Jle,MA-i 6 07;cJ

J
/-h J I Dl JJ '"-"'j.
l-h "" 4 'Y J.
Tbe olJ Rbetoric:
an ajJe-memojre
Wha, follows is the transcription of a seminaT .!riven at the Ecole pTalique
des hatHeS iLudes in 1964-1965. A! !he souTce-or on !he horiton-of
this seminaT, as always, !heTe was lhe modem !exl, i.e., the text which
does not yet exist. One way 10 ap/JToach !his new !ex! is '0 find OUI
fTVm what point of de/raTIUTe, and in oP/lOsitil, n 10 what, it seek.. to come
infO being, and in .his way to con(Tont the new semiotics of writing wi.h
./" classicallrTactice of li.erary language, which for centurie.1 was known
a.< Rltetmic. Whence .he notion of a seminaT on .he old Rheltnic: old
does no' mean .Iw here is a new Rhetoric today; ra.heT old Rhetoric
is set in ol'lJOsition to that new which may not yet have come inro beillg:
the wOTId is incTedibly full of old .Rhetoric.
NOT Ultmld .hese wOTking notes have been published if ./teTe exiSled a
book, a rnanual, a memorand .. m of some sort which migh. IITesen' a
elmmo/oRical and syslerna.ic panorarrw of .hat classical RhelOTic. Un-
fOTtl<l"Jleiy, so faT a.< I know, l/tere is norhing of the kind (ar 1ea.1! in
FTench) . I have .heTefore been oblir,ed '0 cons.ruc. my knowledge myself,
and i. is .he Tesult of this IJeTSonal pTolraede .. tics I"hiel, is offeTed heTe:
.his is .he manual I should have liked 10 find Teady -made when I began
10 inquiTe in.o .Ite dearh of RhelOTic. Nu.hing mOTe, .hen, .lllln (In
elementary system of infonnotion, (m introduction [0 a (erwin numhcr
I2 ELEMENTS
of tenns and classificalions-which does not mean lhat in the course of
Ihis study I have not often been moved to admiration and excitement fry
the power and subtlety of that old rhetorical system, and the modernity
of certain of its propositions.
Unfortunately, I can no longer (for practical rea,OIlS) authenticate
the references for this "scholarly text" : I mlt.\f write tllis nla",,,,l in tKlrt
from memory. My exc""e is that it deals with a commonplace warning:
Rhetoric is inadequately known, yet knowled!{e of it imt,lies no Wsk of
erudition; hence anyone can readily avail himself of the bibliogT<lt,l,ic
references which are lacking llere. What is collected (sometimes, tlerhatlS,
in the form of involuntary quotatiom) deriv" essentially: I . from seveml
treatises on rhetoric fTOm classical antiquity; 2. from the scl10larly intro-
ductions 10 the Guillaume /JtuU series ; 3. from two fundament<.l l b""ks
fry Curti"" and /Jaldwin; 4. from several speciali zed artic"",, ''''ftlhl y
with regard to the Middle Ages; 5. /rom "veral reference /X.,ks, indudin!{
Mcniefs Dictionn.ire de rhetorique, F. Bnmot's Hist"ire de 10
langue and R. Bray's La Formation de la doctrine classi"lIc
en France; 6. from several related readings, the,me/ve., incom/,lete and
contingent (Kojeve, Jaeger) . '
0.1. Rhetorical practices
The rhetoric under discussion here is that metalanguage (whose
language-object was "discourse") prevalent in the West from the
fifth century B.C. to the nineteenth century A. U. Weshallnot dcal
with more remote efforts (India, Islam). amI with regard tn the
I Emst u.. C Ull ius, Europran U'tffl/UTt' and lhe U.ltn Middk ARt) . lrans. Wllbml R. T"ISk.
York : Foundation, 195J.
e harlt' s S. lhldwin, Ancienl and Pnrlic '",c$rlr(I !fllm Rr, ',eH'1Hiru"r \Vmlu,
Glouc(:slt'r, PClcr Smilh, 1959; Mtd.tll(tl RhcWric aud PutilC (I'J '''(0) /nlcrt"t lrd fWIll
Rt'I"rscnltuiut War/,",. Gloucc=sltr, Mas.... . : Smilh. 1959.
Ft'ldinand Brunm, HiHmr(' tit fa h Cln.t;OHt' . Paris: Culin. 191 \ .
Rt'nr: Bray, I.A Fllmlllrion de Ia cJoclnfll' dll.l Jit,lIt' en France, ";ui \ : NIU" . 1951.
11(, llfi Mllritl. OicfifmntUTt tk poClU,lIt t'l dt rhimru,IIt'. ra, is: r UF. I Q(, I.
Wtrncr W. JatJ:c=r. Po.idtia: The Irkou q Gut'k CufIUft'. trans. IIIJ!hrl . J Vilis..
Nc=w York: Oxfultl IQ4 J.- 194S.
A It' x;lOd,t: Knjcvc=, EHai d'ullc hUl flift' Y(ll,u"mcr dt Itl plulo10/,IIIt' p<rirrml'. 1 . "am:
vallim;mJ. 1968.
The Old Rhetoric: an aide-memoi" 13
West itself, ;"e shall limit ourselves to Athens, Rome, and France.
This metalanguage (discourse on discou"e) has involved several
practices , simultaneously or successively present, according to pe ..
riods, within IlRhetoric";
I . A technique, i.e. , an "art." in the classical sense of the word;
the art of persuasion, a body of rules and recipes whose impl emen-
tation makes it possible to convi nce the hearer of the discourse
(and lat er the reader of the work), even if what he is to be convinced
of is "false."
z. A teaching: the art of rhetoric, initially transmitted by per-
sonal means (a rhetor and his di sciples, hi s clients), was soon
introduced into institutions of learning; in schools, it formed the
essential matter of what would today be call ed higher education; it
was transformed into material for examinati on (exerci ses, lessons,
tests) .
J. A science. or in any case a proto-science, i.e. , a. a fi eld of
autonomous observation delimiting certain homogeneous phenom
ena, to wit the "effects" of language; b. a classi fi cat ion of these
pheno-;"'ena (whose is the list of rhetorical
"figures"; c. <In "operation" in the H;elmslevian sense, i. e., a meta
language. a body of rhetorical treati ses whose substance-or sig-
nified- is a language-object (argumentative language and
language) .
4. An ethic: as a system of "rules," rhetoric is imbued with the
amhiguity of that word: it is at once a manual of recipes, inspireJ
hy a practi cal goal, and a Coole, a body of ethi cal prescripti ons
whose role is to supervise (i.e . to permit and to limit) the "devia-
ti ons" of emot ive language.
5. A social l)racrice: Rhetoric is thM privileged technique (since
onc mll st pay in order to acquire it) whi ch permits the nlling classes
ELEMENTS
to gain ownership of .,peech. Language being a power, selective rules
of access to this power have been decreed. constituting it as ..
closed to "those who do not know how to speak"
and requiring an expensive initiation: born Z500 ye"rs ago in leg"1
I cases concerning property, rhetoric was exhausted and died in the
\.urhetoric" class, the initiatory ratification of bourgeuis culture.
6. A ludic practice: since all these practices constituted a (or-
midable ("repressive." we now say) institutional system, it was only
natural that a mockery of rhetoric should develop, a "hlack" rhetoric
(suspicions, contempt, ironies): games, parodies, ;;otic or obscene
allusions,2 classroom jokes, a whole schoolboy practice (which still
remains to be explored, moreover, and to be constituted as a cultural
code).
0.2_ The rhetorical empire
All these practices attest the breadth of the rhetorical phenom-
enon-a phenomenon, however, which has not yet produced any
J important synthesis, any historical interpretation. Perhaps this is
because rhetoric (aside from the taboo which weighs upon lan-
guage), a veritable empire, greater and more ten"cious than any
political empire in its dimensions and its duration, flouts the very
I on emu.! and conjunctio (aclu;tlly o( whit- It
honoww from Arabian Ni1{hH, nntion: "Thf'n he
spent of with ill and clirrinj(, Ihf' o(
cI'pulation in concert and joining the conjunctive wilh cunjnincd, whi lM hmh:mJ
w;u a cast -out nunnation of 113l1rlOn translation, Tht Flook 01 Th()I(5(l1l{j
NiRhu and a NiRhI. York: 1962. vol. 4. p. 34841. nohly, Alain
explains that humanity commits ixlrbtlrisrru in union (I( the
which contravene the ruloes of man falls into tI,lltStrnt' N-l ("
conslnlCtion); in his (oil y. he even commiu ITm'JiJ (CUftjU$, 01). (If. , pr. 414-416) ;
Calderon. commenting on the siruatinn o( a lady whi le her sUl tnr: ""
a R,eat h:nharism or love to venture ttl sec and to he (or, as a had J:r;muTl;u i:m. a
may he made jnln an person. " We know in what an:llmnical
KI05.<;owski I;udy revived the nf .sc: lwla.\licisrn (WOun.\ i f , Stl ( 1JIlIM. IUICUIIIII .
quitftll : "The (fuide.'!!") . It ({II lows Ihal Ih(' pf J!rall1m:u (of rheluric III
I
n( ami nol ulily it marks mil wilh !,,('cision and
a lfansgreMlve s\le where two tahoos art I,flet! : Ihal o( lanJ:u3J!e ami thaI of sex.
The Old Rhe<oric: an aide-memoir.
15
concepts of science and historical reflection, to the point of calling
into question history itself. at least as we are accustomed to imagine
and employ history, and of compelling us to conceive what we
might elsewhere have called a monumental history; the <cientific
scorn attached to rhetoric would then participate in
refusal to recognize multiplicitY, overdetennination. Yet if we
sider that . rhetoric-whateve; the may
have been-has prevailed in the West for two and a half millennia,
from Gorgias to Napoleon Ill; if we consider all that it has seen-
watching immutable, impassive, and virtually immortal--<:ome to
life, pass, and vanish without itself being moved or changed: Athe-
ni"n democracy, Egyptian kingdoms, the Roman Republic, the
Roman Empire, the great invasions, feudalism, the Renaissance,
the monarchy, the French Revolution; it has digested regimes,
religions, civilizations; moribund since the Renaissance, it has taken
three centurie,s to not dead for sure f{hetoric
grants "ccess to what must be called a super-civilization: that of
the historical and geographical West : ,t nas been the unly practice
(with grammar, born subsequently) t1;rough has
recognized language's sovereignty (ku. a;;;; a;' Gorgias says), which
was also, socially, a "lordship"; the classification it has imposed is
the only feature really shared by successi ', e and various hi storical
groups, as if there existed, superior to id"ologies of content and
to direct determinations of history, an ideology of form; as if- a
principle anticipated by Durkheim and Mauss, affirmed by Levi -
Strauss- there existed for each society a taxonomic identity, a socio-
logic in whose name it is possib:e to define "nother history, another
sociality, without destroying those recogni1Cd at other levels.
0.3. The journey and the aetwork
This Yost territory will be explored here (in the loose and hasty
sense of the verb) in two directions: :1 diachronic direction and a
direction, We shall certainly not reconstnlCt a history
of rhetoric; we shall confine ourselve. to isolating a few significant
moments, we shall traverse Rhetoric's two Ihollsand years by making
16 ELEME NT S
/
a few SI"puve rs whi ch will he something like the "llays" IIf our
may he of very ul1e411al length) . In " II. this
long diachrony will comprise seve n moment s, seven "days" whose
"" value will be essentially e1ielactic. Then we sh,,11 collect the rhetors'
classifi cati ons in order tu form a singl e network, a kinJ of artifact
whi ch will permit us to conceive of the art of rhetori c as a kind of
subtly articulated ITIr. chine, a"'trce of operations. a "program"
tineel to pnxluce e1iscourse.
A. THE JOURNEY
A.1. Birth of rhetoric
A . I.1. Rhetoric and property
Rhetori c (as a mctal .mguagc) W;l S horn in the ItJ.!:l l
ccrning propert y. Around 485 H.C. , two S ici li an t yr;lIlt s, Gel on
and J-li crun , effect ed depo rt ations . transfers o ( populati on, ;md ('x#
propri ations in order to populate Syraclise and pay the merce nari es;
whcn they wc re deposcd by a de tnoc r<lti c upri sing and an :l lt emp'
was tn:ldc to return to the ante lillO, there W;l S endless litigation.
for property right s had heen obscured. Such litigati on was of :l new
type: it mohili zed large peopl e's juries Ihal h ad to he convinccd hy
the flc!04ucncc" of those who arpcarcJ before tht.: m. Sileh do
qucncc, pa rtiy oCll1ocr<l t ic and Pt-utl y dCll1ilgngi c. r ardy judic iary
anel partl y politi cal (whi ch was suhse<tuently known as drl" .. nHil 'f ).
was mpidly const itut eJ into an ohj ect of inst rue I ion. The lirst t C;l( h
crs of thi s ncw Ji sci pline werc Etnpedocl cs of Co rax.
hi s pupil from Syracuse (the rlfst tn he "aid for hi s ill strIl Cli oll) ;
anJ Tisias. Such leaching passed nn less rapidl y 10 Atti ca (afler
the Persian wars), t hanks In the litigation of merc h;1Ilts. whu plc; ,dl' d
in Syracllse and in Athens: h y the middl e of ,he fir,h cenlury,
rhelori c w;ts already rarlly Athe n iall .
The Old Rhe,oric: an aide nimoire 17
A.J.2. A great .yntagmatic.
