English 622: Classical Rhetoric

I know everyone tends to get down on Ramus for destroying (or seriously hampering) rhetoric. Typically, we claim that his version of rhetoric impoverishes the tradition for subsequent generations, up through the Current-Traditional rhetoric of the 1950s.

As Augustine described the low, middle, and high styles in book IV of "On Christian Teaching," I couldn't help but think of Comedy Central. Occasionally, watch "The Colbert Report," "The Daily Show" or a comedy special, and I'm starting to realize what an important role low, middle, and high style play in the delivery of comedic lines.

I just finished a blog posting that, for whatever reason, didn't post, so I'm starting from scratch. Argh.

Basically, I liked the fact that Longinius is the progenitor of Bartholomae's argument in "Inventing the University." He does a nice job of arguing that correctness doesn't equal greatness and that the errors of compositional fervor are far outweighed by the sublimity it produces.

One thing that really impressed me about Book II of De Oratore was Caesar's thoroughness in his explanation of humor. We read Hugh Blair's Lectures on Rhetoric a couple of weeks ago and it seems like the idea of funny in oratory really took a hit between second century Rome and 18th century Scotland.

I have a friend who (no joke) sent me an email this week asking me what I thought about the differences between Plato and Aristotle. He has often asserted that Plato and Aristotle differ in that Plato describes the 'why' of existence and Aristotle describes the 'how' of existence. I used to agree with him, but I'm starting to contrast Aristotle and Plato on different grounds.

I know Kennedy discusses a lot of what I'm going to say, but I had these thoughts before I read his chapter. So, I'm going to lead with what my original thought:

I was really impressed with the way Aristotle addresses both the nomos and the physis crowd throughout 'On Rhetoric'. As I read, I consciously switched back and forth between a Gorgian and Platonic perspective. Here's what I found:

As I read Isocrates' work, I saw a lot of his influence on education.

One thing that always bothered me about teaching secondary school was that, though a lot of administrators talked about doing research-based practice, they were hesitant to test new practices that had not been synthesized by their M.Ed. or Ed.D. programs. They were, in other words, not so interested in breaking new ground educationally as they were with matching their practice to the culture of their vocational degree.

Hi everyone, I'm Josh Prenosil from Omaha, NE.

I come to Purdue by way of a series of lateral moves: I graduated with my B.A. in English from Saint Louis University in 2004. Then, I did a two year service in education M.Ed. program at Notre Dame called ACE. Last year I taught at a magnet school in Omaha.