connective to be introduced before the one required. Consider the sentence, "But as soon as he told me (for Cleon had come begging and praying), took them along and set out." In this sentence many connecting words are inserted in front of the one required to complete the sense; and if there is a long interval before "set out," the result is obscurity. One merit, then, of good style lies in the right use of connecting words. (2) The second lies in calling things by their own special names and not by vague general ones. (3) The third is to avoid ambiguities; unless, indeed, you definitely desire to be ambiguous, as those do who have nothing to say but are pretending to mean something. Such people are apt to put that sort of thing into verse.
What is really important is clarity.
The way all these words are compounded makes them, we feel, fit for verse only. This, then, is one form in which bad taste is shown.
Do we agree with Aristotle here? Are these only fit for poetry or could they be used in rhetoric also?
Metaphors like other things may be inappropriate.
the use of long, unseasonable, or frequent epithets.
the employment of strange words.
The misuse of compound words.
Metaphors like other things may be inappropriate. Some are so because they are ridiculous; they are indeed used by comic as well as tragic poets. Others are too grand and theatrical; and these, if they are far-fetched, may also be obscure. For instance, Gorgias talks of "events that are green and full of sap," and says "foul was the deed you sowed and evil the harvest you reaped." That is too much like poetry. Alcidamas, again, called philosophy "a fortress that threatens the power of law,"
was unaware that metaphors can be innapropriate. I thought that they were a writing technique, I never thought of it this way
We thus see how the inappropriateness of such poetical language imports absurdity and tastelessness into speeches, as well as the obscurity that comes from all this verbosity -- for when the sense is plain, you only obscure and spoil its clearness by piling up words.
After reading these examples, I agree with the author. It is annoying to read pieces that have long or frequent epithets.
(1) The misuse of compound words. Lycophron, for instance, talks of the "many visaged heaven" above the "giant-crested earth," and again the "strait-pathed shore"; and Gorgias of the "pauper-poet flatterer" and [1406a] "oath-breaking and over-oath-keeping."
Are these like oxy-morons?
The address of Gorgias to the swallow, when she had let her droppings fall on him as she flew overhead, is in the best tragic manner. He said, "Nay, shame, O Philomela." Considering her as a bird, you could not call her act shameful; considering her as a girl, you could; and so it was a good gibe to address her as what she was once and not as what she is.
The specificity of the chosen metaphor is important. If chosen correctly, it can create a vivid image, but if chosen badly can confuse the audience.
If any statement you make is hard to believe, you must guarantee its truth, and at once offer an explanation, and then furnish it with such particulars as will be expected.
Again, you must make use of the emotions.
The narration should depict character;
Slip in anything else that the judges will enjoy
I like this line, entertain your audience.
We are not to make long narrations, just as we are not to make long introductions or long arguments. Here, again, rightness does not consist either in rapidity or in conciseness, but in the happy mean; that is, in saying just so much as will make the facts plain, [1417a] or will lead the hearer to believe that the thing has happened, or that the man has caused injury or wrong to some one, or that the facts are really as important as you wish them to be thought: or the opposite facts to establish the opposite arguments.
Narratives need to be long enough to say what you need to but not too long.
It follows, then, that the only necessary parts of a speech are the Statement and the Argument. These are the essential features of a speech; and it cannot in any case have more than Introduction, Statement, Argument, and Epilogue.
Parts of speech
It follows, then, that the only necessary parts of a speech are the Statement and the Argument. These are the essential features of a speech; and it cannot in any case have more than Introduction, Statement, Argument, and Epilogue.
and therefore people think that, if his name is mentioned many times, many things have been said about him. So that Homer, by means of this illusion, has made a great deal of though he has mentioned him only in this one passage, and has preserved his memory, though he nowhere says a word about him afterwards.
Compared with those of others, the speeches of professional writers sound thin in actual contests. Those of the orators, on the other hand, are good to hear spoken, but look amateurish enough when they pass into the hands of a reader. This is just because they are so well suited for an actual tussle, and therefore contain many dramatic touches, which, being robbed of all dramatic rendering, fail to do their own proper work, and consequently look silly. Thus strings of unconnected words, and constant repetitions of words and phrases, are very properly condemned in written speeches: but not in spoken speeches -- speakers use them freely, for they have a dramatic effect. In this repetition there must be variety of tone, paving the way, as it were, to dramatic effect;
Spoken vs written word. They have different applications. Repetition is condemned in written speeches but not in oral.
Again, style will be made agreeable by the elements mentioned, namely by a good blending of ordinary and unusual words, by the rhythm, and by-the persuasiveness that springs from appropriateness.
The written style is the more finished: the spoken better admits of dramatic delivery -- like the kind of oratory that reflects character and the kind that reflects emotion.
Good riddles do, in general, provide us with satisfactory metaphors: for metaphors imply riddles, and therefore a good riddle can furnish a good metaphor. Further, the materials of metaphors must be beautiful; and the beauty, like the ugliness, of all words may, as Licymnius says, lie in their sound or in their meaning. Further, there is a third consideration -- one that upsets the fallacious argument of the sophist Bryson, that there is no such thing as foul language, because in whatever words you put a given thing your meaning is the same.
