1. Neo-Aristotelian Criticism
WRA | January 22, 2018

2. Rhetorical Criticism “is concerned with effect
Rhetorical Criticism “is concerned with effect. It regards a speech as a communication to a specific audience, and holds its business to be the analysis and appreciation of the orator’s method of imparting his ideas to his hearers”
(Herbert A. Wichelns, “The Literary Criticism of Oratory.” 1925)

3. Criticism of Neo-Aristotelian Analysis
Focus is often on speeches, as one is looking for DIRECT EFFECTS on an immediate audience
This focus on speeches limits what gets analyzed
It also limits what we might learn about a text, as it’s often just looking for “the speech’s potential for evoking intended response for an immediate, specified audience.”
It assumes humans are rational.

4. Why I Still Like Neo-Aristotelian Analysis
IF you use the spirit of the analysis method, though not necessarily the rule, you can come to some astute observations about how texts work
The focus on ‘effect’ lends itself to professional workplace documents

5. Four-Step Process Select an artifact Analyze the artifact
Formulate a research question
Write the essay

6. Step 1: Select the Artifact

7. Today we are walking through Step 2: Analyzing the Artifact

8. Part 1: Reconstructing the Context
The Rhetor. Why did the rhetor choose to produce this rhetoric on this particular occasion and what did the rhetor seek to accomplish?
The Occasion. Determine the elements in the occasion that influenced the rhetor in choice of subject and approach or the peculiar demands of the time and place of the rhetoric. Pay attention to the events that gave rise to the text, and the social and cultural attitudes towards the topic.
The Audience. Who are they? What do they know about the topic? What might they already believe about the topic?

9. Part 2: Applying the Canons INVENTION
Intrinsic or Artistic Proofs: those that the rhetor creates (as opposed to external, those a rhetor does NOT)
LOGOS: logical argument
ETHOS: the rhetor’s character
PATHOS: emotional appeal

10. Part 2: Applying the Canons INVENTION - LOGOS
LOGOS: identify the argument or thesis the rhetor is presenting and determine how that thesis is developed and supported.
Quoting experts? Statistical summaries? Personal experience? Some other form?
What evidence has been supplied and is it enough to make the point?
Inductive Reasoning: a series of specific examples is used to draw a general conclusion. (say, sharing 6 stories about car accidents that happened while texting and driving so as to illustrate TEXTING AND DRIVING IS BAD.)
Deductive Reasoning: begins with a generalization that is already acceptable to the audience (smoking and lung cancer are linked), and then applies that to a specific case (if you smoke, you’re at risk and should stop).

11. Part 2: Applying the Canons INVENTION - ETHOS
ETHOS: deals with the effect or appeal of the speaker’s character on the audience, the author’s credibility
What does the audience know about the rhetor? Do they have intregity, intelligence, and/or good will?

12. Part 2: Applying the Canons INVENTION - PATHOS
PATHOS: concerns appeals designed to generate emotions in the audience
Identify the emotions generated by the text and explains how those emotions put the listeners in a particular frame of mind to react favorably to the rhetor’s purpose.

13. Part 2: Applying the Canons ORGANIATION
How is the text ordered and which aspects of the content are given emphasis in the rhetoric through the structure?
What are the results of the arrangement?
Is the organization consistent with the subject and purpose of the discourse and is it appropriate for the audience?

14. Part 2: Applying the Canons DELIVERY
Concerned with the manner of presentation. While traditionally this focused SOLELY on aspects of speech (gestures, tone, physical characteristic), today some scholars speak about how the message is delivered through varying digital means.
resign-so-survivors-can-move-on

15. Part 2: Applying the Canons MEMORY
Hardly, if ever, discussed in analysis. BUT it was one of Aristotle’s five classical canons of rhetoric so… there you go 

16. Part 3: Assessing the Effects
At the conclusion, you then judge the effects of the rhetoric.
Was the goal of the rhetor met or what happened as result of the rhetoric?

17. Four-Step Process Select an artifact Analyze the artifact
Formulate a research question: “Did the rhetor use the available means of persuasion to evoke the intended response from the audience?”
IF TIME, in your table, formulate a more descriptive thesis statement for an imagined paper where you would analyze this editorial.
Write the essay