What was this proto-rhetoric, this Coracian rhetoric! A rhetoric
of the syntagm, of di scourse, and nOl of the feature, of the figure.
Corax already posited the five major parts IIf oralio whic h for cen-
turi es would form the "plan" of orator ical discourse: I . exordium;
Z. narration or action (the rel atinl . of facts); J. argument or proof;
4. digression; 5. epilogue. It is easy to see that in shifting from legal
di scourse to academic dissertati on, this plan has kept it s main or
gani zMi on: an introducti on. a demonstrative body, a conclusion.
This first rhetoric is by and large a great syntagmatics.
A. J.J. Feigned speech
It is enterta ini ng to note that the art of speech is originally linked
to a claim of ownership, as iflanp, uage, as ()bject of a tnms(onnati on,
conditi"n of a practice, had been determined not from a suhtl e
ideological meJiation (as may have been the case in so many forms
of art), but from the baldest sociality, af:". rmed in its fundamental
brutality, that of earthly possession: we began t J refl ect upon. Ian
guage in order to defend our own: It ison the of ;oc ial confli ct
that was born a first theoreti cal sketch of feigned speech (different
from fi ctive speech, that of the poets: poetry was then the only
literature, prose not acceding to thi s status until later) .
A.2. Gorgias, or prose as literature
Gurgias of Leontium (today Lent ini, north of Syracuse) came to
Athens in 427; he was the teacher of Thucydides , and t he Sophist
int erl ocutor of Socrates in the Gorgias.
A.Z. I. Codification of prose
Gorgias's role (for us) is to have prose under the rhetori cal
code. ,l(c rcJiling it as a learned discourse, an est hetic ohj ect. "sov
ercign language," ancestor of Hlil Cratllre. ,. How! T he funeral pan#
egyri cs (threnodi es ). initi ally composed in verse, shift to prose, they
18
ELEM ENTS
arc entrusted to they arc, if not writt en (in the modern
sense of the word). at least mctnOri l cti, i. e . in a ccrtain fa shion ,
SeI; thus is born a third genre (aft cr the legal and Ihe deliher"l ive).
the elJicieiclic: t his is the aJvcnt of a decor.Hive prose, ;, prosc as
spectacle. In thi s transition fronl verse to prose, mc:ICT tlnd Inusic
arc lost. Gorgifls seeks to replace them hy a COlic immanent to prose
(Ihough borrowed from poelry): words of similar lnsonancc. sym-
metri cal sent ences, antitheses reinforced hy aSSt )l):lncc . allitcralitHl,
mct aphor.
A.2.2. Advent of c1ocutio
Why ooes Gorgias constitute fI stopover on otlr joUrtll'Y? T here
arc. by and large. in a complelc art of rhelori c (Ihal of Q"il\lili :lI1.
for instance) two poles: a syntagmat ic pole (!Il l' order of the part s
of the di scourse. Of ;md a paraJ iglilatic pull' (rill'
"figures" of rheto ric , lexis o r elo( ucio) . We have secn that Ct nax
had init.iatcJ a purely synt ;lgulati c r"erori c. Gorgias. requirin!.! the
elahoration of "figures," gives rhetor ic a pa radigmati c perspec ri vc:
J hc opens prose to rhet o ric, anJ rhetori c to
---------_.--_. -_ .... -_ .. - --
A.3. Plato
Plato's di alogues which deal directl y with Rhelori c :1fe ti ll' UlIl'gid.1
"nJ thc PIIL"c1w.s.
A.J.1. Tile tlVO rllctorics
Plato dc"ls with two rhetorics. one hall. thc olher 1:.-,,1: I. Ihe
rhetoric of fact is conslituted by an aCli vity whi.-h con-
sists in writing any discourse whatever {no longer a qllestio n (If
legal rhetori c the totalization o( the Ilo ti oll is
it S ohj ect is veri si mil itllJe . illusion; ,his is t he rhetoric o( t he rl n' tor:; ,
o( the schools, o( Gorgias, o( rhe Sophists; 2. t he rhetori c of law
is the true rhetoric. a philosophi c or eve n dialecti c al rheturi ci its
The Old Rhe'mic: an aide-rncmoire 19
ohj ect is Ihe Irlllh ; Plato call s it " (formati o n of snuls
hy srccch) . - The orrosition of g( Kld to bad rhetoric. of Pia Ionic
ttl Sophi sti c rhetoric. hclongs ttl larger on one side,
sc( vile occupat io ns. on the o t her, auste rity,
the rejection o( all compl acency; on one side. empiricism and rOll #
tinct on the other the a rts: the industries of pleasure a rc a oespi #
cahle imilalion of the arts of Ihe Good : rhcloric is the count erfcil
of Juslice. sorhislry of legislation. ClKlkery of medi cine. to il etry of
gYllInasli cs: rhcloric (Ihat of Ihe logograrhers. of the rhetors . of
the is therefore not an art.
A.J.l. Eroticized r'lC!oric
True rhelori c is a psychagogy; it requires " lotal. disi nl eresled.
lOll! Il('come a tr",,,, in Cic"ro and Quin-
lilian. hili Ihe notion will be llIadc insipiJ: what will he asked of
t he orator is a gotx..1 "gcneral ohject o( th is "synopti c"
knowledge is the correspondence o r the interact io n which unit es
Iypcs of souls to types of di scourse. Platoni c rhetori c set s writing
aside ilnd see ks out personal interl ocution, lUlIlOminlJfio; the hasic
mode of discourse is the dialogue hctween (eache r and pupil, unit eJ
l"lY Illl inspired love_ Thinking in common mi ght be .o(
dial ecti c. Rhetoric is a di alogue
A.J.J. Division and mark
Dialeclic i:lIl s (Ihose who livc Ihi s eroticized rhcloric) undertake
two alli ed ent erpri ses: on the one hand. an impulse o ( union , of
ascent toward an unconditional goal (Socr"t es, reproving Lysias in
the I'lwcclTI( S. dclines love in its wrallmiry); un the o the r. an
of descent. ;1 divi sion of unity according to natural articulations,
according to down to indivi sihle species. T hi s "descent "
proceeds in SI CPS: ar each sral-!c, o n each step. there are two terms;
Ulll' must he chosen over the uther in order to t;l kc the next s t l'P
duwn and accede to a new hi nary oppositi on, (rom which the
descent will continue; such is the I-!raJual definition o( the sophi ... t :
zo
ELEMENTS
hunting (or Rame

Wild/' lame (man)
by
.
In pU Ie In pnv;ue
r
f/ .
or gl 15 Of
(or ""fm money
Flartercrs S< ,phi sts
This divisional rhetoric-as opposetl to Ari stotle's syllogistic
rhctoric-clos.cly resembles a cybernetic. digilal program: each choice
determines the next ahcrnativci or again. it rcscmhlcs the para-
digmatic structure of language, whose hi nary oppositions involve a
marked and an unmarked term: here the markcJ {eTm sets up a new
alternati on . But where does the mark come fromr Here we H.' l\Irn
to Plato's erot icized rhetoric: in the Platonic Jiaillguc, the mark I"
eWectetilry lin lICkn()wledgmenl of tile res/","denl (the plIpil) . Plalo's
rhetoric impli es two interioclItors, one of whom offers an <lcknowl-
J" cdgmcnt o r a concession: this is the conditiun of movcment. li enee
those p.lrliclcs of agreement which we encounter in ("btu's
dialogues and whi ch often make us smil e (when we do not lind
them tetlious) by their silliness anti Iheir apparent hanality, ,ne
aClnally stnlCtural II marks," rhetorical acts.
A.4, Aristotelian rhetoric
A,4, I, Rhetoric and Poetics
f
Isn't "II rhetoric (if we except Plato) Aristotelian! No ,Iouht it
is: all the ditlaclic elements which feed the classical trla'H.als come
frum Arislode. Yet a system is n(ll defined only hy it s clement s--
il is also ami especially tlelined by the opposilion in which it is set.
Ari stotle wrote two treatises which COll cern the phenomena of
discourse, hut thcy mc quite distinct: the Tcduu! r/u!Ionkc de:lis with
an art uf everyday wit h !",uhl ie discourse; I he Tcdlfle
The Old Rllc'aric: (m
21
IkJierikc deal s wilh an art of imaginmy evocation; in the first case.
we arc concerneJ to order the progress of the di scourse from idea
10 idea; in the second, the progress of Ihe work (rom to
image: Ihest' me, (or Aristotle, two specific Jays of proceeding, two
:lut(ln(lI1H)lIS "fednUl;"; and it is the ()PfK)sition of these twu systems,
one rhelori cal, the other poetic, which in fact tlclines Aristotelian
rhetori c. All the authors who acknowl etlgc thi s opposition can be
situ;lI ed within Aristotelian rhetoric; rhetoric will cease when
the opposition is neutralized, when Rhetoric and Poetics unite
when rhetoric hecomes a reclme (of "crention") : this occurs:
approximatciy, in the age of Augustus (with Ovitl and Horace) and
a lilli e lat er (with Plutarch and Quintilian sti ll
practi ces an Ari stotelian rhetoric. The fusion of Rhetoric and Po-
eti cs is consecralctl hy the vocabulary of the Mitldl e Ages, when
the POCI ic art s ;lTe rhetorical arts, when the great rhctnrici:lns
ptl4,.' t S. T hi s (usion is crucial, for it is at the very source of the notiun
t,f lit crattlre: Aristnteli:ln rhetoric emphasizes relsoning; dfICurio (or I
the di slrihution of figures) is only .1 part of it (a minor part in
AriSlotie himself); subsequently , it is the contrary whi c h is Ihe
case: rhetori c is identified with problems, not nf "proof" but of
composition and of style: literature (the total act of writing) is
defined hy fine wr;rin,l!. Hence we must constillit e as a stopover of
ollr journey, under the general name of Ari stotelian rhetoric , all
the rhetori cs anterior to poetic totalization. This Ari stotelian rhet-
oric is theori zed for us by Aristotle himself. is practiced by Cicero,
is taught hy <..luintilian, and is "ansforrnetl (generali zed) hy Diony-
sillS of I fali ea rnasslIs, Plutarch, the anonymous flllthor of the
Ireal ise 011 II.e Sublime.
A.4.2. AriMotle's Rhetoric
Ari stotle defines rhetoric as "the art (If extracting (r(l1l1 every
s'lhj ec t 1114..' pTt)pcr degree (,( persll:lsil,n it all(lws," (lr as "the f:lClilty
of spccubtivc:ly discovering wh.H in eil ch case arc the <lva ilahle
Illeans {If persuasion." What is p"rhaps more important than these
dcliniliull s is the fa ct that rhetori c is a tcc/me (npt ;Ill empiric
22 ELEM ENTS
pract icc), i. e. : Ihe means of ImKlucing a whidl !lUlY e'jlwlly he or
nut he, whose origin is in the cfcatinJ,.! aJ,!cnt, nut in the
created: there is no tedllle of natllral Of ncccss;1ry IIling.s : thus dis#
course belongs to neither the one nor the other. - Ari.stodc COIl#
ccives of discourse (oralio) as a and subjects it to a divi sion
of the cybernetic type. Book I of his Hheloric is the h"ok of the
message-emitter, the Ixx,k of the orator: it Jeals chielly with the
conception of arguments, insofar f}S they depend on the orator, nn
hi s aJaptation to the public, according to the three recognized kinds
of discourse (legal, deliherative, epidcictic). Ixxlk II is the h""k "f
the message-receiver, the book l,f the puhlie: it deals with the
emutions (the passions). anti once again with argUlTlent s, hut this
time insofar as they are received (and no longer, as hefore. conceived).
Book III is the IXlOk of the message itself: it dca ls with lexi.1 or
clclCutio, i. e. , with "figures," and with ((Ixis or i.c. , with
the orJer of the parts of discourse.
A.4.J. Probability
Aristotle's Rhetoric is above all a rhetori c o( proo(, of reasoning.
of the approximative syllogism (cnthymcrnc); it is a ddihl.'ratc.:l y
jdiminished I"g'c, one adapted to the level of the 'puhlic," i.e., of
common sense, of urdinary opinion. Extended to literary prndue
tions (which W;IS not its original intention), it would imply 'If)
esthetic of the public, more than an esthetic of th" work. This is
why, mutatis JIIl(wnJis and making all (hi storical) allowances , il
would he well suited to the proJucls of our sOGIIItd mass culture .
in which an Ari stotelian "prohability" prevails, i.e. , "whar the
public helieves possihle." Huw m:lIly films, pull' novel s, clHlIlIICfcial
(
articles might take as their motto fhe Ari stotelian ruk: "het ter an
impossible probability than an illlproLdlle possihility": hCllcr tell
what the puhlic helieves possihlc, even if it is sc ienl ilically illlpo!'"
sihlc, than tell what is really pos.l ible, if such I'0ss ihtlity is Tejcclnl
hy I he collective )fsh ip (",,)Uhlic 0/';11;011. Iii!" (llwu Jllsly Icmpt illg
to conflate this m;lss rhetoric with Aristode's politics; whi ch was,
;"IS we know
t
a politics of the h;lpPY medium, favoring a h,,!;mced
The Olel Hll('luric an dide-mernoire
2J
Jl'11l0cracy , celltereJ on the middle classes, and responsihle for
reducing antagoni sms between rich and poc.. u, majority and minor-
j ity; whence ;1 rheloric of gooJ sense. delil - rarely suhorJil1ate to
\ the "psychology" of the public.
A.4.4. Cicero' .. Rhetoric.
