Reflect on our readings and discussions--as well as your new and growing understanding of rhetoric--and start to construct your own “theory of composing;” what does it mean to compose and to do so “effectively?”
You will revisit your theory of composing as the semester continues and it will become one of the capstone pieces in your portfolio; but for right now, focus on your initial thoughts.
When composing a rhetoric, the first elements that come to my mind are strategy, delivery, and logos. During the process of composing a rhetoric, you as the author are attempting to pull together reasons to sway your audience for your goal. In order to do this, you need to have several concepts in mind when forming your rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteStrategy and logos tie together in order to do this. You are using strategy because you want to convince as many members of the audience to side with you. You are also using logos or logic because you can't always rely on emotion with an audience. For example, if PETA was trying to convince its' audience not to eat meat simply because it is cruel and unusual and the animals suffered and it's mean, that's using emotion and it's usually not going to work on most people. However, if they came up with something legitimately saying "Eating meat WILL give you cancer and bad cholesterol, which WILL lead to heart attacks" and they had great statistics to back that up, it would probably convince more people to either cut down on meat or quit altogether.
Delivery is also one of the most important methods of having a successful rhetoric. In the 1600's there was a hellfire and brimstone preacher named Jonathan Edwards. When he began his preaching every mass, he would simply walk to the front of the room, stand calmly in the center, and would speak quietly and without emotion. When he did speak, his wording and descriptions were so terrifying that it had many of his congregation weeping, crying out and even fainting.
Kari K
In the art of composing effective rhetoric, I feel there are certain aspects that cannot be ignored. The canons of rhetoric provide an easy mental picture of how to construct such an effective idea but in many cases, some canons are stronger than others. I feel as if style is an important one for the writer because it represents elocution and sets credibility. Two important facets of becoming a good writer. As for the reader, style presents an educated, effective, and clear argument. Style is shed oftentimes in a artful and creative light that can appeal to the reader easier. Using these simple tactics can elevate your work and make it more effective when read.
ReplyDeleteAnother way of composing effective work is through Pathos. Pathos is the art of feeling and emotion, and as a writer you need to strike nerves when you write. This gives a sensible connection between you and your audience, a bond that may not be set in stone but at least you both can feel the same emotion. However if done incorrectly, work can go numb and insensitive, therefore losing all connection you might of had with your audience. For example, some PETA commercials attempt to make you feel a sad emotion as they try to persuade you to change your mind over the concept of eating meat. Some may be effective for a short time, but that's all. Pathos is only effective if done correctly, you don't want to leave a situation saying "Oh well whatever" and eat a burger, you want "Wow, that commercial was informative and heartbreaking, I think I might change my ways."
Zak Cervasio
When you start to think about composing a successful rhetoric you have to first look at the 5 canons. Invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery can all help you when starting to compose a speech or text. Depending on what you are composing decides which canons will weigh more into your text than the others. I would also think about Ethos. Showing your credibility while presenting your idea is very important to gaining the audiences trust in your knowledge of the subject.
ReplyDeleteWhile composing your idea, you have to take the audience as your main concern because that is obviously who you're presenting your work to. Keeping pathos in mind while composing is key to any good work. Pathos is the emotion of the speaker and how you convey yourself to the audience. Showing passion about your work while also appealing to the audience and getting them as interested in the idea as you could be a game changer.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe “theory of composing” is such a broad concept. For me, a composition can mean quite a few things. It could be anything from an essay for class, a speech regarding some form of activism, or a letter to my own mother. As I’m learning, rhetoric can be found in practically anything and it incorporates many different attributes and facets of a composition. The process for composition isn’t a linear development. I tend to be rather erratic in my composing, though I usually start out with identifying what the general message is I want to get across and what specifically I can’t go without mentioning. Making sure I get my main viewpoint to my audience, I think, should be the main goal in any theory of composing. Using the five canons is just a way to make your rhetoric more appealing and solid to an audience.
ReplyDeleteArrangement is one of the five ancient canons that I believe it’s important to the presentation and understanding of rhetoric. For example, take a musical composition for an orchestra. Each section of instruments has their designated parts or arrangements for the piece they need to play. If these parts aren’t arranged in the correct order, what you hear may be auditory chaos and you probably wouldn’t want to listen. Arrangement works the same way for any oral or written composition. If your ideas aren’t portrayed in a clear, concise, and logical manner, then any member of the audience may find it hard to understand what you’re trying to say. I’m saying you should follow the rigid five-paragraph structure of high school essays, but there has to be an arrangement that makes sense to the audience. Your composition should form a picture, not just be a jumble of separate pieces.
