Ethos, Logos, and Pathos: Part 1, Ethos

In The Art of Rhetoric, Aristotle speaks of rhetoric as necessarily persuasive, and shows three basic proofs, or appeals, that the rhetor (the orator or writer) must rely on to fully engage the audience. These proofs were important for Aristotle to establish, because rhetoric disengaged from evidence was mere manipulation, something Ancient Greek philosophers deplored about the Sophists who came to Athens to teach persuasive oratory to budding lawmakers. 

Their rhetoric was considered skolion, twisted, because it appealed solely to the emotions of the hearer, and could bewitch or enchant the listener away from a righteous or moral path. So Aristotle's concern was to establish that rhetoric had a rational purpose by aligning it with the more scientific need for proof. This act distinguished the rhetoric of the day from the merely persuasive and poetic, aligning it instead with political speech. Prior to this, rhetoric had not been taken seriously as a form of political speech, as hard as that might be for us to understand today.

First, there is the appeal to ethos, establishing the proof of one's character. This is where one begins as an orator or writer, by establishing one's character and authority to be listened to and heard. For the Ancient Greeks, this was crucial, for to be taken seriously, a man had to be of good family, a good reputation, and have connections in the community. Nowadays, some of this is still crucial when writing, but the goals are accomplished differently in writing than in speaking. In speaking, an orator will most likely have a defined audience s/he speaks in front of, and will have developed her bona fides prior to speaking. 

Her character will be established by the person who introduces her to the audience, who will tell you where she's from, what her educational background is, and any organizations she's affiliated with. All of these contribute to define the speaker's character. Yet, your character, your ethos, is more subtly communicated as well, through your tone of voice, your subject matter, and your presentation style. It is also communicated through respect for your audience, attention to their concerns, and thorough knowledge of one's subject.

When writing, the author establishes his character through his background, his vita, his list of works cited, and a biographical statement. It is important when you're a student writer to establish your credibility by picking a subject you have personal experience with. It is impossible to take a writer seriously when s/he chooses a subject she has no experience with. Your experience is your avenue to credibility. If you choose to speak or write on a subject you know nothing about, you will feel uncomfortable and you lose credibility.  

Invention: how to pick a subject to write about

This can be the single most difficult issue of all for the writer--where to begin? What should your subject be? There are a few select and highly effective ways to begin, which I will list (this list is inspired by a book called The Imaginative Argument: A Practical Manifesto for Writers, by Frank L. Cioffi; a very good book!). 

The easiest place to begin is with your feelings: You have a strong emotional response to something that happened, or something someone said or did. Perhaps it's a political issue, or something to do with civic engagement (my favorite metatopic). Probably, however, it's much more personal, and you can find a topic in anything you've had a strong reaction to. Virtually anything will work, and if you've had personal experience with the subject, you will be writing from a place of authority, a powerful ethical component of effective argumentation. 

Curiosity: There's no better fuel, after your emotional response, than a subject you would like to know more about. Usually, this requires an extensive amount of research, and it might even mean you have to go and experience what you're curious about personally. Eventually, your curiosity will lead to experiences that you will have emotional responses to, and a cycle of interest--invention--creation will begin. Curiosity always feels very exciting, and it's the surest way to stay invested in a subject. 

Aporia: Aporia means "an irresolvable internal contradiction or logical disjunction in a text." What happens is that you read something and your response is that it makes no sense. Using aporia as a method of approach to find a topic is extremely effective, especially in academic or essay writing. Your goal is to answer the question you've discovered the author has not answered, or has brought up in an incomplete manner. Aporia explains the fundamental problem most readers have with a text they question. For most readers the writing gives them a weird feeling that they're missing something, but the problem might not lie with your reading of the text. The problem might lie with the author's lack of argumentation skills or insufficient or incomplete evidence.

The Importance of Kairos

In an article entitled "Kairos: A Neglected Concept in Classical Rhetoric" from 1994, James L. Kinneavy argued that the use of kairos, the principle of using the right word at the propitious moment, should be resurrected. Indeed, it's an ethical principle from Ancient Greek philosophers and Sophistic teachers who taught orators how to construct and present an effective speech, and it's a concept that should never have been buried by time. 