In the second cenWry I) .C. , Greek rhcrors ahuunc..kJ in Rome;
schools of rhetori c were founded which functioned in classes de-
termined hy here two exercises were c urrent: the .'HUI .wriae, a
kind o( "persll:lsive" composition (especially in the delihcr:ltivc
genrd (or cllildrcn, find the con[TOtJene."i (legal genre) (or older
student s. The earliest Latin trcflti sl" is the Hhetorica ad Hercnniunl,
sometimcs attrihuted to Cornificills, sometimes to Cicero. In the
Middle Agcs. which ceaselessly rep",duced this manual, it hecame
the fund:lI11cntill text on the art o( writing, along with C icero's De
im/(,Htillnc. - C icero is an orator who speaks o( the art of oriHory;
whell ce i l certain pragmafization of Aristotelian theory {and there.
(ore..' Ilolhing really new in relation to (hi s thl' try). Cicero's R/I(!torica
comprise: I. the Ull ewrica ad HcrcJluium (assuming it is his), which
is a soTl o( dige!"t o( Aristotelian rhetori c; how ver. the classifi cation
o( "quest ions" replaces in importance the theory of the ent hyrnemc:
rhetoric is pr(l(c!"sionalizcd. The theory o( the three !" tyll' s (low,
high, middl e ) also appears here. Z. Dc ifltJcrHione OTulmia: thi !" is an
(incomplete) work of the "uthor's youth, purely legal, chiefly de-
voted to Ihe el,;dleireme, a developed syllogi sm in which one or tWD
prcmi ses me followed hy their proof,,: this is the "good argument."
J. Dc oru{orc, a work highly regardcJ lip to tl. e nineteenth cenlury
("a nI;l:->lcrpi ece of good sense," "of healthy and right reason," ''(If
gCl1crnu!" and lofty thought," "the most original of rheturicd Irea.
li ses") : ; IS i( he haJ Plato in minJ, Cicero morali zes rheturic and
re;Jet !" against the te;lching of the !"chools:"fhi s is Ihe c ultured man
turning ;Igaiwa speci alization: fhe work takes the f(lrm (I( a dialogue
(Cril sslls. Antollius, Mtlcius ScaevoIa, Ru(us, Cotta): it dcfint's the
or;1I0T (whtllllust have;1 gellcral culrllre) and reviews the Ir;lllil iOllal
d i vi sillfls (If rlll' l< Irie..' (;m1cnr;f), '$;Iil', ell Jew;o) . 4. Bl a It iSh Iry
ELEMENTS
of the art of omtory in Rome. 5. Or' lIl1r, an ideal of the
Orator; the second part is more didacti c (it will rece ive lenglhy
commentaries by Pierre Ramus): h ere is specified Ihe Iheory of Ihe
oralori cal"numhc r," repeated by Quintilian. 6. The Tll/lin!: a digest
of Aristotle's To/lies written from memory in eight elays on the ship
taking Cicero to Greece after Mark Antony hael sei zed power; Ihe
most interesting thing alxlUt it for us is the struc tural network of
Ihe <llInestio (cf. infra, B.I. Z5). 7. The ""rlilion,s: If,i ' lillie n"","al
of questions and answers, in the form of a between Cicero
and his son, is the driest anelleas! ethical of Ci cero's lIeatises (and
consequently the one I prefer): it is a cmnplctc elementary rhetoric .
3 kind of c atechi sm which has the .. uf giving the entire
scope of rhetorical classification llhis is the I1lc:minj.! of IN,ITlirio:
systematic segmentation).
A.4.5. Ciceronian rhetoric
Ciceronian rhetoric can he c haracterized hy the foll owing fea-
tures: a. fcar of "system"; Cicero owes everylhing h I Ari stotle. hilt
dc. intcllccttmlizcs him, seeking to penetrate Ihe spt.c lIlation on
IItastet" on the IInatural"; the apex o( this deslrtlctllring will he
reached in Augustine's R/,elrJrica ,tlCTa (B<Klk IV of Ihe C/ITisti"n
Doclrine) : no rules for cloquence, which is nonelheless necessary
for the C hristian "',1I0r: one need only be clcar (this is an act of
charity). lind more concerned with truth than with tcrms: stich
rhetorical still prevails in :1 cade mic c(HlceplitHls
o( stylc; b. nalio naliz;uion o( rhetoric: C icCHJ tries 10 rOl'l1<lnizc it
(the of (he DrOll..,), and TOmttniws "ppe",,; c. mythic col -
lusion of pro(essional empirici sm (C icero is ;1 lawvcr immersed in
political life) with an appea! to high culture; Ihis w llusion will
have a great future: culture becomes the hackd",p for politics;
d. o( style: Ciceronian rhclOric heralds II develo pmcnt
of docl(in.
TIle ()ltJ I<hcrorit: : LUI
25
A.4.6. Quin/i!ian'.< work
There is a certain pleasure in re"eling Quintilian; he is a
tcaclu.r, not too prolix, not tou moralistic ; a mind at once clas... "'ii(ying
and sl'nsitive (fl comhimltiun which always Seems astounding to the
world at large) ; we might assign him the epital,h M. Teste dreamed
offor himself: TTllrt<iil c/ll5sificando. He was an olli cial rhetor, ar-
pmnted hy the Slate; his fame was very great in hi s lifelime, soffered
an eclipsc upon his death, hut was revived in the (ourth century;
LUlher preferred him to all others; Erasmus, Bayll' , La Fontaine,
Racine, Rullin thought highly o( him. His De iJl.Hitwionc onttorid
traces in twelve hooks the orator's education (rom c hildhood on.
it is a cOlllrlele plan of fO""'Hion (the meaning of
inslillllio). Ihlk I deal s with elementary education (stuJies with the
grammarian, then with the rhetor); Oook II dl'fines rhetori c . its
utility; B< xlks III tll VII eliscuss llllJ('7l(io anel Dispusilio; BlHlks VIII
10 X discuss /O(lIlio (Book X gives prac ti cal ;1dvicc on how to
"write") ; Il" ,k XI elisCllsscs minor aspects of rhetori c: ACli" n ("rep-
a,"lion of the di scourse) and Memory; B<xlk XII di sc usses the ethical
qualiti es nl'cessary to he an orato r ;lnd posits the requiremellt o( a
gl'ncral c lihure.
A.4. 7_ The rilC/orical course of study
Educalion COllsi sts of three phases (in France tlxIay, we speak of
thrce c ycl es) : I. ,'rrrcnticeship to hlnguagc; nurses and tutors must
have no I:mguage de(ccts (C luysipPlis wante,1 them tn he trained
ill rhilllso"hy); parent< shoulel he as educated as rllssihle; Ihe stu-
dent mwil hcgin with Greek, then learn to read rind writ e; studenl s
arc not tn he hit ; 2. studies with the RTammaricu.s (a more extended
f11eaning til :," ollr word "gmmmarian": one might say it means
JIItlHcr of ,I.,'Ttumrwr) ; the c hild works with the ..,-tmlHl<Ilinu: (rom tll C
age o( seve n; he Ilsll'ns to lecturcs on poetry and reads aloud (Iectiu) ;
he writes thellles (relells fables , paraphrases p"ems, expands on
maxims ); ill' fakes lessons (rom fin fi Chu (animated recilation);
J. stlldies with Ihe rhelor: the student mWH hq.:in rhetoric quit e
early, prohahly at (ulIrlt'en, or at pllhc rty; the le;lcher I1IIISI <': 011 -
26
ELEMENTS
stantly provide examples himself (but the students are not to stand
up and applaud him); the two main exercises arc: a. narralioll.l,
summaries and analyses of narrative arguments, of historical events,
elementary panegyrics, parallels, amplifications of commonpl aces
(themes), speeches following an outline (fJrefonnalll mal eria) ;
b. declarnatioll.l, discourses on hypothetical cases; an exercise, so to
speak, in fictive rationa/it] (hence dec/arnatio is already very close to
the finished work) . We can see how far such fmce> speech:
speech is beset on all sides, expelled ftom the student's body, as if
there were a native inhibition to speak and it required a whole
technique, a whole education to draw it out of silence, and as if
this speech, learned at last, conquered at last , represented a good
"object relation" with the world, a real mastery of the wurld and
of men.
A.4.8. Writing
In dealing with tropes and figures (Books VIII to X). Quintilian
establishes a first theory of "writing." Book X is addressed to Ihos<
who wish to write. How to obtain this "well founded facility" ({imw
facilitas), i.e. , how to conquer native sterility, terror of the blank
page (faciliras), and yet how to say something, not to be carried
away by garrulity, verbiage, logorrhea ({inna)! Quintilian sketches
a propacdcutics for the writer: one must read and write frequently,
imitate models (make pastiches). revise constantly, hut only afler
having let the matter "test," and know how to end. Quintilian
notes that the hand is slow, "thought" and writing have two dif
ferent speeds (the <urrea lists' problem: how to achieve writing as
rapid ... as itself!); here the hand's deliberation is beneficial: no
dictation, writing must remain attached not to the voice but to the
hand, to the muscles: to remain with the hand's slowness: no quick
drafts.
A.4.9. Generalized rhetoric
The last stage of Aristotelian rhetori c: its dilution hy syncret ism:
Rhetoric ceases to be set in oppositi un to Poeti cs but becomes a
Old Rht!loric: an
27
transcendent notion which we should today call "literature"; it is
no exclusively constituted as an ohiect of instnlCtion but
becomes an mt. in the modern sense of the word; it is henceforth
./buth a theory of writing and a thesaurus )f literary forms. We can
ohserve I hi s transition at five points: I. Ovid is often cited in the
Middle Ages as having postulated the relationship of poetry to the
art of oratory; this comparison is also affirmed by Horace in his Ars
I'oelica, whose substance is frequently rhetorical (theory of,t]les);
2. Dionysius of Halicamassus, a Greek contemporary o( Augustus,
on his Dc com/JOSilione verlxm.m, abandons an important element o(
Aristotelian rhetoric (the enthymeme) (or an exclusive concern
with " new. value: the movement of sentences; here appears an
aUlonomous notion of style: style is no longer based on logic (subject
before predicate, substance before accidence). word order is vari -
able, guided only by rhythmic values; J. in Plutarch's Moralia we
fond a tract "Qltomodo adltlescens fJoeras 'ltdire debcar" (how the
young should study poetry), which thoroughly morali zes the literary
esthetic; a Platonist, Plutarch tries to lift Plato's ban on the poets;
how! precisely by uniting Poetics to Rhetoric; rhetoric is the means
by which to "detach" the imitated action (often a reprehensible
one) from the (frequently admirable) art which imitates it; from
the moment one can read the poets esthetically, one can read them
morally; 4. On Ihe Sublime (Peri Hypsou.s) is an anonymous treati se
of the first century A.D. (mistakenly attributed to Longinus and
translated by Boileau): it is a sort of "transcendental" Rhetoric-
'ltb/imiras is actually the "elevation" of style; it is style itself (in
expression "to have style"); it i, literariness, defended in a heated,
inspired tone: the myth of "creativity" begins to dawn; 5. in the
DialoRlte of tile Orators (whose authenticity is sometimes contested).
Tacitus POlili cizes the reasons for the decadence of eloquence: these
reasons :lre not the "bad taste;' times, but Domitian's tyranny
imposes si lence on the ['onlm and shifts poetry toward a
an; but thereby eloquence emigrates to "literature."
penetrates it. anJ constitutes it (doquenria comes to signify
litre) .
28
ELEMENTS
A.S. Neo-rhetoric
A.5.1. A literary eJthetic
We call neo-rhetoric or secont! sophistic the literary esthetic (Rhet-
oric, Poetics, and Criticism) which prevailed in the united Greco-
Roman world from the second to fourth centuries A . u. This was a
period of peace, of commerce, of exchanges favorable 10 leisure
societies, above all in the Middle East. NeD-rhetoric was truly
ecumenical: the same figures were learned by Saint Augustine in
Latin Africa, by the pagan Libanius, by Saint Gregory Naziamen
in eastern Greece. This literary empire was built on a double ref-
erence: \. sophistic: the orators of Asia Minor, without political
allegiance, seek to revive the name of Sophists, whom they suppose
they are imitating with no pejorative connotation; these
entirely decorative orators enjoy widespread celebrity; 2. rhetoric:
it encompasses everything. no longer count ers any neighbo ring idc;1,
absorbs all speech; it is no lonf(er a (specialized) ICc/me, hut a general
culture, and even more: a notional education (at the level of the
schools in Asia Minor); the sophistes is the director of a school,
appointed by the emperor or hy a city; the teacher serving under
him is the rhelor. In this colleclive institution, no name can be
cited: there is a dust of authors, a movement known only Ihrough
Philostratus's Uves of the So(,ltists. What did this educaton of speech
consist oH Once again we must distingui sh syntagmati c rhetoric
(parts) from paradigmatic rhetoric (figures).
A.5.Z. declamatio and ekphra.is
On the .yntagmatic level, one exercise is preponderant : decla-
mario (meli(c); this is a regulated improvi sation on a theme ; for
example: Xcnophon refuses to survive Socr,ltcs; the Cretans
they possess Zeus's tombi the man in love with a statuc. ct c.
provisation shifts the order of the parts (dis(,,,, ili,,) to the back-
ground; discourse, having no persuasive goal but hc ing purely
decorative, is dcstructurcd. ;1tomizcd into a loose s<'Ti es of brilliant
fragments, juxtaposed accortling to a rhapsodi c model. The prin-
The Old RhelOric: an aide-memoire
29
cipal fragment (which was highly prized) was descriptio or ekphrasis .
