Journal Prompt IV

Keith Grant-Davie’s purpose for writing this essay is to review the original definition of the term and its constituents and to offer a more thoroughly developed scheme for analyzing rhetorical situations (pg264). He talks about three men who gave their definitions of a rhetorical situation and he broke them down into how he defines rhetoric.

He starts with a definition by Lloyd Bitzer. Bitzer states that rhetoric is

·         “The context in which speakers or writers creates rhetorical discourse” (265).

o   He explains that the situation is important because it determines the rhetorical approach that a writer is taking in their writing. Bitzer says that it is a response to a situation, question, or solution, and is a response to a problem (265).  

He also states three ways that we examine the constituents of a situation; exigenence, audience, and constraints (265).

·         Exigence is some kind of need or problem that can be addressed and solved through rhetorical discourse (266).

·         Audience is those who can help resolve the exigence (266).

·         Constraints are persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because they have the power to constrain decisions and actions need to modify the exigence(266).

This three way system is Bitzer’s trademark when it comes to defining rhertorical situations. He proposes three “amendments” to explain his system more thoroughly.

1.       He believes exigence, as the motivating force behind a discourse, demands a more comprehensive analysis.

2.       He thinks we need to recognize that rhetors are as much a part of a rhetorical situation as the audience.

3.       We need to recognize that any of the constituents may be plural (266).

 He then gives definitions for four constituents that he sees in rhetorical situations; exigence, rhetors, audience, and constraints (266).

·         Exigence- the rhetor’s sense that a situation both calls for discourse and might be resolved by discourse (266).

o   Why is the discourse needed?

o   What is the discourse about?

o   What should the discourse accomplish?

·         Rhetors- those people, real or imagined, responsible for the discourse and its authorial voice (269).

o   Partly predetermined, but usually open to some definition or redefinition

o   They need to consider who they are in a particular situation and be aware that their identity may vary from situation to situation.

§  POSSIBLE VARIATION OF RHETORS

·         May be singular or (more likely) multiple rhetors

·         Answering the question “who is the rhetor?” may not be simple

o   Rhetors may speak in some professional capacity, volunteer role, parent, or some other role that is difficult to distinguish.

o   They may also play several roles at once

§  When they try to play one role, the audience is aware of their other roles.

§  Play partly through integrity and receptivity

·         The ability to adapt to new situations and not rigidly play the same role in every one

o   A rhetors ethos will not be the same for all audiences

·         Audience- those people, real or imagined, with whom rhetors negotiate through discourse to achieve the rhetorical objectives (270).

o   A discourse may have primary and secondary audiences

§  Present and those who aren’t there yet

§  Act collaboratively or as individuals

§  Rhetor knows a little

§  Only exist in rhetors mind

1.       Any people who happen to hear or read a discourse

2.       Set of readers or listeners who form part of an external rhetorical situation

3.       Audience the writer seems to have in mind

4.       The audience roles suggested by the discourse itself

·         Don’t ask “who is the audience?” just define and create a context for the readers

·         Constraints- factors in situation’s context that may affect the achievement of the rhetorical objectives (272).

o   The hardest to define because they can include so many different things

§  Persons, events, objects, and relations

§  They are part of the situation because they have the power to constrain decision and action needed to modify the exigence

·         A rhetor works within the constraints

o   Exigence and constraints can be closely related

He then asks the question: What is the discourse about?

·         The question may be answered at quite a concrete level by identifying the most apparent topic (267)

o   Example: political speeches

Second question: Why is the discourse needed?

·         What has prompted the discourse, and why is now the right time for it (268)

·          The discourse acts as a catalyst for the exigence

·         Exigence may result not from what has already happened but from something that is about to happen

Third question: What is the discourse trying to accomplish?

·         Objectives as part of the exigence for a discourse because resolving the exigence provides powerful motivation for the rhetor (269)

·         The agenda may also include primary and secondary objectives

o   Some of which might not be stated in the discourse

The second definition is by Richard Vatz. He challenges Bitzer by saying that the rhetor’s response is controlled in the situation. He says that situations do not exist without rhetors, and rhetors create rather than discover situations. Rhetors don’t only answer the question they also ask it (265).

The third definition was written by Scott Consigny’s and is a combination of Bitzer and Vats. He states; a rhetorical situation is partly, but not wholly, created by the rhetor (265). He says that when taking one of the rhetorical approach integrity should be involved; the ability to apply a standard set of strategies effectively to any situation the rhetor may face (265).