Types of metaphors
Prose-writers must, however, pay specially careful attention to metaphor, because their other resources are scantier than those of poets. Metaphor, moreover, gives style clearness, charm, and distinction as nothing else can: and it is not a thing whose use can be taught by one man to another. Metaphors, like epithets, must be fitting, which means that they must fairly correspond to the thing signified: failing this, their inappropriateness will be conspicuous: the want of harmony between two things is emphasized by their being placed side by side
Metaphors are a powerful tool in prose, they connect ideas for the reader.
Words of ambiguous meaning are chiefly useful to enable the sophist to mislead his hearers.
Interesting connection, sophist use ambiguous language for false persuasion.
People do not feel towards strangers as they do towards their own countrymen, and the same thing is true of their feeling for language. It is therefore well to give to everyday speech an unfamiliar air: people like what strikes them, and are struck by what is out of the way.
Style. Use language people recognize and understand.
metaphor is of great value both in poetry and in prose. Prose-writers must, however, pay specially careful attention to metaphor, because their other resources are scantier than those of poets. Metaphor, moreover, gives style clearness, charm, and distinction as nothing else can: and it is not a thing whose use can be taught by one man to another. Metaphors, like epithets, must be fitting, which means that they must fairly correspond to the thing signified: failing this, their inappropriateness will be conspicuous: the want of harmony between two things is emphasized by their being placed side by side.
you do what I have suggested if you say that a man who begs "prays," and a man who prays "begs"; for praying and begging are both varieties of asking
Interesting way to put this. I have never thought of these two things as being related.
Metaphor, moreover, gives style clearness, charm, and distinction as nothing else can: and it is not a thing whose use can be taught by one man to another. Metaphors, like epithets, must be fitting, which means that they must fairly correspond to the thing signified: failing this, their inappropriateness will be conspicuous: the want of harmony between two things is emphasized by their being placed side by side.
Naturalness is persuasive, artificiality is the contrary; for our hearers are prejudiced and think we have some design against them, as if we were mixing their wines for them.
Good statement. People are able to perceive when speakers are authentic or not
We can now see that a writer must disguise his art and give the impression of speaking naturally and not artificially. Naturalness is persuasive, artificiality is the contrary
Naturalness vs. artificiality.
We can now see that a writer must disguise his art and give the impression of speaking naturally and not artificially. Naturalness is persuasive, artificiality is the contrary; for our hearers are prejudiced and think we have some design against them, as if we were mixing their wines for them.
It is an interesting contradiction that naturalness is persuasive and artificiality contrary, but the rhetorician must use artificiality to create the naturalness that will persuade.
the significance of contrasted ideas is easily felt, especially when they are thus put side by side, and also because it has the effect of a logical argument; it is by putting two opposing conclusions side by side that you prove one of them false. Such, then, is the nature of antithesis. Parisosis is making the two members of a period equal in length. Paromoeosis is making the extreme words of both members like each other.
It is possible for the same sentence to have all these features together [1410b] -- antithesis, parison, and homoeoteleuton. (The possible beginnings of periods have been pretty fully enumerated in the Theodectea.) There are also spurious antitheses, like that of Epicharmus
Describe a thing instead of naming it: do not say "circle," but "that surface which extends equally from the middle every way."
The description must be really good to impress, otherwise it'll sound just unintellectual.
But the proportional metaphor must always apply reciprocally to either of its co-ordinate terms.
All these ideas may be expressed either as similes or as metaphors; those which succeed as metaphors will obviously do well also as similes, and similes, with the explanation omitted, will appear as metaphors.
The Simile also is a metaphor; the difference is but slight. When the poet says of Achilles that he Leapt on the foe as a lion, this is a simile; when he says of him 'the lion leapt', it is a metaphor -- here, since both are courageous, he has transferred to Achilles the name of 'lion'. Similes are useful in prose as well as in verse; but not often, since they are of the nature of poetry. They are to be employed just as metaphors are employed, since they are really the same thing except for the difference mentioned.
I think it's interesting that Aristotle is teaching the functional difference between simile and metaphor. Instead of saying similes use "like" or "as," he has to give examples. I'm glad teachers teach it differently today.
Revenge, too, is pleasant; it is pleasant to get anything that it is painful to fail to get, and angry people suffer extreme pain when they fail to get their revenge; but they enjoy the prospect of getting it. Victory also is pleasant, and not merely to "bad losers," but to every one; the winner sees himself in the light of a champion, and everybody has a more or less keen appetite for being that.
Holy shit, this took a dark turn. This must have been Aristotle's Hot Topic Jr. High phase. At least someone has the balls to say revenge is sweet. I take it back, I love this.
The things that happen by chance are all those whose cause cannot be determined, that have no purpose, and that happen neither always nor usually nor in any fixed way.
This is not how statistic work.
As for Impossibility, we can clearly get what we want by taking the contraries of the arguments stated above.
The passage above reminded me of the age old question, which came first, the chicken or the egg? both are possible but we may never know.
That if of two similar things one is possible, so is the other.
everything is possible, sometimes unlikely but still possible.
