description

comments

contents

the editor

 

 

isbn:
9781891136238
2010
710 pages
paperback

suggested list price: $73.75
price to college bookstores:
$59.00

 

Readings in
Rhetorical Criticism

fourth edition

Carl R. Burgchardt, editor
Colorado State University

PREFACE

The fourth edition of this anthology, like the previous editions, presents major classical and contemporary approaches to rhetorical criticism and illustrates them for undergraduate and graduate students. When I first began work on Readings in Rhetorical Criticism, conversations with colleagues around the country led me to realize that many of us assign the same basic readings and address similar topics. Teachers who used previous editions confirmed my judgment that the book includes many of the most important and commonly assigned essays in the discipline.

Readers and reviewers have endorsed the design of the book and generously suggested several ways it could represent the current, dynamic state of rhetorical criticism more fully, while at the same time illuminating traditional scholarship and the evolution of the field. Their perceptive comments guided my efforts to make the fourth edition more useful for those who teach—and learn about—rhetorical criticism. While retaining the basic structure and approach of previous editions, I have reorganized the book to some extent and replaced some of the earlier selections with essays that reflect more recent scholarship, seem more accessible to students, or represent an approach more clearly.

In this edition, as in previous editions, I have endeavored to (1) conform to a focused concept of rhetorical criticism; (2) offer a survey of pathbreaking essays that are frequently cited in the literature; (3) provide access to some classic essays that are out of print or difficult to obtain; (4) introduce students to contemporary critical practice; and (5) present the major critical methods, approaches, and philosophies in an evenhanded way. The essays included in the chapters and listed in the “Additional Readings” section in the back of the book reflect the major historical and contemporary controversies concerning rhetorical criticism.

To include everything that merits anthologizing would have been impossible. Instead, I selected essays that could provide a starting point for discussion and be supplemented in a variety of ways. I chose some essays because they are famous, some because they illustrate a concept particularly well, and some because they explore promising new directions. I preferred to use primary sources rather than secondary interpretations of major critical concepts. Finally, I attempted to find pieces that refer to and challenge one another.

Most of the essays analyze traditional objects of criticism: speeches, essays, pamphlets, editorials, and so forth. In order to represent recent approaches more fully, however, I have also included some works that criticize nontraditional objects, such as media coverage, architecture, postcards, photographs, television, and common cultural practices.

Each chapter begins with a headnote that describes the selections briefly and explains how they are related to each other. The headnotes provide background information and alert the student to important issues in the essays; however, I have neither systematically outlined the readings nor attempted to describe all the salient points. I have attempted to prepare students to read productively, without interfering with their processes of discovery.

ORGANIZATION OF THE BOOK

The first chapter in the book presents nine views of the purposes of rhetorical criticism. These essays, taken together, form the conceptual foundation for the book, which often refers back to one or more of these trailblazing articles.

The chapters that follow define and illustrate many of the most popular and enduring approaches to rhetorical criticism. Generally, each chapter presents an essay that proposes a particular approach or method, followed by one or more essays that apply and illustrate the theory.

The “Additional Readings” section, structured to correspond to the chapter organization, provides supplemental resources for students who are grappling with methodological concepts or seeking scholarly models. This carefully selected bibliography contains a variety of authors, subjects, and methodological choices that reflect the breadth and depth of rhetorical criticism.

The anthology can be assigned from the first page to the last, but is also flexible to alternative arrangements. Each chapter is designed to be a free-standing unit; there is no assumption that students have read the chapters in order. For example, although Chapter 1 is meant to stand as an internally cohesive unit, some instructors may prefer to combine specific readings from this chapter with later chapters in the book. Herbert A. Wichelns’s “The Literary Criticism of Oratory” could productively be assigned with Chapter 2, “Neo-Classical Criticism.” Raymie E. McKerrow’s “Critical Rhetoric: Theory and Praxis” complements Chapter 11, “Critical Rhetoric.”

Some instructors may prefer to group essays that analyze the same or similar critical objects from different perspectives. For example, Lincoln’s rhetoric is critiqued in Chapters 2 and 3, from neo-classical and close textual analysis approaches. Essays that rhetorically analyze the media coverage of events include those by Tonn, Endress, and Diamond and by Ott and Aoki in Chapter 4, “Dramatism,” as well as Dow’s and Sloop’s essays in Chapter 10, “Gender Criticism.” The Palczewski essay and the Lucaites and Condit essay in Chapter 9, “Ideographic Criticism,” as well as Campbell’s and Dow’s essays in Chapter 10, “Gender Criticism,” analyze social movement discourse and could profitably be read in conjunction with Chapter 7, “Social Movement Criticism.” The “Additional Readings” list more essays that use different methods to analyze similar critical objects.