The principle of kairos, however, goes deeper than 'mere' rhetoric. It has to do with an important principle of timing. The use of kairos requires that the writer and/or orator pays attention to his or her audience and understands precisely when the right word would make all the difference in the outcome of the piece of writing. It requires an ethical awareness of others' needs, at the same time that it relies on the orator's sensitivity to others. 

So kairos is ultimately an ethical consideration, and the reason this is important is because rhetoric is usually seen as necessarily unethical. Rhetoric is considered to be only interested in persuasion, in manipulating the listener into doing something they would otherwise never do. This is a perception about rhetoric that never really dies, and is only made worse by the frequent misuse of the word 'rhetoric,' which has come to be associated with the worst, most avaricious aspects of politics.

Relying on kairos, however, indicates that you understand the use of moderation and balance in the speech act. Think about the times you've seen or heard someone who waited for the precisely right moment before they introduced a new topic to you, or told you some piece of information that was, perhaps, upsetting. Their sensitivity to your needs told you a great deal about their concern for your welfare, proving their integrity and self-control. The same is true for those giving a speech or writing a piece of persuasive argumentation for their audience, and that awareness of correct timing is a powerful tool when constructing an argument.

The Rain in Spain Falls Mainly in Seattle.

I live in Seattle, ergo I am indoors too much, turning into a moldy vegetable. 

Seattle weather (it's pouring down rain even as I type) encourages the following, apparently, according to statistics:

More Ph.Ds per capita live here than anywhere else in America. I'm not kidding. 

There are more independent bookstores per square foot than anywhere else, even New York City, apparently, because we all stay indoors all the time, reading, drinking coffee, and going quietly or noisily insane.

And I know I get more writing done because there's no good reason to go outside. Every day, I look out my window first thing, and make a negotiation with the omnipresent greyness. I decide to ignore it most days, but in fact, it's a psychic drain to live in place where the sun so rarely shines. I love it here in many ways; it's a great city, and it has become extremely interesting as the years go by. It has grown up from its industrial roots, and there is a lot to do, especially when the sun shines on those three days out of the year when everyone is out, making traffic even worse than it normally is (another reason to stay indoors, if you ask me).

but... we are forced indoors here unless you enjoy walking through downpours all the time. 

There is a joke made by old-timers who lived here back when it was all logging and fishing... that moss grows in people's underarms because it's so damp here. It's true. You do tend to get a little soggy living here, and mold on the walls and in one's brain is a constant threat. ;-)

Back to the writing, and listening to the sound of the raindrops. It's a lovely sound... yet I miss the sun.  

Writing is easier with good software!

I am so excited about my new software. This might sound geek-lame, but I happen to love technology, and I am not ashamed to say that the latest version of Word for Mac (2008, v. 12.1.0) is great! Lots to learn. All I can say right now is, if you need to upgrade, don't hesitate to do it. It's worth the money. 

More about the details of using it as I learn it, but so far, it's got all the features I've been hoping for in a word processing program since 1986. Wait a minute; that's how many years?? Yes, it combines PageMaker/InDesign graphics functionality with advanced Word ability I have not seen prior to this. I had been hesitating to spend money on something I didn't really have to have, but in fact, this will make a couple of my current projects much easier, especially the book about containerized shipping in Asia, since there are about a hundred or so pictures to manage, and I need for them to flow rather seamlessly into the text. Up till now, I have had to juggle softwares to make this combination happen, and even now, I am going to have to work with Photoshop first of course, but Word is making all of this easier than ever.

I am in love. ;-)

All Writing is Persuasive

I remember when I first read the above assertion in The Rhetoric of Fiction by Wayne C. Booth. It was the first time I was introduced to the concept that narrative fiction might be trying to persuade the reader to think, feel, believe, or do something. This concept makes sense when reading novels by Charles Dickens; he was trying to bring social awareness to deplorable conditions in Victorian England. But what of Jane Austen? What was she trying to convince us of?