Not only is your arrangement important to composition, but how you present and deliver your composition also plays a key role. No one wants to watch a boring speaker. If someone is not passionate about what they’re saying or even remotely interested, how are you expected to be interested. If you’re bored by your own subject, you cannot rightly expect your audience to be hanging on every word you say. Even though it’s most notably used in oral compositions, it does have a place in written works, too. Something on paper is likely to give off its own tone to the reader. Words can come across as harsh, sarcastic, or zealous, even when not spoken aloud.
To compose effectively is to create a piece of work that is organized and clear in the manner you intended it to be. My theory of composing would first begin with thinking of the subject or argument in which I will write about and coming up with ideas to support that subject or argument in my writing. Writing each idea and then later choosing which will be the most effective leads to a smoother transition when actually writing and thinking of what idea should come next. Then, I would move to select the ideas which I believe will be most effective in my writing and will create the strongest argument. Following this step, I would then proceed to create a layout of the order in which I would like to present my ideas in my work. The process of first mentally creating ideas, then recording those ideas, whether they be used or not, and then choosing the ones to be used and arranging them will lead me to compose a piece of work that is organized and clear. The process leading up to the actual writing of the work is most important to me in composing effectively.Thus, the organization and clarity of the paper is what I feel is an effective composition.
ReplyDeleteRhetoric is only as effective as its message. Although this term is very broad, it’s composed of many key words we’ve already discussed. Three of the five canons of rhetoric determine message: invention, arrangement, and style. It is also defined by the use of logos. The message must be thoroughly thought out and researched. It must be refined yet authentic and raw. The message must convince without demanding or overtly manipulating. It is the illusion of the omniscient being, easily ruined if the curtain is drawn back to reveal the little man behind it all. The message must appear larger than the creator, larger than you or me. Because of the responsibility the message holds I think that it is the most vital component of composing rhetoric discourse.
ReplyDeleteAs vital as the message may be, it will be easily misguided without a clear audience. I believe audience to be an essential element in composition as well. Imagine the message as the head and the audience as the neck, pointing or turning the message in the direction that is appropriate. In order for rhetorical discourse to be effective you must understand the audience for which it’s intended. This means the constraints that the audience may possess, which mediums will deeply resonate with the audience, the information your audience already knows, etc.
Rhetorical discourse is most effective when a clear, concise message is directed at an intended audience.
In order to create an effective composition one must lay out their opinions in a clear and concise matter. In the terms of a rhetorical argument my personal “theory of composing” is to present a topic that generally concerns me, and to make others realize that they should share the same concerns. In order to present and deliver a reliable rhetorical argument the five cannons of rhetoric are certainly an important aspect, but all of them have to be slightly altered when speaking or presenting an argument to different audiences. However there are three key concepts of rhetoric that will never be changed: ethos, logos, and pathos.
ReplyDeleteThese three key concepts allow you to present your argument to an audience reliably, logically, and emotionally. When combining all three of these rhetorical aspects together one is able to connect to their audience in a multitude of ways that one’s argument is sure to be received.
The whole point of a rhetorical composition is to change or alter one’s perception of reality, and I think that goal is impossible to achieve without ethos, logos, and pathos.
Rhetoric is an all encompassing art form that shares a relevance to almost every aspect of life. To me, even choosing to be ignorant of its importance is to contribute to the entity itself. However, once aware of rhetoric and composition's value, and upon education on the subject, then effectiveness can be discussed.
ReplyDeleteEffective discourse can be explained through the interplay between many factors but nothing is more valuable than knowledge. Anticipation and prediction of an audience's reaction is the key to being an effective orator. Choosing the right words is always difficult, but once a speaker has gained the knowledge of every word's connotation and the perceptions of his or her audience the struggle is cut down by a lot.
Finding a message, or something to speak on, is a matter of desire. There is a host of opportunities and events that merit an utterance, but choosing the one to earn your attention is a self exploratory issue. However, once chosen, the message is going to set the parameters for how you deliver your rhetoric and what tropes and schemes you use. Every message means something to its speaker, and relating that meaning --that importance-- is an art.
Composition is something to be valued. Not everyone is a natural born speaker. But to learn style and technique is a trade that comes in part from study and in part from the motive inside you to say something, to write something, to move someone.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe "Theory of Composing" rhetorical discourse, I feel, is completely dependent on the 5 canons of rhetoric and the rhetorical triangle.