Ekphrasis is an anthology piece, transferable from one discourse to
another: it is a regulated description of places or persons (origin of
certain medievallo(mi). Here first appeared a new syntagmatic unit,
the piece: less extensive than the traditional parts of the discourse,
longer than the period; this unit (landscape or portrait) abandons
oratorical (legal, political) discourse and readily unites with nar-
ratio n. with a story line: once again, the rhetorical tleats into" the
literary.
ASJ. Atticism/ asianism
On the paradigmatic level, neo-rhetoric consecrates the assump-
tion of "style"; it assigns an ultimate value to the following orna-
ments: archai sm. extended metaphor, antithesis. rhythmic phrase.
Since this tendency toward the baroque produces its reacti on, a
struggle begins between two schools: I. A lIicisrn , chiefly defended
by grammarians, guardians of a p"re vocabulary (the castratin/; ethic
of "purity," which still exists today); 2. ,.sianism refers, in Asia
Minor, to the development of an exuberant style tending toward
the strange, based, like mannerism, on the effect of surprise; here
the "figures" play an essential role. Asianism was obvi ously con-
demned (and continues to be by the classicizing esthetic whi ch is
the heir of atticism). '
A.6. Tile Trivium
A.6.1. Agonistic structure of instruction
In Antiquity, the mainstays of culture were essentially oral in-
struc tion and the transcriptions to whic h it might give rise
, Auu.:i51n: obviously wh::u he c"lled a r:lchm: if
nil' N- 1/1", the e xpttssion "d"$sic"I " C"d"lsicism", in tilt (}pf""l .
SIIlon prnpllst"J hy Aulm Gdl i .... ) (stcond c('",my A. n. ) lilt cltminu aUlhor "nil lilt
f,,Jl,. 'lIOIu : III Ihe of Sc- fviu5 Tullius. which di vidaJ ci li lt m
'0 wc;,h" tIllll (lYC lilt n( which (mmf'd Iht dl'U5ici hilt
dll.UlC ttymnlllRlc"Uy Ine"ns: ttl Ihe social e l1.ISI"
(wcalth ,,"d powrr) .
)0
ELEMENTS
marie trc;lIi scs anJ the '_CdHtdi of the logoj:!rilplu .. rs ). After the ci)..!hlh
cenUlry, inSlfuction takes an agonistic 1\lrtl. relll' uing a situathll l
of sharp rivalries. Free schools the monastic or episcopal
schools) left to the initiative of any l1l:lstl"r. (liten a very yotlng
one (in his twenties); everything depends 011 success: Ahcl:m.l, a
gifted student. Udefeats" his le:'!chcr. tilkcs aWflY hi s paying
cnec. and founJs a school uf Ids own; fin;mcial rivalry is closdy
IinkeJ to the rivalry of iJeas: t he same Ahelard forces hi s teacher
Guillaume tic Champcaux to rCllouncc realism: Ill' it. (roln
every point of view; the Olgonistic structure coincides with the
mercia I structure: the SdlOlil'i(icCJs (reacher. student, Of (urllll'r
dent) is a cOll1hntant of ideas anJ n professional rivfll. There arl'
two school exercises: I. the re;H.ling ;md expl ica tion of a !'i et
text (Aristotle, the Bihle), wl,ich includes: <I . exl,osilio, interpre'
tation of the text according til a suhdividing me rlHlJ (a kind of
analytic delirium); b. ql.wCSliollcs, propositions nf the h .' xi which
can a ,"0 or a CHn : the!i c arc di scusscJ a nd dctnl1lincd hy
refutalion; each reasoning must hc presented in the ('lrm of a cpm-
plete syllogism; the lesson was grad1lally nl'glected l1l' cause of it!'i
tedium; 2. the di slmle, a cerel1lony, a dialectic ,' dud, condllctl'J
wil h the teache r presiding; after Jays, the teacher deterinilll'S
the result. What is involvcJ here is hy and large a I-!arnc ( lihurl' :
athletes uf speech arc tmined: speech is the ohject of a ccrtain
glamor and of a regulated powe r, aggression is (oded.
A.6.2. TIle wri/tcn text
As for the written text, it was not suhject, :' s il is ttldilY, 10 a
judgme nt (,( nriginr.lity; what we call the (lur/uJr did ", )1 e xist; ;IHHI.nd
the ancient text, the only text used ilnJ in ;1 S('l1S(' mll1l(l,l!t'd. hh'
rcinvestcJ capital, there were various (unctions: I. the srrilHllr who
purely anJ simply copies; 2. the cmnl Jilllllr who adds 10 what he
cnpics
t
hut nothing Ihal comcs (nun himsdf; the (fJIIIJIICllf(/fllr
who introduces himself into the copilJ t ex l, hilt o nly ttl Illake il
intelligihle; 4. the llU( (Or, finall y, who pa'Sl'nl S Ili s own ideas 'lIIl
.dways hy drpcnJing 011 1I1ha authoritks. The::e ftlil ctiom: ;tre 1101
"
Tilt Old Rhe,oric: an aide memo;"
)(
clearly hicmrchized: the commentator, for example, can have the
prestige a great writer would have today (this was the case, in the
twelfth century, of one Pierre Helle, nicknamed "the Commen.
tator"). What we might anachronistically call the writeT is therefore
essentially, in the Middle Ages: I. a transmiu,,-: he passes on an
absolute substance which is the treasure of antiquity, the source of
authority; 2. a combineT: he is entitled to "break" works of the past,
by a Imlltless analysis, and to recompose them ("creation," a modem
value, had it occurred to the Middle Ages, would have been de.
sacmlizcJ into a structuration) .
A.6.J. The Septennium
In the Middle Ages, "culture" is a taxonomy, a functional net.
work of "arts," i. e. , of languages scbject to rules (the etymology of
the penod rel ates aTI to aTCIUS, which means aTliculatedl, and these
"arts" arec.alled "liberal" because they do not serve to ram money
(Ill Upposlrton to the arles mechanicae, manual activities): these are
general, sumptuous languages. Such liberal , rt s toke the place of
that "geneml culture" which Plato rejected in the name and behalf
of philosophy alone, but which was subser, 'en!ly reclai med (Iso.
crates, Seneca) as propaedeutic to philosoph\,. In the Middl e Ages,
philosophy itself is reduced and passes into the geneml culture as
one art among the others (Dialectical . It is no for philosophy
that a liberal culture prepares, Lut for theology, whi ch remains '
sovereignly outsiJe the Seven Arts (the SeIJlenni"m) . Why seven!
As early as Varro, we find a theory of the liberal arts: they arc then
nine (ours, with the addition of medicine and architecture); this
st ructure is repeated and codified in ti,e fifth and sixth centuries by
Marti:lIllls Capena (a pagan Africanl who institules the hierarchy
of the Seillenniunt in an allegory, The Mamagc of MCTcury and Phi-
IolulD' (l'hilalnlD' here designares total knowiedge) : Philology, the
learned virgin. is prumised to Mercurv; she receives as a wedding
prese nt the seven liberal arts, each being presenteJ with ils symh"ls,
it s costume, it s kmguage; for cxmnpl c
t
Gmmmruica is.1I1 old wuman.
she has lived in Atti ca and wears Roman gallncnts; in a little ivory
32 ELEMENTS
casket, she carries a knife and a file to correC( the chi ldren's mis-
t k . Rhelorica is a beautiful woman, her arc embelhshed es,
wilh all the figures, she carries the weapons int ended to wounJ her
adversaries (coexistence of persuasive rhetoric ftnd ornamental
oric). These allegories of Martianus Capel la were widely known, we
find statues of them on the facade of NOIre-Dome in Paris, at CI,anres,
and drawn in the works of Botticelli. Boethiu, and Cassiodorus (sixrh
century) specify the theory of the Se" renni"m, the first hy shifting
Ari stotle's Organon into Diaieclica, the second by postulatmg that
the liberal arts are inscribed for all eternity in divine wisdom and in
Scripture (the Psalms are full of "figures"): rhetoric .the
guarantee of Christianity, it can legally (rom llito
the Christian West (and hence into modern tllnes); thlS Tlghr w,1I be
confirmed by Bede, in Charlemagne's rime. - What constitutes the
SepLennium! First we must recall to what it is oppused: on the one
hand. to techniques (the "sciences," as di sinterested langu:l':cs,
belong to the Se'Jlennium) and, on the other, 10 theology (the Se,,-
lennium organizes human nature in its humaniry; thi s nat UTe can .he
subverted only by the Incarnation which, if it is appli ed to a class,fi-
cation, takes the form of a subversion of language: the Creator be-
comes creaturc, the Virgin conceives, etc.: ill lute vcrlJi cO/JUW slul,et
omnis reguln). The Seven Arts are divided int o two unequal _groups,
which correspond to the two paths (viae) of wisdom: the rnvuml
includes Grammarica, Dialectica, and RhelO1iCLI; the QUlulriviwn in,
cludes M'<lica, Arithmerica, Geometria, Aslron",,,ia (Medicine will he
added later). The opposition of the Trivium and of the Quadri vium
is no longer that of Letters and Sciences; it is ""Iter the opposition of
the secrets of speech and the secrets of nature.'
'11 . . n,c li'l o( ar15: Grmn(m:UI(:") k'4l1i 1tlf . 1J.i,(1('>cUC;t) lele a mflt:mo . .
I N'"(, ,- J y"h, colorat Mw(sica) canit . Ar(hlllll,"lIca) numef:lII . Gdufnt: tna) v('>ra (nee!. nc _
pnnJe, :u . As(tronomi;t) colil aslr.\. . .
An allegory hy Alain de Ulle (lwelflh ct: nlUry) aCCllunu (ot Ih('> 'y'lem In "II ctlfnplexllY:
the Sc=v('>n arc summnned to prllvide :t ch",i{'1 ( \If I'rwirll"n, who I"
, . I G ,'-. p,"vi,I"s Ihe ..... ,Ie (m 1)I(,k' lh lrl Ihc ;:"dc, wlul'll IUr('>ln,u.:a IlIanKlnl : wml"f1(l... , ., I f
'II I ,1, "w,I, ,h, qU:lJrivium (urnhh('>\ Ihe (nur wlw<>i\, iiII' ;11(, I u: 1\'(,
emnc 15 les WI , . I I I I .
5('n':5, h:ltllC55Cd by Rillill; Ihe J!11('>5 I\.w:ml Ih(' Mary: (" .. ; W 1('11. I 1('> 111111
( I . ' cl"d Tivult , .... , "nu.k'lIlll (hlm::!lu", " rcdcmp'Ion) . o IlIm:ln powers IS It'.. ,
The Old Hhclflnc: art aicle ,"rmoire
33
A.6.4. The diachronic play of the T rivi ,I m
The TritJiu," (which alone concerns tiS here) is a taxonomy of
spt'ech; it attts to the persistent effort of the Middle ARCS to
estahlish the piece of speech within man, within nalllre, within
the creation. Speech is not in thi s period, as it will be suh,equentiy,
:0 vchicle, an instrument, the mditati"n of ,orroelltiroR else (solll,
thought, pas.o; ionL it ahsorhs the entirety of the mental : no
ri ence, nu psyc hology: speech is not expression hut immediate con,
srrucrioll . What is interesting ahollt the Tritlilml is the re fore less
tlt e w nt ent of each discipline than the play of these three disciplines
amung themselves, down through len centuries: from the fifth 10
the ,i fleent h centuries, leadership e migratcd from one art 10 an-
o,lter, so that each period of the Middle Ages comes under tlte
dominance of one art: in turn, it is 1?11cloriCQ (from the tifth to the
scvl' nth ccnillry). then Grarmruuictl (frolll rhe eighth 10 tht, tenth
century). then L'Riw (frum lite cleven, I. to Ihe fifteenth cen,ury)
which dOfllinates her sisters. wlltl arc to rhe rank of pour
rel at ions.
Rhclorica
A.6.5. Rherorica as .mpplement
Ancient Rheloric had survived in the tradit ions of several Roman
schools in Galli anJ among certain G;dl ic rhctors. such as Ausonitls
(1/0- )93), RT(llIImaricus and rheror in Bordeaux, and Sidon ius Apt,l -
linaris (430- 484), Bishop of Auvergne. Ch;orlelllagne entered tlte
figures of rheforic in hi s aC:lJemic reforms. affer the Venerable I1etlc
(67 J- 7 J5) Itad entirely Chri stianized rhetoric (a task hel(lIn hy Sain'
Allgllstine and C;,ssiodorus), showing tltat the Rihl c it self is filII of
",iJ.:lln ..'s." Hlll,toric does not prevail for long; ir is soun
hCIWCl'U (;nUIIHllIticd anJ LfiRicCI: it is tlu ptl()r rclilti(lIl ()( rll c Triv-
iUI1I, dc:-; tilll'd 10 h;lvc splendid resurrecfi on tlnly Whl'n it GlTl
revivl.' as "Pul'try" ilnd more generally as "1\t'll es Lctlfl'S. " This
wcakfll'SS (If Hlu: 'llric . dimini shed hy tlu.' Irilllllph (If the caslr:1fing
1a1l J.:II:lgCS, grall1lllilr (we reca ll the fil e and the knife of Marrianus
J4
ELEMENTS
Capella) ami logic. results perhaps from the fa ct that it is .entirel
y
shovcJ to ward (mllimerH. i. e. I toward what is rCl!ilrdcd as tncsscn
tial- in relation to trllth and to fan (first ;lppCil rancc of the refer
ential ghost 'i ); it then appears as what coml'S a[r r rwarJs. to This
medieval rhetori c is suppli ed essentially hy C icero' s treati ses (/<I,c-
torica ad I-Ierennium and De invcnlil1nc) and QlIilltili ..tn' s (helter
known to teachers than to students)' but it did produce trc.ui scs
chiefly relative t.o ornament s, to figures. to "colors" ,rll c(O.