Since the publication of the third edition of this anthology, the “critical rhetoric” approach, often designated as “critical/cultural studies,” has become pervasive in the field of rhetorical criticism. Indeed, in the last few years, nearly every new piece of rhetorical criticism reflects, to some extent, the perspectives and politics of critical rhetoric. Teachers who wish to accentuate this transformation may combine Chapter 11, “Critical Rhetoric,” with the essays by McKerrow (Chapter 1, “Purposes of Rhetorical Criticism”), Ott and Aoki (Chapter 4, “Dramatism”), Butterworth (Chapter 6, “Metaphoric Criticism”), Zaeske (Chapter 7, “Social Movement Criticism”), Morris (Chapter 10, “Gender Criticism”), and Sloop (also in Chapter 10).

As editor, I attempted to reproduce the original essays faithfully. Optical scanning technology and computer conversion tools, in conjunction with some excellent proofreaders, were enormously helpful in accomplishing this goal. I corrected only minor typographical errors. Occasionally, I inserted “[sic]” to indicate unorthodox or archaic phrasing in the original publication. (When “[sic]” appears in roman type, the original publication included it.) For the sake of consistency, I converted all footnotes to endnotes.

FEATURES OF THE NEW EDITION

In revising this volume, I tried to update the readings, refine my classification of critical approaches, and, in general, create a more interesting, accessible, and relevant book for scholars, students, and teachers, while maintaining the basic structure, selection criteria, and approach of the previous editions.

First, in response to insightful comments from colleagues, I reframed (and sometimes moved) chapters to illustrate the dynamic nature of rhetorical criticism, as well as its continuities, more fully. For example, I have retitled Chapter 2 as “Neo-Classical Criticism,” because some readers found the previous label, “traditional criticism,” to be ambiguous. The chapter on close textual analysis, previously Chapter 10, is now Chapter 3. This placement, I believe, more clearly reveals the roots of close textual analysis in the neo-classical approach. In order to represent current issues and directions, the chapter on “Feminist Criticism” has been renamed “Gender Criticism”; it has also been significantly reorganized and broadened in scope. For similar reasons, the last chapter has been restructured and is now called “Critical Rhetoric.” In making these changes, I strove to maintain a productive balance between historically important articles and works that reflect vibrant new directions in scholarship.

Second, whenever possible, I have introduced more recent illustrations of contemporary critical practices. Five chapters include at least one new essay. Most of the new selections were first published after 2005.

Third, I aimed to maintain the wide-ranging subject matter and critical variety of previous editions. New essays use cutting edge (as well as more established) methods and perspectives to explore historical and contemporary subjects, such as Abraham Lincoln’s oratory, rhetorical controversies surrounding the war in Iraq, pictorial representations of the woman suffrage movement in the United States, the struggle to define what it means to be a feminist, and the gendered world of race car driving.

Fourth, in the chapter introductions, I have tried to emphasize, once again, that the critical approaches represented in the book do not constitute mutually exclusive categories. Several selections reflect more than one critical perspective and could legitimately appear in more than one chapter. I have tried to structure the material in a way that invites students and teachers to discover multiple connections between the readings.

Finally, the bibliography for the fourth edition has been expanded and updated to reflect current issues and scholarship.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Most books require the help of many people to reach completion. This is particularly true in the case of a large anthology such as Readings in Rhetorical Criticism. Throughout the project, I relied on the good will, generosity, dedication, and hard work of numerous individuals.