ReplyDeleteThe 5 canons of rhetoric, (invention, memory, style, arrangement and delivery) are all dependent on one another for a comfortable flow of discourse. If one or more parts goes missing there is, usually, a clear disconnect regarding the discourse and the rhetor. Take for example delivery, of the delivery method of the message at hand isn't ideal for the situation being addressed, the audience desired to receive the message will do so with less enthusiasm or worse yet, less understanding. If the delivery is sloppy or unrehearsed or perhaps inappropriate to the situation an audience will know, consciously or not, and be less apt to get involved, be moved, or create a change even if the discourse is something they might agree with. This kind of dependency on delivery is equally distributed for all 5 canons, without even one the composition of rhetoric is flawed and not being used effectively.
As seen in class with the PETA videos, if there is one leg of the rhetorical triangle missing the rhetoric becomes almost immediately ineffective. Without a credible speaker the audience seems to care significantly less. Without an emotional response the audience has no reason to feel moved by the discourse because it isn't relatable to them. And without logical reasoning behind the discourse, it can seem cheap or not believable or worth fixing or talking about to the audience, again making the discourse obsolete.
In order to compose a piece decently one must have a clear comprehensible voice. I believe this is the most important thing any piece of written or spoken work can possess. Facts are extremely important of course, because it is much easier to survive criticism that way, but the way the piece is read determines its entire outcome. The author should be able to relate to the listener or reader in such a way that they can understand the point of the composition and perhaps even agree.
ReplyDeleteAnother important aspect of composing is organization. It is important to have a strong voice but it is also necessary to state clear ideas with some sort of order so the facts do not become jumbled. It is very frustrating to try and read a composition that skips around because it lacks any kind of system.
Composing means being able to reach the listener on a level that they can understand and relate to. It means speaking in a strong voice that will carry both the emotion and the point that you are trying to convey. Composition also means being able to give logical order to whatever it is that you're trying to express.
After another week of exploring rhetoric through readings and discussions, I feel that I am continuing to expand my writing horizon. My hope is that throughout the semester I can refine my creative writing skills and grow the different types of papers and stories I feel comfortable writing. An essential element to this process is constructing my own theory of composing.
ReplyDeleteComposing, to me, means creating your own personal, unique literary work. It can be as simple as a short poem or haiku, but more time, concentration, and depth are required as the length of it grows. This, however, is not a mysterious or highly debated idea. The important part is composing effectively and efficiently, wasting few words in the process. Particularly, with non-fiction rhetoric, it is essential to provide in depth and vivid detail to stimulate and sustain the reader’s interest.
Concerning the cannons and pillars of rhetoric, I don’t claim to be any sort of expert or master. However, even just through reading what we have for class, I can more effective ways to craft my theory of composing. For example, arrangement and form are crucial to the flow of an argument or paper. Without this substantiated structure, even the finest essay can crumble. Additionally, style ties in greatly with creativity and personal touch. Each writer’s style is unique to him, yet requires some sort of professionalism and maturity. Even when written on a page, delivery is huge because it dictates how the reader receives whatever the author has to say.
In my own writing, I am attempting to sharpen these things like my delivery and form. Through these readings and in class discussions, I will continue to develop my own theory of composing. As my expanding knowledge of rhetoric translates into enhanced writing composition, I will look to further refine my theory of composing.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe impetus for any composition is a motivation to say something. And so any original problem which requires changing is the birthplace of composing. From it, a message is born. Not just pompous or rambling words, but words with intention, which is what distinguishes them from most of their associates. And then there is the consideration of an audience, to further temper these words. This accounting adds the effectiveness factor to composing, for without modifying the message to suit the cares and concerns of an audience, the words merely fall on deaf ears. So the composing of rhetoric requires both an instigating flaw, and the consideration of a specific audience, to accomplish any manner of goal.
ReplyDeleteerika higgins
According to Douglas Park, "to identify an audience means identifying a situation." Within a "theory of composing", the audience should always be a central focus. The audience is capable of being influenced by the rhetorical discourse and being “mediators of change”. That being said, the rhetorical discourse cannot be a source linguistic of power that the writer, or speaker, seeks over the audience. The rhetorical discourse must be accessible to the audience being addressed. The appeal to pathos that a speaker makes must be informed by the attitudes, beliefs, and actions of the audience. If the appeal is not accessible, then it loses its effect.