. .) I t rts of "netry (artes veni(iwtoriCle); JIl'" >SI"O IS ap-
nel or a cr a I" . 11
proached only from the angle of the of the di scourse
(ordo artificiali, . ",do naturalis) ; the figures identlf,ed arc c1uefly of
amplification and abbreviation; style is rel ated t o the tllTee genres
f V
' 1' I e1
7
. gra",', ',umilis meoioCTu5 and two ornaments:
o Irgl S W le . v , , ,
facile and difficile.
A.6.6. Sermon . , dictamen, arts of " ,,,:try
The domain of Rherorica encompasses three canons of rul es. three
I Artes
these are the oratori cal arts in general
arCcs . . .
(the ohject of rhetoric, stri ctly speaking) , i. c . . essentially,
or paraenctic di scourscs (exhorting to virtue); serm(lns can he
'n ' I '" ,.tt w tk. nfFt;mce Itll.iay, in cerlai n wlwf(' il
g It"" ... ,. . _ I . .
. " , , ot It. rt:JIJ( c Frc ll c h It> II ll' sI;I!II\ of a hll('iJ-:" ;11lJ-:llal-!(' , II 1.\
III "proSltlOn tl:l " . ' . . I 1_ , , , .
dcc!afrJ 11t:1I wh;t l mllst l'It' ' ;lIIghi is nnly , hc "'t' m:!' b llJ-: II:l f.:t', !lll i 11l I\( 1 III ' ,I I:lrt .
i( ,hefe W(,f(, a N-Iwccn !;mf,:lI;If,:C a nd lilera lulc, I( 1,IIlI: U;I j!l ' WI" : hnr ,md
. h 'r . t' Co I,. " , d some whe re ,",cyond whi(: h ,hl'ft wOItlld l't,
1\(11 I CJl', :1.\ I II ("OU U 1"1:.. . ,
5t1ppit-menu, lit craturc among ,hem, ..
" " Suln-tmd tnlJl1Ul (ltJ(xlnil, j! "I"'lIn I Pnjicil dle/IIC
"IRI . I a L ,I" 'n .. 1 10 llch cumplC:: lcs Ihe wurk t,f lief ;111" d\(,
l c lutlC :lnn rw II..
(;lct in a mUTt' ;I('cnmrli:-ohcd (,,:-oh ion, "
1 Vitj!il ... wheel i.\ ;I c!a.\.\ ifl 0 Iioll of Ihl' IlIfe(' \Iyl. ... .. : 1.' ;1( 1. of 1I1l' tlHl"l" :>1.' .: 101:-0
o( th(' whcel ;\.'\..'icmhlcs a o( term ... :lnd ...VUlIo.. !...;
ACIl t'id EcI"R"lI.(' s
-- I IlICm" " .u"'/U$ "w,/""'us sfJlul
R"HWil j fJ J
milt" (L"ninOlu
/ hfm. Aj{lx
f'f/1I14 1
RLII /II U
ur/'I, n llfrwn
LIUT"S. cf'clru.s
11<1111'''' IIfio_\Il.1
TilJfU.I, M d'/ "I(' II_1

h kul,u
,,,,\,UII
/llt UI
"/:''' ',,111
' n/*,/"'1I1"1
/ .. ,.
II: t llllll11
,,!!,"
11<1"" 11..1
:,

35
ten in two languages: .'cnllones ad /)(),,,,/um (fo, the people of the
p;ui!'i lt), written in the vern<l cul ar and sermones ad clcrtlm
(for the synods, rhc schools, the monasteries). writt en in Latin;
however, everything is preparcti i n Lltinj the vernacular is only a
translati(Hl ; 1. Arles diclaruji, an dicf.llminis, epi stol ary art: rhe gn)wrh
of admini strati on, after Charl emagne. involves a theory o f
istra(ive correspondence: the dicw.men (concerned with dictating
lell ers); the .liewt"r is an acknowkdged profession. whi ch is taught;
the model is the dictllmen of the p"p,,1 chancellery: the <lY/us "'nll!tlle'
takes precedcnce over all; a styli stic notion appe:lrs, the (unus, the
quality of the text's fluency. apprehended crit eria o f rhythm
CInJ accentuation ; 3. ArIes lJOcl icae: poetry initi ally be longs to the
dictl.lmen (t he I,ruse/twefry ClPPOS; I ion is for a long time ex trcmciy
vague); tht'n the l!Tr eS IJOelicae ta ke over r),(hmicum, borro w Latin
Vl.'fse from GrwnrruHicQ, and hcgin to aim at
ture.
1O
A sfrucrur':ll reworking appc;us, whi ch will sct ;n oppusition,
at the end of the fift eenth ce ntury. the First "/'etoric (or general
rlletoric) to the Seomd Rhetoric, from which emerge thc Arts o(
Pottry. such :-IS Ronsard' s.
Grammalica
A.n.7. D""alU . and Pr;se;an
Aft er the Invasions. the leaders of the c, tture arc Celts. English-
men, ;lIld Franh; they must lett rn Latin grammar; the Carolingi ans
consccr;lfe the importance of grammar hy the f<1tHoll!'i School s of
Fuld". Sai nt Gall . and Tours; grammar leads to general eJucation.
tn poetry . to til C lit urgy. to Scripture; it includes. alongside gramlTl ar
strictly spea king, poetry. metri cs. and certain hgures. - The two
great grammatical authorities of the Middle Ages are Donatlls and
Pri ...dan. I , [)unaws (circa J 50) produces an ahridgcd gr;1I11m;n (ITS
UlIHor) which dea l!'i with the eight parts of the sent ence, in 'he form
of qIlCS! illns and 'lTlSWcrs. and iln ex tended grammar ((In HllIjor) ,
I )ollatw:; clljoycJ an enurlllous fame; I);mt c purs him in h elVe- n (as
(' pposcd to Pri scian) ; s('vtral hy him arc among the firs! print ed
36
ELEMENTS
work, on a footing with Scripture; he has given his name to ele-
mentary grammatical treati ses, the dontll!. 2. Priscian (end of the
fifth century, beginning of the sixth) was a Mauritanian, a Lat in
teacher in Byzantium, educated on Greek theories, notably the
grammatical doctrine of the Stoics. His lnstiturio grammarica is a
normative grammar (gramfntltica regulans), neither philosophical nor
"scientific"; it survives in two abridgments: the Priscianu5 minor
deals with construction, the Priscianus fntljordeals with morphol ogy.
Priscian offers many examples borrowed from the Greek Pantheon:
man is C hristian, but the rhetor can be pagan (we know the fortunes
of this dichotomy). Dante sends Priseian to the Seventh C ircle of
the Inferno, that of the Sodomites: an aposwte, a drunkard, a
madman, but known as a great scholar. Donatus and Pri scian rep-
resent absolute law-except when they do not agree with the Vul -
gate: grammar can then be only normative , since it is believed that
the llrules" of locution were invented by the grammarmns; they
were widely circulated by Commentatores (such as Pierre Helie ) ;md
by versified grammars (enj oying a great vogue) . Until the twelfth
century, Grammatica includes grammar and poetry, and deals with
"precision" as well as with "imagination"; with letters.
the sentence, the period, figures, metrics; it yields very lottie to
Rhetorica: certain figures. It is a fundamental science, linked tn an
Ethica (part of human wisdom, articulated in the texts nut side of
theology) : "science of speaking well and writing well ," "the cradle
of all philosophy," "the first nurse of all literary study."
A,6.S. The Modistae
In the twelfth century, Grammatica becomes specul ;llive once
again (as it had been with the Stoics). What is called SpecuuHillc
Gramfntlr is the work of a group of grammarians known as ModlSlde
because they wrote treatises entitled De modis siRlIifiwII<li; many
were from the monastic province of Scandinavia then known as
Dacia and more specifically fmm Denmark. The Modi sts were dc-
, .
37
nounced hy EraslIlus (or thei r harhllrotls Latin, for the c haos of the ir
definitions , for the suhtl ety o f the ir di stinc tio ns; as il
11l ;lttn o( (:H..:I the y provided the hasis fo r grammar d1lring two
Cl' ntllries , and we arc still in tl\c ir dcht f(lr cellain sprc ulativ(' terms
((or eX;lITlplc: im(allcc) . the Modi sts' ueatises t<lkc two (orms: the
modi minoTes, whose suhst an ce is prescnt eJ modo l>os ilitlo. i.e. , with-
(lut cri li cal di sHlssiun. in a hrief, c!(, .tr, ve ry didacti c fashion, anJ
til(' "IOJ; majoTes . given in the form of (iltLICSlif) i. e. , with
the ImJ a nd the con, hy increasingly specialized questi ons. Each
treati se includes Iwo parts, in Pri sc i;ln's manner: Er/, ymolol!ia (tntlr-
pho logy )- pour spelling W;IS a peril.J matt er ;lntl corrcsponds tn a
fal se etymology of the word Elymulllgi<l- and lJiasynlherica (synl:lx),
hilt it i.o; pn.' ceded hy a theoreti c ll introduct ion concerning the
rel a tions of the rIIfKli essenJi (hcing and it s properti es ). the modi
iurd/iJ!c ucii (I;) k inJ,! possession of hci nJ.! under it s aspects) ,11\<.1 I he
rtlf J(li (leve l (If Thc modi signifh:auJi tile II1sc l v(' s
include t wo strata: 1. desij!THJtion corresponds to the modi signandi;
tiu.'i r cl e llH ... ' flt s art' : ' Join ' , thc phon: c signifi er, <lnt..! dietio, the COIl-
cept word, :I gt'll<.'ric SClTlant Cl1le (in doloT, do/eo, thi s is the notion
of suffcrinJ,!, the dolorous); the mCKli si1{llluuii do not yc r hdong to
the grammarian: vox, the phonic signifi e r, depends on the I,"ilo-
lllllUTtllis ( we should say t he phonetic ia!'), ;l nd dictio, re ferring
(0 an innt slat<.' of the word, whi c h is not yet ;lni111<lleJ hy a ny
relati u n, escapes the logician of langll<lge (it would de rive from
whal wc sh(lllid call lexicography) ; 2. the level (If the tIIl><.li
ficwuli is reac hed when we .. dd to an intent iOllal sen,o;e;
Oil this le vel. the word, nCllt ra l in dir tio, is e ndowed with a rda ti on.
it is <lpprclu: l1dn l as " OJHSITuL'(jlJle" ; it :lpl'c;lrs in the higher ullit
of the Sl.'lltcnce; it ,hen pertains to the speculative grammarian, tn
llt <.' IOl-!ic i' lI1 of Ianj.!uage. Thus, far (rom hlarning the Modisls , as
has somc timl'S hec il the casc, for having reduced l:lngll:lgc ttl a
Iltll1H.: nclat1lrc , we lIlust congra tul:lt e (hem for dune just the
opposite: f(lr ll1t'lI\ language hegins Il ot ;'I t dieti" a nd at the
O HlOfI, i.c., :11 lhe hllt at the consiJ"FuifictHum o r ( 01l5U,((.' -
38 ELEMENTS
ribile. i. e. I at the rel at ion, at the inlcrsign: a founding pri vi lege is
granted to syntax, to fl ex ion. to rcefion, (tnd not 10 the scmant cmc.
in a word. to srTltc tuTlllioH, which would pcrllaps he the hcst way
of translating modus significandi . Hence there is a (f:rtain rciationship
between Ihe ModislS and eert .. in modern struclurali sls (1ljclmslcv
and glossematics. Cholnsky :lnd competence): language is a SUI IC-
lure, and this strllcture is in a sense "guarant eed" hy the sHur tlirc
of being (moJi e"enJi) amI by thaI of mind (moJi Ihere
is a gromntalica unit/cystitis; thi s was new, for it was comnHH11y he-
lieveJ that there were as many grammars as languages: (JrWIIUlluica
una et eculcm est secwulum 5uh5r1nCiwn in fmlllilm's liJlJ.!, uis. li ee( tlcd-
dcnwlirer tllIricrur. Non er/.!o ,l!Tammalicu5 sed 1,/liloso/,/lIIs Iml/,yim
turas r erum clilij.!cntcr cfnt sideran$ , , , gram,nlllionil inVt" lir . (G rall1111;lr
is one and rhe same as reg.uJs suhstance in all languages although
it can vary by aeciJenrs, Hence it is not the gr:llnmarian. it is the
philosopher whn, by the exalnination of the n;,fUre of things, di s
covers grammar,)
Logica (or Dialectica)
A.6.9. slUJium and sacerdolium
'--"J.!icli dominates in the twe lfth and thirteenth centuri es: it pilsill' s
asiJe I<ll ctoyicd and ahsorhs GnJI1IJIlari((I, This struggl e takes the (Ilrlll
"f a conniel of school s. In Ihe lirst half "f Ihe Iwelflh cenlury, Ihe
SCh()(l ls (lfCh ... rtres in pan iculnr dcvchlp I he tcacl ling (lf Gn.III1HldliClI
( in the extenJed sense we have di scussed) : thi s is wilh a
lit erary orient:ltionj contrary to it. the school ur Paris develops
theo logical philosophy: this is sll(cnlllliulfI , There is a victory or
Paris over C hartres, of s(lCCTllotiullI over 5 1I./ill 111 : Gwntlllc.llic(l is
"bsorhed by ulJ(im; Ihis is aecnmp,micll by a relrcal of IiI
erature, hy an intensified enthusiasm for the vernacular, hy a
drawal o(humanisl1l , hy an impul se toward the lucrati ve disc iplines
(medi ci ne , law) . f)illlc(i(J is initially sustained hy Cicero's T"I,io
and by the work of l3ucthi ll s, who first inlroJll ccd Arist otl e; !I,co,
"
"
,.