But while it is easier to supply parallels by inventing fables, it is more valuable for the political speaker to supply them by quoting what has actually happened, since in most respects the future will be like what the past has been.
I agree. Fables are fun but politicians need facts.
A fox, in crossing a river, was swept into a hole in the rocks; and, not being able to get out, suffered miseries for a long time through the swarms of fleas that fastened on her. A hedgehog, while roaming around, noticed the fox; and feeling sorry for her asked if he might remove the fleas. But the fox declined the offer; and when the hedgehog asked why, she replied, "These fleas are by this time full of me and not sucking much blood; if you take them away, others will come with fresh appetites and drink up all the blood I have left." "So, men of Samos," said Aesop, "my client will do you no further harm; he is wealthy already. But if you put him to death, [1394a] others will come along who are not rich, and their peculations will empty your treasury completely."
This is a really good fable. I have heard a lot of them but this is a new one for me.
Public officials ought not to be selected by lot. That is like using the lot to select athletes, instead of choosing those who are fit for the contest; or using the lot to select a steersman from among a ship's crew, as if we ought to take the man on whom the lot falls, and not the man who knows most about it."
We don't do this, we elect people who turn out to be incompetent.
For the accuser uses probabilities to prove his case: and to refute a conclusion as improbable is not the same thing as to refute it as not inevitable.
People don't use probabilities unless they are trying to defend themselves?
Enthymemes are based upon one or other of four kinds of alleged fact: (1) Probabilities, (2) Examples, (3) Infallible Signs, (4) Ordinary Signs.
types of facts. I didn't know about these.
Objections, as appears in the Topics, may be raised in four ways -- either by directly attacking your opponent's own statement, or by putting forward another statement like it, or by putting forward a statement contrary to it, or by quoting previous decisions.
types of objections
Three points must be studied in making a speech; and we have now completed the account of (1) Examples, Maxims, Enthymemes, and in general the thought-element -- the way to invent and refute arguments. [1403b] We have next to discuss (2) Style, and (3) Arrangement.
3 points of speechmaking
if he shows that a thing has happened, we show that it has not; if he shows that it has not happened, we show that it has. This, then, could not be the distinction if there were one, since the same means are employed by both parties, enthymemes being adduced to show that the fact is or is not so-and-so.
they are going back and forth contradicting each other.
In chapters 2-11, the various emotions are defined, and are also discussed (with incidental observations) from the three points of view just indicated. In chapter 2, Anger is the subject. The orator must so speak as to make his hearers angry with his opponents.
it is especially important that he should be able to influence the emotions, or moral affections
(b) they invest a speech with moral character.
Maybe the facade of moral character, but if used just because Aristotle's guidebook told the speaker to... I'd question that, anyway.
character is affected
Nature versus nurture
Emulation.
One of these things is not like the others...
make his audience feel
I like that he stresses manipulating the audience's perception of the speaker, rather than actually seeking to possess positive qualities. ;)
Fame means being respected by everybody, or having some quality that is desired by all men, or by most, or by the good, or by the wise.
I love how things have changed. One of the most talked about people in the media right now is known simply for acting like a slut on an award show. Aristotle, you would be so let down.
The Epilogue has four parts. You must (1) make the audience well-disposed towards yourself and ill-disposed towards your opponent (2) magnify or minimize the leading facts, (3) excite the required state of emotion in your hearers, and (4) refresh their memories.
As to jests. These are supposed to be of some service in controversy. Gorgias said that you should kill your opponents' earnestness with jesting and their jesting with earnestness; in which he was right. Jests have been classified in the Poetics. Some are becoming to a gentleman, others are not; see that you choose such as become you.
Next as to Interrogation. The best moment to a employ this is [1419a] when your opponent has so answered one question that the putting of just one more lands him in absurdity.
Since a given action can be done from many motives, the former must try to disparage it by selecting the worse motive of two, the latter to put the better construction on it.
This whole section just seemed super deceptive to me.
the better sort of man will be just without being forced to be so, and the written laws depend on force while the unwritten ones do not
Can a person, like in the above scenario, actually be forced to be just? Who determines what's equal, what's fair when it's not a black-and-white situation ("failing to do them good")?
disposition
and therefore intent?
as if you had failed to do right rather than actually done wrong. You may be able to trust other people to judge you equitably.
Persuading oneself that one isn't actually in the wrong. Rhetoric can be used to change one's own perspective, it seems.
Those in power are more ambitious and more manly in character than the wealthy, because they aspire to do the great deeds that their power permits them to do. Responsibility makes them more serious: they have to keep paying attention to the duties their position involves. They are dignified rather than arrogant, for the respect in which they are held inspires them with dignity and therefore with moderation -- dignity being a mild and becoming form of arrogance. If they wrong others, they wrong them not on a small but on a great scale.
In a word, the type of character produced by wealth is that of a prosperous fool.
First let us consider Good Birth. Its effect on character is to make those who have it more ambitious;
To put it generally, all the valuable qualities that youth and age divide between them are united in the prime of life, while all their excesses or defects are replaced by moderation and fitness. The body is in its prime from thirty to five-and-thirty; the mind about forty-nine.