If you think about it though, you begin to realise that it's true. All writing is persuasive. This includes the obvious, which is politicized fiction that attempts to show the reader how the sociohistorical context used in the book influences the characters' choices, and, by extension, the reader's. I'm thinking here of novels like Herman Melville's Moby Dick, which include a long discourse on the sociopolitical ramifications of whaling, and The Octopus, by Frank Norris, which discusses conflict in California's wheat-growing regions between farmers, ranchers, the railroad, and the legal system. Another politicized novel is All the King's Men, by Robert Penn Warren, which foregrounds politics in the South during the dustbowl era, and the amoral rise to power of governor Willie Stark.

With sociopolitical novels, it is easy to argue that these stories attempt to persuade the reader to believe something in particular.  Melville wanted to show the deplorable conditions for whalers, Norris hoped to bring awareness to the material deprivations of farmers, and the sacrifices they made, and Warren wanted to show how immoral and amoral politics is. Each writer's hope was that the reader would become motivated to complain and make changes, and in fact, each book is known to have had an effect on the readers of its time, which created material changes for the groups in question.

However, what about the novel Pride and Prejudice? Can it be said that Jane Austen attempts to persuade her reader of anything? Is she hoping for some kind of social change, or for her reader to think, feel, believe, or do anything in particular? Or did she write simply because she liked to write? I think that in fact, she did want the reader to understand something rather subtle. In essence, Austen's theme, throughout her six novels, is "unity." Think of the thing that the writer wants us to believe or feel, etc., as a concept or philosophy they're trying to "sell" us, the reader. 

In Austen's case, she wants us to understand how very important certain Enlightenment values were to her. One of these values could be expressed through her plot device of the question of whether or not her characters would be married, and if so, would that person be a true friend? Friendship, integrity, moral standing---these were all important Enlightenment and Romantic era values, and Austen is indeed writing to persuade us of their importance. 

You can tell a novelist wants us to believe something in particular when s/he uses certain kinds of language to express her values. It can also be seen through the subject matter she chooses to discuss. Textual evidence will support the novelist's theme, and language choices will indicate how s/he feels about the subject. Each sentence will be carefully chosen, whether consciously or not, to relay the novelist's values, and it is those values s/he is trying to convince you of.

The question is, will you agree or disagree with those values? That's when you find yourself nodding along to what you're reading, or perhaps rather vehemently saying "no." When that happens, you'll know the writer is trying to persuade you of something, and you're either in agreement or not, depending upon your values. 

Learning how to write a novel by studying how to write a screenplay

One of the ways I suggest students get past a block in something they're writing is to write something else. Ideally, it should not in any way pertain to their primary writing project; the goal is to stay away from the project that's causing you difficulty. One way of approaching this is by trying a new kind of writing. The type of writing I've been researching for awhile now is screenplays. 

I have always wanted to write a stage play. However, what I'd like to write is intensely personal, and I'm not ready to say the things that would need to be said. It would emerge sounding stilted and stupid, as though I were avoiding saying certain things. Which is, in fact, what I would be doing if I tried to write it now. It involves my childhood, and it would be hard to write. So I'm putting it off for the time being. 

So instead I got started taking a look at how to write a screenplay. I've come up with a basic concept, which I was quite pleased to be able to do, since I've never done this before, and one doesn't know, when you try something new, whether or not you'll be able to accomplish even that much. I bought a bunch of books, and one of the things I've noticed as I read them is that they inform my novel-writing abilities more and more. The thing that's interesting about screenplays (from my perspective) is how visual the story must be, if it's going to be effective.

Now, if you're writing a literary novel, you have all sorts of room for interior monologue, and you can take a page to describe what a room looks like, what fabrics feel like, the color of a boy's skin or the smell of the fireplace. In a screenplay, all of that must be conveyed immediately, and it must be conveyed through the medium of the eyes. There is no room whatsoever for embellishment. Dialogue becomes the device that moves the plot even more so than in a novel. All of this has taught me to look at my characters and my scenes very differently, and I think it's been enormously helpful to my fiction writing, because every time I crack open a screenplay-writing guidebook, I get new inspiration about how to see my characters more clearly.