I wish to recognize the encouragement and sound advice of everyone who helped me with the first three editions. The valuable contributions of these individuals carried forward into the fourth edition: Heather Aldridge, Augustana College; John Arthos, Denison University; Jacinta M. Behne, Colorado State University; William L. Benoit, University of Missouri; Dale A. Bertelsen, Bloomsburg University; Barbara Biesecker, University of Georgia; Lloyd F. Bitzer, University of Wisconsin–Madison; Edwin Black, University of Wisconsin–Madison; Barry Brummett, University of Texas at Austin; Thomas R. Burkholder, University of Nevada Las Vegas; Karlyn Kohrs Campbell, University of Minnesota; A. Cheree Carlson, Arizona State University; J. Robert Cox, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Adrienne Hacker Daniels, University of St. Thomas; James Darsey, Georgia State University; Ray D. Dearin, Iowa State University; Janis L. Edwards, University of Alabama; Keith Erickson, University of Southern Mississippi; Susan E. Fillippeli, Auburn University; Trischa Goodnow, Oregon State University; Richard B. Gregg, Pennsylvania State University; Charles Griffin, Kansas State University; Cindy L. Griffin, Colorado State University; Bruce Gronbeck, University of Iowa; Dan Hahn, New York University; Jeffrey Hobbs, Abilene Christian University; Carol Jablonski, University of South Florida; Richard L. Johannesen, Northern Illinois University; Peter Kane, State University of New York, College at Brockport; David J. Kavalec, Colorado State University; Amos Kiewe, Syracuse University; Janis King, Southwest Missouri State University; Brenda K. Kuseski, Colorado State University; Randall A. Lake, University of Southern California; Ed Lamoureux, Bradley University; Michael C. Leff, University of Memphis; Camille K. Lewis, Bob Jones University; David A. Ling, Central Michigan University; Bruce Loebs, Idaho State University; John Louis Lucaites, Indiana University; Stephen E. Lucas, University of Wisconsin–Madison; Daniel R. Lutz, Colorado State University; John J. Makay, Bowling Green State University; Susan Mackey-Kallis, Villanova University; Roseann M. Mandziuk, Southwest Texas State University; Suzanne McCorkle, Boise State University; Martin J. Medhurst, Baylor University; Charles E. Morris III, Boston College; Star A. Muir, George Mason University; Teresa Nance, Villanova University; Janice Norton, Arizona State University; Barbara O’Connor, California State University, Sacramento; Lester C. Olson, University of Pittsburgh; Tracey M. Owens, University of Wyoming; John Pauley, Saint Mary’s College; Anne Pym, California State University, East Bay; Angela G. Ray, Northwestern University; Tom Roach, Purdue University Calumet; Edward A. Schiappa, University of Minnesota; Mike Schliessman, South Dakota State University; Enid M. I. Sefcovic, Florida Atlantic University; Kara Shultz, Bloomsburg University; David Thomas, University of Richmond; Laurie Thurneck, Saint Mary’s College; Pamela J. Tosch, Colorado State University; Rebecca M. Townsend, University of Massachusetts; Paul Turpin, University of the Pacific; Karen Whedbee, Northern Illinois University; Joe Wilferth, State University of West Georgia; and Susan Zaeske, University of Wisconsin–Madison.

For the fourth edition, I gratefully acknowledge the insightful and supportive advice of the following people who served as reviewers or responded to our survey of adopters: Benjamin Bates, Ohio University; Bill Benoit, University of Missouri; Thomas W. Benson, Pennsylvania State University; Jason Edward Black, University of Alabama; Jim Cherney, Miami University; Dana L. Cloud, University of Texas at Austin; James Darsey, Georgia State University; Greg Dickinson, Colorado State University; Catherine A. Dobris, Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis; Janis Edwards, University of Alabama; Jean Goodwin, Iowa State University; Sara Hayden, University of Montana; Davis Houck, Florida State University; Michael Leff, University of Memphis; John Llewellyn, Wake Forest University; Susan Mackey-Kallis, Villanova University; Steve Martin, Ripon College; Kelly McDonald, Arizona State University; Martin Medhurst, Baylor University; Catherine H. Palczewski, University of Northern Iowa; Robert Patterson, University of Virginia; Larry Prelli, University of New Hampshire; Anne Pym, California State University, East Bay; Angela G. Ray, Northwestern University; Jody Roy, Ripon College; Mari Boor Tonn, University of Maryland; Jacob Thompson, University of Northern Iowa; Ron Von Burg, Christopher Newport University; and David Zarefsky, Northwestern University.

Special thanks go to Susan Zaeske, University of Wisconsin–Madison; Bonnie Dow, Vanderbilt University; and Dana Cloud, University of Texas at Austin, who offered valuable advice concerning difficult questions of organization and naming.

I am grateful to all of the graduate students at Colorado State University who read and discussed my book during seminars. Their questions and comments helped hone my thinking about rhetorical criticism. Three students in particular made specific suggestions that were incorporated in the fourth edition: Laura Crum, Stephanie Whalls, and Elise Clement. I am also grateful to my “official” proofreaders from Colorado State University: Beth Meyers-Bass, Hollie Petit, Elizabeth Sink, Hannah Werntz, and Amanda Vilim Wright.

For the fourth time, Kathleen M. Domenig, editor and publisher of Strata, exceeded all my expectations. I am grateful for her attention to detail, dedication to quality, patience, tact, knowledge, encouragement, and friendship. She is simply the best.

I wish to acknowledge the crucial contributions of my family, which I relied upon for emotional sustenance. I appreciate deeply the patience and understanding shown by my wife, Jill C. Burgchardt, and my daughters: Jane E. Burgchardt and Lucy A. Burgchardt. As always, I thank my mother, Elva L. Burgchardt, for providing love and support from the beginning. She is a model of courage, intelligence, and devotion.