ReplyDeleteAristotle believed that, as writers, we must seek to understand the character of an audience by “analysis of its wealth, power and relative youth”. Once we understand those elements, we can begin to form and correspond our argument with the emotions and moral qualities of each character type; not just a standard argument for each unique audience.
In my own writing and “theory of composing”, I don’t ever want to compromise understanding and appeal for formal language that can be misinterpreted. With the audience as a central focus, I simultaneously hold the facets of the rhetorical triangle as a central focus. The attitudes and beliefs of my audience (pathos), the coherent and concise message (logos), the established credibility (ethos), and the sensitivity to different audiences, time and circumstances (kairos). To compose effectively is to compose with the appeal to a specific audience.
My understanding of rhetoric has definitely broadened over the past two weeks. The readings have been helpful in strengthening and building upon the basic conception of rhetoric I had been introduced to in the past. However, it was a short piece from the video In Defense of Rhetoric, a mere 25 seconds, that really helped me get a better grasp on the subject and helped me develop my own “theory of composing”. In this clip, the speaker explains how visual and written rhetoric use the same concepts and work in the same way for the same goal. In his example he uses photography, a study I’m reasonably familiar with and with which I can easily associate concepts and ideas.
ReplyDelete“When we take digital photography, we make decisions of: how I will crop the picture, what lighting I will use… These are just as important to the person who’s doing visual rhetoric, as to the person who’s using oral rhetoric, [who] will consider: how loudly they speak, what terms they use… It’s the same principle at work: choosing the available means of persuasion, but now it’s happening in different technological areas”
To me, this makes absolute sense and helps me organize my thoughts on the “theory of composing” into some logical form. Every photographer knows that this area of study isn’t as simple as pressing a button. As a matter of fact, when we take a photo, we refer to this process as composition of the photograph or image. It’s not simply snapping the first thing on sight, just like oral rhetoric isn’t simply speaking out the first thing that comes to mind. This is carefully planned and delivered. It’s a process that begins before the image is captured and doesn’t end until it has been delivered or exposed, and even then it may continue because a number of revisions will very likely me made. Before taking a photo, I always need to consider, not only my subject but also more technical aspects such as my ISO, exposure, shutter speed, depth of field, and a number other elements. If I change any of this, for example my depth of field by having the background as sharply focused as my subject and foreground, the photograph will be a completely different one and so will the point I try to get across to my audience. The same thing that happens in this form of visual rhetoric occurs in oral rhetoric where a small change within one element will alter the entire thing. In the same way, that composition of a photograph doesn’t end after the photo is captured, composition of oral rhetoric doesn’t reach its end after the words have been conceived and written down or memorized. Revision of a photograph will take place in postproduction where it may be cropped and slight changes of lighting made, just as revision of oral rhetoric will take place as a regular practice. There’s so many more concepts of rhetoric and composition that I can see linked to photography, I think this was truly a great example to clear out many doubts and confusion I might’ve previously had on the subject.
I believe that composition is merely the process by which one formulates an idea and then finds a way to present said idea to the general public. There are several things that one must keep in mind while they are creating their composition, and I feel that the two most important aspects are the audience and the point that one is trying to convey. As one starts to formulate their composition, the first step should be to clearly outline the idea(s) that they intend to express. Next, the author must pinpoint the strategy they are going to use to address their audience. Then, using this information, the author must draft out a rough composition and then review it and edit it (and repeat as necessary) until they are satisfied with the end product. Then, they may want a peer to review it, and make any additional revisions, or just review it themselves.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy own theory on composing is rooted in the classic five canons of rhetoric: invention, memory, style, arrangement and delivery. I see all of these intertwined in all facets of composition, where one of these pushes another one pulls. In some situations, there may not be a large need for memory but where that lacks style or delivery makes up for and likewise where the invention aspect is less emphasized memory may be called on more.
ReplyDeleteI may be obsessed with the audience. Since in college, there have been many points stressed to me, as far as composition, but none that has had such an impact as the audience. I think the audience is so vitally important to the way a composition is created, presented, and digested that it should be an obsession. If there is a new toy helicopter that a company is trying to sell, they would cater to an adolescent boy, whereas if a presidential candidate was talking about a new social security deal he/she would not use the same tactics as that company selling toy helicopters. The art is the same but the presentation is vastly different from one another.
