DOCIBIENT RESUME ED 079 779 cs sob j45 AUTHOR Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs TITLE Criticism: Ephemeral and Enduring.. PUB DATE Apr 73_ . NOTE 14p.; Paper-presented at the Annual Meeting of tip Central States Speech Assn..(Minneapolis, April, 1973) DRS PRICE 14P40.65 BC-S3 29 DESCRIPTORS *Analytical Criticism; Communication (T)ought Transfer); Cultural Context; *Literature Reviews; *Persuasive Discourse; *Rhetoric; *Rhetorical Criticism ABSTRACT' In spite of the material seeking to define rhetoric and approaches to its study, few attempts have been made-to stipulate gmaities of *rhetorical acts-meriting critical attentigau_pr critical outcomes that serve social or professiopal functiops._ **Aerial criticise, to be useful, must pastor. a unique Junction logrimiciety as as for the speech communicationdiscip4ipe..Some distimtite must beillide between those critical acts deeignsd for a- social function and those intended to contribute to'rhetorical theory..Tbe foundation. of rhetorical theory lies in Rex-hart Michelins' belief that rhetorical criticism, rather than being copceined wit') permanence, beauty, or effects as such, regards rhetorical-acts as symbolicACts; thepurpose of rhetorical criticism is to discover and explain the symbolid _proceises available to huaan'beings as revealed in these 'acts. .(RN) F I L M E D OSEARTNIENT OF SISALTN. EDUCATION& weLpmen NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HASSEEN REPRO DuCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVEDFROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATIONORIGIN ATING IT POINTS OF VIEPtOROPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILYft EMIL INSTITUTE OF SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY CriticisE: Epilemerl and Enduring lonaoseovi ro orntoourA Two tom mosolo Turomm. Ha eon mum Err Ka.r12,rn Kohrs aaraiibell Associate Professor of Ithetoric: 1Car-1-3112-Fohrsi_. Depart:lent of English, no wow on. u,eneral -Literature and swum oT toecitoolo mono now,- Abet aria woos ouToot not at swum ot- GOMM PEESNIENSIk OF DIE COMIlett State University of -Nevi- York ONINEOL^ Binghamton In 1 ':Y70, addressingtheprospect of rhetoric, Karl Wallace followed numerouspredecessorsinlamenting the state of criticism. He wrote: "-It seemsto besk,-;enerally. failures 'agreed among rhetoriciansthat one of their signal in the- laSt 70 :yearsis-the failure. toproduce in-any significant numbers practicingcritics of public discourse. I would add that notonly have we failed toproduce a significant' body of -criticism, but we haVe failed to fulfill both Oar- social and professionalfunotions.2 I _shah argue that these failures -canbe traced to the waysin which- the objects aLd_ objectives ofcriticism have been defined and _ functions to -a confusionbetween-critical acts serving social Contributions -andcritical ac ts capable ofmaking s ignifiCaAt to rhet o ric al theory. 'Despite numerous essays definingrhetoric, explicating methodology, .and arguingthe merits of variouscritical - atteapts either= perspectives, tier-ehave been few systeriatic to define thosequalitieS and characteristicsof rhetorical stipulate critical act-s- meritingcritical attention or to outcomes that serve social orprofessionalfunctions.3 The traditional answer, that-critics must describe, analyze, interpret, and evaluate,is inadeauate because itfails to indicate what should bedescribed, analyzed, interpreted, 4 - and evaluated and towhat-end. Other answers sugesti-ng the contributions -criticism maymake to historical or 5 -emiiirical research are alsoinadequate. If criticism is to (1) be legitimized, it iiusthave intrinsic worth; it 1:.ust perform a unique function_for*society and for our discipline. The historical burden under-which raetorical criticism labors'is the definition ofthe objects-and objectives of- tritical inquiry enuncictedby Herbert Wiohelns and_enacted in what Edwin Blacklabelled "neo-Aristotelian" methodology. Wichelnst influential Statementbears re:peating: LETetorical criticis is not concerned with -ipermanende nor yet With beauty. It is concerned With effect. It regards-a speech as acommunication to a specific audience, andholds its business to be the analysis and appreciationof -the orator's method of imparting his ideasto his hearers,0 . This definition excludesenduring wasterpi--ces, literary works,. genres or movements,and discourses.taat persuade tarougk methods other than byinparting_fdeas: lethod- ologically, it excludesconsiderations af truth, long-term effects, aesthetic quality, andmost significantly, appraisal . and evaluation of the endsbeing advocated. Th.67taSt Of the rhetorical critic is to examineindividual oral works from a single sourcein relation to animmediate-audience -and explain their success inproducing instrumental effects through imparting ideas. Itls'as if the fledgling critic were asked to take anoath that might readsouething like this: I do solemnly swear to devoteall my efforts to explaining the 'persuasive effectsof advertisers, politicians, and propagandists. I-promise, against all my natural proclivities,to be fascinateday the dull, garrdlous, repetitivepronouncements on head- .