'.
::
"
The Old Rhe((1ric: l lll
39
in the twelfth and thirteenlh centuries, after the (massive) second
enlrance of Aristotl e , by the whole of Aristotelian logi c which dealt
wilh Ihe dialec li cal syllogism.'
A.6. IO. Vi.<pu/a/io
lJifliecri((1 i:-; an art o f living di scourse , of dialogue, There is
ing I'latllnic ;lhll lit stich di:1lllgUC, there is Il() quest ion o f a suhjccti()I)
on principle of the heloved to the master; di <1 logttc here is
it s Slftkt is a victo ry whi ch is not predetermined: it is a h:lUle of
syll ogisms, Aristotl e staged by two p"rtners, Hence Dialecrica is
finally identifi ed with an exercise, a mode of exposition, a
IIHIIlY, a gallle. Jislmldlio (whi ch might be call ed: a colloquy of
opponents) , The proceJure (or Ihe protocol) is that of Sic "I Nlln :
contradi ctory testimonies ;ITC coll ected nn a question; the exerc ise
confront s an opponent and a respondent; the respondent is lIslmlly
the ca ndiJate: he responds ttl tilt: ohjections present ed hy the
r<mcnt; as ill Conservatory competitions. fhe opponent is on the
stair: he is " friend or is appoinled ex offili .. ; the thesis is posited.
the opponc.'nt counlers it (.'iccl contra). tl1(' cl ndidat c responds
(rc.'i /Jllfulco ): the conclusion is given by the master, who presides.
" In (i lllll! n lI:.in .mdt' nl lioI' IIfCCIi (cor Il.t, Mit"-lie AJ:ell, il 1lC' fe!Oernl 't' u,\l lhal Ihe
1I1l11",.I\,.! il1h' !I" lClttal rlllllln ill :llwaYIi Ari li lll!le, :11111 e"' (' n, in a Afill i nele fIR/WIU I'bl
o
.
1' /:111' wa., paflblly S;.inl AUJ!II.\li ,w in Illl' Cl'nl lllY, Ihl'
.'\Ch. ",11,1 (:I " Iir c!,uy" ,1. (' of whk h " I" l!kal"
:111.1 :ITld ,Iu' Ahhcy of Sai lll Vic tor ; 11I1W('\lt " in 'he , hirl l'cll lh ('(' nlmy 'he
\,"1.,. 1t".1 aI(' II( 111(' ""'11:11, "1lI1 Mt ll", and (''''('n ;lI e lilll(' knllwn.
In Ihe lill n' lJlh ,lIltl ll lxlecII,h :m inl cII!.C: iii A,i\loill.' in
n ;lIm (M.u.q l", I:in nll anJ (tilll"anI1 Rru"u) , - Ali (Of he (,fl l c', ,, till' Mil ldle
ill IWo lI ' aj!I's: li n- l illlt: , i n ,lie sixlh ,Ifill a'lll r ;mially, ,I"ott!!"
( :"I'dltts, l '"rp"l',y'li ClI' rRUfit,\ , ;l 1I11l\"c, IIiuli; Ihe .. nd lilll (" in (fl H' C', in ,h('
Iw, II,lt :1Ilt! ,hj,h-cnl h n l\llIl i('".... ; in lhe ni"d, ("(' IlUlty, all .. f All Illdc II :md"H:d infll
A' :lhll ; til ,I.l Iwd,," n'lIlul Y, If,tftli bllllll.\ IIf all !If Aril- I" "I.' WI' IC a"ai lahl t" clI ,I.1(, e illin
I' llm !lIt' {;nlk lit h "lII dl(, Alahir: i, Ihe rna!.li i ...(' inlh1l1 of Ilt (' r"1fr1l' " An"I.,11( \, ,"('
T",,,, (, I Itt \'1,111\ ,,, ,,111"(11111'''''11 , 'he "II.,,,,, allt l AII.\,utl"
(S.11111 I h"",;,, ). 'hirt! :l1'1,,-.u alll(' w,1I ..... Iha l Il( hi .... " "('11(\ in Ihl'
l l' II'III Y " ' h:tly, i ll 1/ ,(, M"t llTl'('Hh ('l' IlIIl,y 11\ F' ;lIlt'l "
40 ELEMENTS
DispuflIlio is invasive;" it is a sport: Ihe masters dispute among
themselves in the students' presence once a week; Ihe studenls
dispute on the occasion of the examinations. The argume nt pro-
ceeded upon permission granted by a gesture from the presiding
master (there is a parodic echo of these gestures in Rabel"is). All
Ihis is codified, ritualized in a treati se which minutely regul ates
disPUflIlio, to keep the discussion from digressing: Ihe An ohligatoria
(fifteenth century). The thematic material of the dis/llltatin comes
from the argumentative part of Aristotelian Rhetoric (through the
Topics); it includes insolubi/ia, propositions extremely diAicul1 to
prove, im(Jossibi/ia, theses which seem impossible to everyone, so/Jh-
ismafll, cliches and paralogism" which serve by and large for the
dispuflIliones.
A.6. 11. Neurotic meaning of the disputatio
If we wanted to evaluate the neurotic meaning of such an ex-
ercise, we should doubtless go back to Ihe Greek machi, that kind
of agonistic sensibility which made intoleroble 10 the Greeks (then
to the West) all txpressions in which tht subjecl is in contradiction with
'Even Christ's death on the C r05$ is mitde part of the Ken'Hio of Dl.lpullIlio (some fW' oplc
today would find this rwuctl on of tht: r:lssinn to a Khool saCf ilrJ:i nu5; OIhtrs on
the contrary would the medieval heedom of mind which laid nn ,,,,hnn upun the
"dram .... of the intellect) : Circa ltTliam Jt'xltlm dKtndu", fMgutri lin ('(nhcdram
suom oJ dispt.llilndum (I qu.trU"' unom C ui qutJrioni ,('spont"" ""US a,Ubltnllum
r ose cujUJ ttspot"uiotvm dttnminll' qwsriontm. t( quando wll n tkffnTt tl hnnortm
focert. nihil aliud dtltrmiMI quam quod diMTOI ftJf)ondtru. SIC ItCIi I-ajit ChnJflu i" cruet. uni
ruCrndil ad dispurondu,n; tf propontif unttm qutJlKmtm Oro Ptlm: EL. EL l1mmn Jlal ltlChrom.
IJtUJ. mtUJ. quid mtdc-rtliqwilfil EI Pdln" rtspmv.i.l : "0. F,li mi. '","a IMnuwn floll1TVm nt
di.\ptC'iru: non rnim PdltT ,tdtmit Rtnws #!urmnum sint !.t. EI ,Ilt Jt' Jptm.kru CUI : lin. Pall'1'. hrnt
tkltrminrufi qut'llimlt'm mtom. Non dtttnniMho Il'IIm POS! JtJporutm\(m ult.m. Nrm sit"ul r.1I min.
",d sKur 1101 w. FiIll ooIu"kU 'WI. {Toward rht third CIt cht sixth hour. ,ht lin thtolrlJrVl
mount Iht: pulpit ' 0 dupUIt: and aslt a qutstton. ()( , hOSt al ltmlin!! .. nJWeu IhiJ (,utJlion.
Afttr that ft 5pOnK. tht: mMltf concludts Iht qutstiun :mll wlltn wbhts In on
h im ,m honor. ht: dnts not condudt: in .. ny athtr way Ih"n hy ".,h", Iht rtsron<knl had
5a1J. This is whal Chrisl dtd on Iht uon ont day. whtn ht mnunlw 1m tht dLsrut :Utnn.
Ht a (IUeslinn to God tht Falher : Eli. Eli. lamma sabfl(hldfll . GOO. my GO(I, why hayt
you (o uaken md And Ihe F .. lhtr answt,d: My Son. (10 nUl Iht' wnrks e,f ymll hand!' .
lor ,ht Father could nnl (e,lum tht hum:m race without YIlU. And e h"'t My
t:a, htr. you ha v( concl udt: d my 411tstion wdl. I cClulJ not t"flllcl udt' it ntht'rwist: altt r your
tIC.)
(:
,
"
"
The Old Rhetoric: an aide-memoir.
41
itself: il sufficed to force an adversary to conlradict himsel f to reduce
him, e1ionin,ue him, cancel him out : Callides (in the G'''/(im)
refuscs to answer rather than to contradict himself. The syll ogism
is the very weapon which permits t hi s liquidation, it is Ihe invincihle
knife which delivers victory: the two di sputants are Iwo executioners
who Iry to castrale each orher (whence the mylhic episode of
Ahclard, the caslrator castrated). So inten.", did it hecome thaI the
neurotic explosion had to be codified, the narehsistic wound lim-
ited: logic was turned to spml (as today Ihe of so
many peopl es, chiefly underdeveloped or oppressed, are turned "inlo
soccer" ): this is the eTistie. Pascal saw this problem: he seeks to
avoid selling the other in radical contradiction with himself; he
wants to u<:orrect" the other without wounding him to death. to
show hion thaI one need merely "compl ete" (and not deny) . The
dis/"'Wtio has di sa ppeared, but Ihe problem of the (ludic, ceremo-
njal) rul es of the verbal game remains: how do we dispute,
Jays, in ollr writings, in our coll oquies. in our meetings, in our
conversaliuns, and even in the "scenes" of private life! H"ve we
set rled our aecounts with the syllogism (even when it is disguised)!
Only an analysis of our intell ectual di scourse will some day he ahle
to answer with any degree or precision. 10
A.6.1 Z. Restructuration of the Trivium
We have seen that the three liberal art s fought a h"trle among
themselws for precedence (to Ihe final advantage of l..o/(ica) : it is
actually the system o( the Triviul1l in its fluctuations whi ch is
signifi cant. It s contemporaries were aware o( this: some tri ed to
rest .. ,crure the whole of spoken cuhure. Hugh of SI. Victor
(1096- 1141) set in opposition to the theorel ical, prac ti G.I, anJ
mechanical sciences, the logical sciences: wRiC"l1 took over the
iurn in its enlirely: it is the whole science o( language. Saint Bon#
Ii" l't' ,dlll;'" :tlltl L Olh' l'd' I\ Ty" ' ;' . Th. Nrw Rhl ",", A Trrtlfl\r fin 1\ ' R'umrn.
1111,/11 . 11 .11 1' , 'ohn W.lkin.'o('" aUll rllu:dl W(,:I\lt"r. Noll( 1);11111: : II( Nul' t" /);""<'
Il)fll} ,
42 ELEMENTS
aventure (1221- 1274) tri eJ to <I iscipline "II forms of knowledge by
subjecting them to Theology; in particular, L"giC<!, or the sc ience
of interpretation, comprehenJs Grammat ica (expression), Dia/cctiw
(education), and Rhetorica (pcrs,",."ion); once ag"in, "s if to set the
mental in opposition to nature anJ to langu;1gc ilhsnrhs it
entirely. But "bove all (for this heralds the future), sill ee the twclhh
century, something which we must certainly c" lI u lln> is separateJ
out from philosophy; for John of S"lishury, Dia/er tinl functions ill
all the Jiseiplines where the result is abst rac t; Hllel urica Oil the
contrary cullccts what DialeclicCl rejects: it is the field of the hY/'OI/ICl i>
(in anci e nt rhct()ric, the hYrx)tilesis is set in ('ppc.)sitilJn Il) thesis,
like the contingent to the general Icf. infra, LI. I .2Si), that is to
say, everything which implicalcs concrete ci rc1Imstances (who ! what!
why? ho w?); thus appears an opposition which will h"ve " gre:1I
mythic succes.< (it still survives): that of the concrete "ml the ah
stract: Letters (deriving from Rheluri<a) will be concrete, Philosophy
(deriving from Dialectica) will be abst ract.
A, 7, Death of rhetoric
A.7.1. Aristotle's Ihird entrance: tl.c Poelics
We have seen that Aristotle haJ "ppe"ml twice in the West :
once in the sixth century with Boct hius. once in the twelfth century
with the Arahs. He makes a thirJ cntmnce: through PfJelics.
This Poelics is very little known in the MiJdle Ages, except in the
form of some distorting "briJgments; hut in 14'18 the re "ppca" in
Venice the f"st Latin trans"'tion made from the original; in 150 I,
the first edi ti on in Greek; in 1550, Aristotle's p""lics is t",ns"'ted
with a commentary by a group of Itali"n scho"'" (Castcivetro,
Sc"liger-of Italian urigin-"ml Bi shop Veda). In Frallce, the te xt
itself is littl e known; it is through 1t"lian innuence that it makes
it s impact in France; I he J,!cneral ion uf 16JO
included IlUIIlCHHIS devolees ()f Arist{ltle; the I'f 1t.' lio S\lPlllic!'i Fn: m:ll
Classicism with it s chi ef element: a theory pf vcri !'i il1liliwdc; it i.'\
the (ot1c of lit erary Hcn'at ion I " t "core t ician,..; arc :1 t11hurs.
