Page 69 - Cultural Studies A Practical Introduction
P. 69

5


                                           Rhetoric



                                        with   Brett   Ingram








                            Rhetoric has a bad reputation. Often used as an insult in the contemporary
                  political scene, the word  rhetoric  has come to suggest mere verbal trickery
                  set in contrast to real action, the ornamental play of words rather than
                  serious and responsible attention to facts. For instance, it is a common
                  strategy for one political candidate to frame his or her opponent as a dealer
                  in fanciful rhetoric while positioning himself or herself as a   “ straight
                  talker, ”  more  “ down to earth, ”  and therefore more authentic and capable
                  of enacting change. Examples of this strategy abounded in the 2008
                  US presidential campaign, as Republican candidate John McCain and
                  Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton both attempted to halt the momentum
                  of Barack Obama by calling into the question the substance behind Obama ’ s
                  eloquent speaking style. John McCain cautioned voters to  “ listen carefully,
                                                                       1
                  because his ideas are not always as impressive as his rhetoric. ”    Likewise,
                  Hillary Clinton stated,  “ Some people may think words are change. You and
                                              2
                  I know better. Words are cheap. ”    Bill Clinton, himself an acknowledged
                  master of wordplay, added,  “ I think that action counts more than rhetoric,
                                                                            3
                  that solutions are more important than speeches, however beautiful. ”    We
                  can see here a dichotomy being constructed, in which ideas and action are
                  set in opposition to linguistic expression; the former are represented as
                  forces capable of making thing happen, while the latter is rendered as na ï ve
                  idealism, pleasing to the ear but ultimately ineffectual as a means of trans-
                  forming the real world.
                     What must be noted is that the Clintons ’  and McCain ’ s attacks are
                  themselves rhetorical, that is, they are intentionally composed arrange-
                  ments of language designed to provide an interpretive framework through
                  which the listener is prompted to think and act in a prescribed way. These
                  rhetorical constructions are formulated not simply to provide a fl eeting
                  stimulation to the listener ’ s senses and emotions, but also to actually move
   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74