- (2) acues, body odors, foreignaid, welfare, anti- coadunism, auti-pollutioAl and tae.like. 6hould'a metapuor a) ?ear, I prouibe to ignore it. Should ,a speech endure, I promise_ to neglect it. All this Ido solemnly swear so that a separate discipline of speech communication,snail' not perish the earth. Of course, I overstate the case. iJevertheless, despite- eLlendations.legitimizing. the criticism of writtenrhetorict7 8 9.the'objects of critical movements$ and exhortative acts inquiry still remain, to use ErnestWrage's apt phrase; "fugitive-literature."19Their importance, like their effects, .is specific, instrumental, andimmediatein a word, ephemeral. A critical l-dilemma results. On the one hand, the analysis and evaluation of _ephemeral,contemporary, rhetor- . ical acts serves a vital function forsociety. On the other hand, like ,the acts themselves,the criticism of them, particularly as mandated by Wichelnsand-developed in neo- Aristotelian methodology, is itselfephemeral, i.e., without 11 enduring historical or rhetorical significance. It should come as no surprise, then,that the. Speech Communication ASsociation has not given an award-to a critical work fulfilling Wichelns'.definition or. that criticsdo not write significant numbers of ephemeralcritiqueS explaining the instrumental effects of ephemeral events. If this situation is to change, adistinction must be ( 3 ) made between criJ;ical acts designed to perform a social function And those inended tGo make enduring contribu*jons to rhetorical theory. ilei:mrding social criticism, I have little quarrel with Wichelns' definition of the objects of critical inauiry, especially_ when expanded.to include written and exhortative rhetoric and .persuasivecaliDaigns.12 'But-profeSsional journals are not the a.,3propriate vehibles nor are orofessionia colleagues the appropriate audience. The Social criticism of ephemeral/ contenpoary events belongs in the mass media, where much of it how appears, and. he audience it needs to reach' is the general public. It would bb preferable if this criticises were written .by trained rhetorical critics rather than by joUrnalists who vary widely in their'critical Skills.- liethodologically, however, the strict application of neoAristotelian procedures must be abandoned. The social function of criticism is to raise issues and encourage public discussion. This requires that critics appraise both the means used in and the-ends advocated by rhetorical acts. and the immediate and long , range effects ofboth.13Social critics of public discourse need professional encouragement to follow the precedents set by prominent historians,- economists, political scientists, and others who critique specific proposals and policies of ;articular administrations or interest groups in the mass media. BeWever, very little, if any, of this social crit icism will have enduring value. Social critics nearly always produce statements that are bound to particular times, issues, and situations. In fact, social criticism may be defined as (4) criticism evaluating the ways in which issues are formulated, policies justified, and theeffectEi of bothon society ata particular historical moment. Such social criticism is ,absolutely vital, but as social criticism itwild' not be enduring; its importance and its functions are imdediate' 14 and'epheMeral, Ironically, a definition of the acts .se `riling, critical inquiry is only tangentially relevant to the second type of criticism directed to colleagues through professional publications. This "academic" or "professional" criticism Can make an enduring contribution to-the discipline whether or not theacts it examines are trivial ephemera orlenduring masterpiecest-oral or written, argumentative',- or exhortative, aesthetic or persuasive, single events or' movements, confron- tations or rational discussions, verbal or non-verbal. What must be specified are the factors that constitute critical excellence and the critical outcomes or objectives that Contribute to rhetorical' theory. At this-level, criticism and theoty-are indistinguishable. The-most economic and forceful= method for specifying significant outcomes and describing critical excellence is the examination of masterpieces or touchstones of criticism. 15 Consider with me Kenneth Burke's essay on aein Kampf, .Richard,Hofstadter's essay onhe paranoid style in American politics,16and Edwin Black's critiques of the Coatesville 17 Address and. of the "cancer of communism" metaphor in the 18