TIlt! Old Rllftoric: an
43
criti cs. Rhetoric. whose chi ef o hj ect is "fine writing.
11
sty1e, is
ited to instruction, where moreover it triumphs: thi s is the realm
(lf the teachers (jesuit s).
A.7.2. TriumplJant and moribund
Rhctorit.: is triumphant: it rul es over instrllction. Rhetoric is )
morihund: limited to this sector, it fall s gradually into great
lectllal di sc rcJi!. This di scredit is (lcc"sioned by the promotion of
a ne w vaillc, cviJeucc (of facts. of ideas, of sentiments), whi ch is
and does without (or imagines it does so),
o r ;1t least claims no longer to uo;;e language except as an iU.'ifTUmcrll.
as a medi at ion , as an expressio n. This u('vidence" wkes. from the
sixteenth century on, three directions: a personal evidence (in
Pro testantism), a rat ional evidence (in Cartcsianism). a sensory
evidence (in empiricism) . Rhetori c, if it is tnler"tcd (in Jesllit in
struc tion), is no longer a logic at ;111. hilt o l .:y a coloT, an o rnament,
closely supervised in the name of the " n"tur"I. " No dOllnt there
was in Pasc;:,1 some postulation of this new spirit , si nce it is to him
that we owe the of modern humani sm; what Pascal
demands is a mentalist rhetori c (an "art of persuasion"), sensitive
"s thollgh by instinct to the complex ity of things (to "finesse');
eloquence cOll sisr s not in applying .tIl c()lle tn discoursc.
h1lt in Ill'coming aw;' rc of the thought nascent within liS, so that
we can re producc this moveme nt '"", he n we speak to the other. thll s
sweeping him into truth, as if he himself, hy himself, were discov
ering it; the order of discourse has no intrinsic charac terist ie (clarit y
or syltlll1t'try); it depends on the nature of thollght, to which, in
ordcr to he "correct," language must conform.
A.7.J. je.<uil in<lruction in rhetoric
AI tilt ..' end (If the Middle Ages , as we hilve the tcac ltinJ.!
of rhcl pric was losing ground ; it none thel ess suhsisted ill ccrl:lin
eoll q . .:c!'i , ill EIlf.!land and in Gcrmil ny. In the sixtecnth
th is hcrit ;lgc Wil.'\ orJ.!ani zed , :I!'istll111'd ;1 st:,hl e form, ilt fir!'i t in tll ('
UYl1lllilSC located in Li ege ,md rlln hy Jesuit s. This
44
EL EM EN TS
coll ege was imitated in ami in Nimes: the form of in-
struction in France for three centuries WOl S set. Very qUi ckl y some
forty culleges foll owed the jesuit mudel. The instruct ion given here
was cod ified in 1586 by a group uf six j esuits: thi s is the lI",io
Swdi(Jrum, "dopted in 1600 by the Universi t y of Paris. T hi s limi"
sancti o ns the preponderance o f the lI humanit ics fHl ll of Latin rlll' t
uric; it invades all o f Europe , hut its success is in France;
the power of this new Halio no doubt derives from the fa ct that
there is, in the ideology it legali zes, an identity of an academi c
di scipli ne, of a discipline of thuught, anJ of a disci pl ine of langua!!e.
In thi s humanist instruc ti o n, Rhetori c it sel f is the Ilohle
it uo minates everything. The onl y academi c pri zes arc the pri zes
for Rhetori c, for translation. "no for memory. hut the pri ze for
Rheto ri c . aw;mJeu at the conclusion of a speci al Ctlnt C!'iI , ,ksigllalcs
the fi rst pupi l, who is heneefmth call ed (anJ the titl es ar< sign ifi -
cant) imlJeTawr or tribune {let us not (orget thar speech is a powcr-
l
anJ eve n a pulitical power) . Until arounJ 1750, (lllt ,ide the sci-
ences, el oquence constitut es the unl y prestige; in this pcri(K..1 of
Jesuit decl ine, rhetoric receives a cert ai n amuunt of new li fe (rolB
Frccl1l;lsonry.
A_7.4. and mallua/s
T he codes of rhetori c arc innumcrahl e, at lea' t IIntil the end (lf
the e iJlhteenth century. Man y ( in the sixteenth ami seventeenth
centuries) are written in Latin; these arc the academi c 1I1 :1 IHlids
wrill en hy j esuits, notably those of Fathers Nunez, SlI siu" anJ
SO;l rC!. The "Institut io n" of F;l lhcr NUllul, fur example, consists
of five hooks: preparatory exercises, I he three Inili n part s of rhel oric
(i nventi o n. arrangement, anJ style) and an ethical pari ("wis-
..lorn"). Yet rhetori cs in the vernacul ar proliferate (we shall cit e
here onl y those in French) . At the end of tlte fi fteenth cen .. "y,
rhetorics a TC primarily poet ics ( art of making verse!'. , ( If ;Irt s ur the
scconJ Rhe tori c ) ; we must c ite: Pi erre Fahri, (Jrmld 1.' 1 Vmi Art Je
I'lcil1e Wu'wri<fll c (six editions fr" ", 152 1 to 1'; 44) "nd Anl oine
Foclin (I'ouquclin), llloCt lo"ri<llle /rdll \"i,e (1 555 ), whi ch includes a
45
cl ear and c",npl ete c1assifi cat ion of figures. In the sevent eenth and
eight eenth centuri es , until ahout 1830 in fact, the Treati ses of
Rlu:lo ric prevail ; these treali ses generall y offer: I. parriJigmati c
rhe loric ("figures") ; Z. syntagmtt tic rhe fori c ("oratori cal consfnlC
tion") ; these two categories are fclt tu be necessary and compl e-
lIIent ary, so that a commerci al digest of 1806 can combine the two
most (;HIl OUS rhe tori ci ans: the Fi gures , by Dunmrsais. Clnd omto rical
construction, by Ou Batt ell x. Let us ci te the hest known of thesc
treat ises. I'or the eight eenth century , it is no doubt the HIo"l<Iri</llc
by Pcre BernarJ L""y (1 675): this is a compl ete treatise of speech,
u,eful "not onl y in schools, but also in all of life, ill bUJi1l1: ami
,dfinR"; it i, hased, obvi ously, on the princi pl e of the exteriority of
langu;lge and o( thoughf : one has a "pi clUre" in the mind and one
seeks tn "render" it with words. For the century, the
most (a mous treati se (and mo reover fhe most intell igent) is that o(
Oumars"is (Traire des Tro/>es, 1730 ): Durna""is, a rxx" ",an, un-
successful in hi s lifetime, frequent ed O' Hnlbach's irrcli giou.; c ircle
ri nd was an Encycl opedi st; hi s wo rk. tntlre th;ln a rhe fo ric. is a
linguisti cs of the changes of meaning. At the end of the e ight eenth
century anJ at the beginning of the nineteenth, many classical
treali ses were still publisheJ, absolutely indifferent to the , hock of
the Revolution ;",..1 the changes whi ch foll owed (Bl air, 1783; Gail -
lard , 1807; /..ir llheroriquc des demoiselles; Fontanier, 1827- recentl y
repllhlishcd anJ int roduced by GerarJ Genett c). In the n ineteenth
ccnlUry. rhe to ric survives only artificially. under the pn.lteCl lon o(
oOici al rcgul:nions; the very title of the manuals clOd trc:1tiscs changes
in a signifi cant fashi on: 188 1, F. de Caus-,ade, Hhftflri<fuc <t Genres
lill enur<,s ; 1889, I'rat , Elb nenl' ele IIhCwri<luC ct de tilleraru,,: Li r-
craltl rc sli ll stands warmnt for rhetoric, hcfore it com
hut the 01..1 rhetori c, in it s death throes, is ri valed hy
" I I f t I " PSYC HI ogles t! s y c.
A. 7_ S_ End of RlIe/oric
Il owever, to say in a cal egori cal way that Rhetori c is dcml wotlld \
mean we could speci fy whal ha!l re placed it, fur. as we h;lve sufli /
46 ELEMENTS
cicntly remarked in this diachroni c journey, Rhetoric mtl st always
/
he in the st,uctu,,,1 with its neighhors (G,al11l11a"
Logic. Poeti cs, Philusophy): it is the play o( Ihl' systel11, nol each
of its pari s in itself, which is Ili st(lrically siJ,:nili cant .. On II,i s IlHlhl c11l
I we sh .. 11 notc, to conclude, sc ycml orientations of ,he inquiry.
I . II would he ncccssClry to m .. kc a c(lntcl11por;try Icxi cnlogy {If the
wonl Where docs it still find acceptance! It still sOlll c ril1u .. 's receives
original contents, personal intcrpn.'I;ltions , (rom wriH.' rs not (rpm
,hetors ([I"udel"i,e "nd "deep rheloric," Val ery, Pa"lhan); h"t alxlVe
all. we should have to reorganize the cont emporary field of ir s
connotations: here pejorative," there analyt ic. U and in yet another
place revalidated, II so as to Jr:lw up an ideological G I St' history of
Ihe (lid rhetoric. 2. In educt! ion, the end of of rhetoric
is, as in this case, diflicllh 10 date; in I\lZ6, "Je,uil in Heirul
wrote another manual of rll cturic in Arahi c; in I l) J8. a l-ki,..: ian,
M. J. pllbli, hcJ still "not he,; and dIS,," in Rhc' lori c
allJ in AJv"nceJ Rhetoric have only lahly vani shed . 3. To what
degree and with what reservations has the science oflangu;lgc taken
ove' the field o( the old ,heUl,ic ! First o( all, Ihere' has heen a shi(1
to psyc ho#styli sti cs (or styli!5tics of hut today, when
mentalism is hunted d()wn and harri ed! Out (l ;111 rhchlric,
J:lkohson h:ls retained only two figures, melaphor and metllnymy,
making them into an cmhlem of the two axes of language; for SOftie,
Ihe formidable labor o( classifi calion per(orllled by Ihe old rhetori c
11 (TIl(: ",y!l ie!!. .snphist ie-u(-nej,!:lIitln: " til he :.11, m:lke VIIUI 'II( lIt'IIIIIlJ! . ") " It y :111
expl:.iuctl P:U:klt ,X. ,hi5 de51111( l i w: IC'1:ie tic.' hdlls Ihe II :l1",I. \ lulIl!
till . .. ti i!l lulh5 nUIfllll": . W"h,"" dficx: i'y, it i!l IIl1im:" I ly notlllllJ: 1 .. 11 II K" IC ' UC. A ''''11
fakrll 1tl""' lIlls, <' f( w un l:m .... . ;I .. '<'. ,hl\ I!I ,,, c" :ml!t' ,ilt' ( IOIlIV
IIf ,h(' wur lJ" (Sarll ( , Stunl UI"nt"I. 1\:' 4" & Mu"" , If:ll' \ . h td um:m. N(' w YUl k: (;l"' I.:('
""milt" 19(0), p. 101) .
II Jul;<I Kri !ll(v<', Simi illfilti, "<llis: 1111 s.-lIiI , 1%9.
" li lllltp J.L , A VtlU'ftJ RIu-'II'fK. 11:1115, Ilundl :",d ::- II1,klll , Ibllll1l"' (' : J" IIII\
Univ(' I, ity I"l'(.' , 11100 .
"Tlu' n( tr :kJilion,11 ,11l' !IIf1( h:l!l c rt' all,d a ':" 1' II. "I(' 1IIIIII,III.lIt\ . :11,,1
V:lyl. \ I; n Innl! w:.y 10 J! ;tp, In 1..\ I II wl."ld 11,,1 1'1.' :,1' " 1:1,' "''' ' WH ' nl!
III dl'M',il1(' .. ' , \\,w ,ilt'tt,r lt' ad:'I " I-d 1\, ,I", \ ' :11 11 1" " , :lrullt' q llllt' IIIt' III \ 1,1 1"11'
't' IIIP' Ir :"y ,\I lu,b, \ hip'll IIw \wll .. rill' 1.11lary hl' lI l " l JIIIlI :III , ',1.1'1:14,."
fllill !\,yk. Nt'w Ymk : ll:ulles & Nllhlt . 11
1
"'1 , 1'. 110 ).
."
,
I
i
The Old Rhetoric: an aide#mi moire 47
seems slill usable, especi.lly if applied tn the ",,,'ginal fields (l(
cornlllunic.ltion or signifi cati on. such as the advertising im:lge.I'i
where it is not yet worn OPt. In flny ca.se, these conH:1di ctory
evahl:1tions silow clearly the present mnhiguity of the rhetorical
phenomenon: glamorous ohject of int elligence and penetration.
grandiose system which a dviliz:lti on. in its extreme hrea(hh,
perfected in order to classify, i. e_, in order tn think it s langu:1gc ,
inslnm1('nt of power, loc lis of historical conflicts whose reading is
utterly ahso,bing p,ecisely if we 'estorc this object to the diverse
history in whi ch it devcioped; but "Iso "n ideologi cal object, (ailing
into ideology :1t the advance of th:lt uother thing" whi ch has re#
placed it, :md today compelling LIS to take an indi spcnsahle criti cal
distance.