I think a lot of time should also be devoted to perfecting one’s ideas. I read a short article Shitty First Drafts, which is all about getting that first draft down on paper no matter how bad it is. But by doing this the writer has engaged their mind and begun to see where they might want the composition to go, or where they don’t want it to.
As historical as The Brief Introduction to Rhetoric was, it helped a lot in seeing the evolution that rhetoric has taken throughout history. It’s interesting to see how rhetoric took a back seat for hundreds of years and then starts to creep back into the picture.
The composition of rhetoric lies within the dimensions of the Rhetoric triangle. The three points of the triangle reflect on Ethos(the communicator),Logos(the message), and Pathos(the constraints). Applied to a rhetorical situation such as a PETA commercial's attempt to appeal to a religious crowd by useing quotes from the bible and asking you "What would Jesus do?", the use of the triangle can dissect the rhetoric.Ethos would be represented by the use of God and the Bible in the commercial. Pathos can be represented by them inferring that it is a sin if you eat meat and don't become a vegetarian. Logos can be seen as the context of some of the religious quotes that were used(usually completely out of context). The three points of the triangle as well as the triangles mutated fourth point in Kairos(timeliness) can easily navigate you through the composition of Rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteVictoria writes:
ReplyDeleteWhen composing rhetoric, I feel that if you start out specifically writing to meet certain aspects of rhetoric, then the writing will fail. The writer should just write, and not worry about adhering to the rhetoric. I feel as if the concepts of rhetoric, like the cannons, should be applied only in the editing and revision process.
After writing out everything and sitting on the material for a few days, an author should go back over their work and address the canons to specific parts of the text. The same applies to logos, ethos, and pathos. After the work is done, the writer should see if his arguments are logical and have solid, stable proof to back them up. Do the arguments appeal strongly to the morals of the audience and are they appropriate morals for the intended audience? Is the author credible or coming from a credible place? How is the arrangement beyond just word choice and syntax? Does the style fit with the subject matter and the audience? Is the delivery appropriate? If any of them do not meet the criteria, then the text needs to be re-worked so that it does.
Brittany W. writes:
ReplyDeleteThe recent readings have given me a lot more to think about when it comes to rhetoric and composing. Also, through the discussions and videos that we have watched in class I think I have grasped a pretty good understanding of what stands out to me when it comes to composing. My theory would focues on arrangement, invention, and style.
I feel as if when I am writing the arragement comes naturally to me. I also feel like this is by far the most important aspect of writing an effective piece. Whether you are writing a to-do list, or writing a novel, if you do not keep your ideas and priorities in order, no one can follow along. Also, if you do not arrange your ideas in the order in which you feel is most effective, people may get the wrong idea about the informtion that you are trying to present.
I tend to also side with Aristotle's theory of composing when he talks about invention as an important part of speech or essay writing. Invention is important with anything you do in life. However, in writing it is even more important because if you can not think of what to write about and develop your ideas on paper, no one is going to hear your point. This could be problematic if you are writing due to a situation that you want a strong response to. People will probably have a difficult time responding if the ideas you present to them are jumbled, presented sporadically, and are bits of useless information.
I would say style is the third most important in composing because people need to get a feel for who you are as a person. Through your style, readers are able to interpret what kind of a person you are and they can immediately see if they can relate to what you are trying to say.
Brittany S. writes:
ReplyDeleteWhen composing a rhetorical discourse, you have to consider the rhetorical triangle/square/pentagon. Consider not only pathos, logos, and ethos, but also kairos and topoi. It is best to go through the canon which will guide you as you prepare your discourse.
The first canon, invention, is about finding something to say. The second canon, arrangement, is the organization of what you're saying. Thirdly is style, or the presentation of your ideas. Next is memory, which - although more prevalent in classical times - is all about mnemonics and timing. Finally is your delivery, or how it's said, including body language, dress, and so forth.
After you've gone through the canon, it's time to consider the triangle (or any polygon, given that you find a fitting word for each vertex (some choices include aesthetics, dialectic, and exigence)). Establishing your credibility (ethos) is an important step in composing You must also make sure that your discourse is logical as opposed to chaotic (logos). You must also target a specific audience; you need to figure out what makes them tick, then, you go in for the kill. This is usually where pathos comes into play.
Mainly, I believe that you've got to stay focused on your audience if you want them to stay focused on you. In most cases where discourse is involved, the audience is there by choice – they don't have to be there. So, I would make sure that my discourse is something worth their while, otherwise, you will have composed in vain and you can be almost certain that your rhetorical discourse had no affect on the audience.