B, THE NETWORK
B.a. ,. The demand (or clas .. i(ie;orion
All Ihe treati ses o( Anliquity, e<pt:cially Ihe pnst -A,i <lutelian
ones, show an (',hsession with clas.c;ifi c31 ion (the very term of parlilio
in nr:llory is an eX::lmple): rhetoric openl\ olTers it self as a c1:1ssi #
fi ciltion (of m:lteriais
l
of rules, of parts, of of styles), Clas#
sifi calion it self is the object of a discolll sc; announcement of the
pl:tn o( Ihe treatisc, di scussion o( the proposed hy
predcces.,,,rs. The p"ssion (0' classification always seems ny,antine
to those who do not p.nicip",," in it: why discus., so billcrly Ihe
place of the /rro/)()Silio. sometimes put at ti l': end of the exordium,
sometimes at the beginning of the nllTTcltiu! Yet in most ( :lses, :lS
is natural, the taxonomic optior implies an ideological onc: there
is a in things arc pl"ced: teUme how JIlIt dil\si{y
(IIkl l ' Uldl you who you <lTe. Hence wr calillot adort- as we slwll
dll here, for didactic single, canonic:,1 classillcalilln
1\ IIlIla"ly }:. c qllt'!I I "Hltl:'"Ti IIIlC rt illl ,lJ,tC pllhli ci l:lirc ," C mnIllIl114(1I1I111U. III
(1
1
1701. Pl' .
' .
.'
48 ELE MENTS
whi ch wi ll ddihcratcly "(or!:et" Ihe 1lI'llIy varia I iOlls "f wh k h Ihe
plan uf the rcdmc rl,,?wrikC lx'en the ohject , wi;huut fir:.; t saying
II worJ about t hese variation!"i.
B.O. 2. points for cla ... ;fical;on
T he account o( Rhelori c has heen made. essl nl ia lly. (rolll Ihree
difTerenl Slarting flOinl s (10 simpli(y llI all ers ). I. For A,i stotl e. wh"t
comes first is rec/me institution of it power to product'
what may or may not exist); the redmc (l"'lcrorikc) cl1l-!clldcr s (ollr
types o( opcralions. whi ch are Ihe parts o( Ihe rhelmical errl (anJ
not the parts of di scourse . of (lnuio) : (I. P,sfeiJ. csrflhli shmcnt of
"proofs" (iJ"Jcnrio) ; b. Taxi5, arrange ment of rhest. )1roof.o;;
the di scuurse, according to a (crt;1in orJcr ((Iisl,witifl ) ; f. '....eXIS,
vcrhal (ormublion (at the level of Ihc sentence) of IIll' argumenls
(cloc urio); d. staging of the tlltal hy "II orator
whu mllst hecume a performer (actiu). {our opl' rallOIl S arc
cxamineJ threc timcs (at least with regard 10 duo.' iUVt'wio) : rrom
the po int or vi ew or the e mill e r or the rrolH tilt, point o{
view of it s receiver, from the point o( view (lr tile IT1t'ssage it selr
(cr . . III/,ra. A.4.l.). In "cco,,1 wilh Ihe nolion o( Ird,,, " (whi ch is
(
:1 powcrL the Ari stotelian st.lrting poilU the
or (act i ve operation) cs .tt ti le IIUld.
It s struct ure (di scourse as product). Z. CICero, If IS Joc.: tr lfll I dlC('Iull
whi ch comes first. i. e. , no longer a tceJme, hilt a hndy
or knowl edge t;tllght ror practical ends; the doclri ,UI dire,uli, (rolH a
taxonomic point o( view, engcnJers: 1. an energy, a rorCt ,
oTtltoris, on which depenJ the opera t ions call ed for hy Ari stodc;
b. a proc.Juct, or one might say, a form, the OTtllio, to which ;lrc
nltachcJ the extended paris o( which it is COlllposeti ; c. a slIhjt:n
or, one mi ght say, :l cnntent (;1 t ype ur contl' nt) , tilt.' ( II/d .. on
(
whi ch the gcnres of Jepenti. Thus appl' ars ;1 certain
tonoUlY or the work in rch1tillll to the lal)( lr wll icll ha!'oi prnduCl"l1
it. ) . A sYl1l hcsizer and pedagoglle, Q uintil i:m 4.:tl lll hirll' s Ari slolle
:llld C iceru; hi s starl ing po int is (l' rf ilinly if i!'oi it pract ical
:lnll pcd:lJ,.!t)gi calrcdlf"?, Ill )t speCi llafi v ...; it " Iigll s: (j . ,Il l' (lpl' ralhIlIS
,
J
49
(,/e <lT1e)- whi ch arc Ihose o( Aristotle and C icero; h. Ihe npcmlor
(de "rlificc) ; c. Ihe work il sel( (de o/lere) (Ihesc !"51 Iwo Ihernes arc
Ji sclIs.<ij ed hut not suhdivided) .
/J.0.3. The stake of the cI .... if;c.1/;on: tIle place of the plan
We call sittlate precisely the stake of these Iflxonomic variations
(even i( they see rn minim"I): il is Ihe place o( place. o( di,/,,,,ilio.
of Ihe order of Ihe parIS o( Ihe discourse; 10 wh"1 is thi s disl,,,,i!io
10 he connected ! Two choices arc possihlc: either we regard the
IIplan" as an lIordering" (and not just as an order), (1s ;:t creative
Ol ct or the distrihution of the materi als, in a word a lahuf, a
tur:Hion, :lnd then we connect it to the preparation or
or el se we take the plan a proJuct, as a fixed structure. ;lnd W('
t hen connccl it to the work. tu ()TlIliu; either it is a or
material s. ;1 di strihution, or elsc it is a grid, a st ereot yped rorm. In
short, is order ;Ictive and creativc, or passive ;Hld created! Each
option has h;ld its represent :ttives, who have t:.!cen it to it s limit :
SOlnC connect c.ii5Ix)silio to />whmio (di scOVlry or proof'\ ); others
neet it ttl eiocwio: it is a si mpl e verhal furm. We '< now the hrc;1lhh
this prohlell1 assumed on the thresho ld .l Il h.J ' rn times: in the
sixteent h ccnillry, Ramus, violently (rednu! is a
sophisti cation contrary to nature ), radi call y separates rrom
i"tlcutio: order is independent or the di scovery or arglllTl ent s: [ir . .-. I
Ihe sea rch for argument s, then their grouping. c .. lln l HU.' tllOc.I . In the
sevenleenth cent ury, the decisive hlows aga inst a decadent rhetoric
\
1 struck against the of the plan of
as If h;ltl IIltllnately heen conceived hy a rhetoric or the produ('i
(and not of producti on) : Descartes di scovers the coinc idel1ce or
invt' llt ion ;1nd or no longer wi th the rhetors hllt widl the
mat hemati cians; ,lOd ror Pascal, o rder has :l creative va ill c , it SUOi t.TS
til (ound till' new (it COlnnot he a readY#lT1 adt grid , ext n nal and
prior) : "Let it not he said that I ha ve said mu hi ng new: the :lr#
rilllgeflH' llt (Ir the materials is new. " T he relilthm
(wet'Tl the order of imlt.' wion and Ihe onler uf ion
(urdu), ;",..1 Il tl tahly thc gap in the oricnt ati on (contradiction, in -
50 ELEMENTS
version) of the two parallel orJers. always has a theoretical bearing:
it is a whole conception of lituaturc which is at stake each time,
as is evidcnccJ by Poe's exemplary analysis of his own pocm "The
Raven": in order to writ e the work. (rom the Idst Llling
aPI)lIrenrly received by the reader (received as "ornament"). i.e . . the
melancholy effect of the word nevennure (elo). Ihen Iracing back
from thi s to the invention of the story and of met ri cal (urm.
8.0.4 The rltelorical R1at.ine
If. forgetting this stake or " t least resolulely opling for the Ar
istotelian starting point, we manage to slIpcrimrosc the
classifi cations of Classical Rhecoric. we get a canoni cal diSirilllllion
of the Jifferent parts of the Lechno. a nelwork . a Iree. or ralher a
great liana dcsccnJing (rom stflgC to stage, 5C.l IHClimcs splitting a
generic clement, sometimes olliccting sc;ttt crcd pari s. This nctwl)rk.
is a One thinks of DiJerot and hi s machine (()r making
slocking;-"h can be seen as a si ngle and unittllc reasoning whose
conclusion is the fabrication of the ohject ... " In Oideml's Ill'"
chine, textile m"terial is fcJ in at the bcginning. and at the end,
it is stockings which emerge. In the rhetori cal machine. what one
puts in at the beginning, b:ucly emerging (rolll a native aphasia,
arc the raw materials of reasoning. facts. a "suhjec t"; what (omes
lout at the end is a complete. st ruc turl,d di .scDur.sc , (ully ;,rmcd for
1 persuasion.
8.0.5. Tile five parIS of I/.c Icc/mc rilclorikc
Our point of departure will therefore he consliluled hy the dif
ferent motheroperations of [cchllo (it will be understood fmm Ihe
preceding that we shan connect the order of Ihe paris. Ihe di sl").<i ri,,,
lu Ihe Lech.,,; and not to (mlli,,: thi s is what Ari slotle did) . In il s
greatest extension, the reclIne r/u:wrikc include.s flvc princi pal
cralion.s; we must insist on tile active, transirivl', Inol..'l'WfIlJl(Hic. (1) #
crarimwl natufe of these divisions: it is not a questioll of the c! etT1l'nt s
o( a structufc, hut of the act ions o( a t.!radual strtl cttlrali(lfl, as is
clearly shown hy the verhal (orm (verhs) (If Ihese definilions:
, .
. '
The Old Rheloric: an aitkmimoire 51
I. INVEN1' 0
Emesis quid dicru finding what to say
2.
Taxis inwnta dispontTt orduing what is found
J. tlOCUTIO
Lexis Qrnllrl': tJfTbu addinR the of words,
of figures
4. ACTIO
H ypocri sis agere et IXrfonning the discQUT!'C like
an actor: gestures and di ction
5. MEMORIA
Mneme rnemoriac committing to memory
The first three operations are the most important (InvenLio. Dis-
/)O,i rio. Elocurio); each supports a broad and subtle network of no
tinns. and all three have fed rhetoric beyond Antiquity (above all
Elocurio). The last two (Acrio and Memoria) were rapidly sacri ficed.
as soon as rhetoric no longer the spoken (declaimed)
discourses of lawyers or statesmen, or of "lecturers" (epideictic genre),
but also. and Ihen almost exclusively. (written) "works. " No doubt.
though. that these two parts are of great interest: the first (Acrio)
because it refers to of speech (i.e . to a hysteria and
to a ritual); Ihe second because it postulates a level of stereotypes.
a fixed intertextuality. transmitted mechanically. But. since these
two last operations are absent from the WI. k (as opposed to orlllio).
and since. even among the Ancients. they have given ri se to no
cla,sification (but only to brief commentaries). we shall eliminale
Ihem here from the rhetorical machine. Our tree will therefore
include only three branches: I. Inventio; 2. Di'(xJ,irio; 3. Elocurio.
Yet we may note that between the concept of Lechne and these
Ihree starting points there is interposed one more level: that of the
"suhstantial" malerials of disco.ulse: Res and Verba .. I do not think
Ihis is to be ;"erely as Things and Words. Res. Quintilian
says, are quae signi!icantuT, and Verba: qlwe significant; in short, on
the level of the discourse. the signifieds and the signifiers. Res is
52 ELEMENTS
what is already promised tn meaning, constituted frolll the outset
as the raw material of significltion; Verhum is the (orm whi ch already
seeks out meaning to (ulfill it. It is the p"radiglll resltlCr"" whic h
counts, the relation of complementarity, the cxchallJ..!c. nol the
definition o( each term. -Since /)is(xlSitili bears at once on the
materials (res) and on the di scursive forms (verh,,), tilt' first starling
point of Ollr tree. the first wo rking-drawing of our machine, will
look like thi s:
B.1. Inventio
8.1.1. Dbtcovcry and not invention
hltJcn.io refers less to (In inventi on (of Ih;1I1 to a
discuvery: everything already exists, one mll:;1 Itlcrl'ly recogni ze it :
this is more an "extractive" notion than a "creative" one. This is
corroborated by the designati"n o( a "place" (the Topic), (rom
which the arguments can he extmcted and (rolll whi ch they Illust
be brought : irlllcntiu is a progress (via (ITRuHlCnlonun) . Th is not ion
of inveruio implies two sentiments: on une hand, a complete
fidcnce in the power or a me lhod, o( a (lath: ir the net of argu-
mentative forms is cast over the raw material with a good tec hnique,
one is certain tu draw up the content of an excellent di scolJrSCi on
the other, the conviction that the spOnf<ln<!OllS, the unmethodical
brings nothing in return: to t he power of fin,,1 speech correspo nds
a nothingncss of original speech; man cannot speak without having
given binh to his sflCech, and (or this delivery therl is a speci al
ledme, invenlio.
B.I.2. To convince/to nrovc
/ Two wide paths start from imlcnl;o, one logical, the other
/ chologkal: W cOJlvifice and (0 move. To ( O)1vi ll ((' (fidrJf1 fuccre)
"
}
"
,
1.
.'
The Old Rheroric: an
53
man"s a logical or pseudo-logi cal apparatus which is call ed, by and
la,ge. I'ro/uni" (domain o("Pl(lo['): by reasoning, we must do actual
vioicilce to the rninJ of the character and whose
psychological dispositions do not then conrern us: the p"xls have
the ir own power. To move (animos intpellere) consists, on the
trary. in thinking the prnhative message not in itself bllt according
Yc.l its Jest inati<m, the mood of its 3mlicncc, in m()hili zing suhjec tivC',
ethi cal "IlX'(S. We shall first proceed down the long palh o( ("."hat;"
(to convince). and then return to the second term o( the initial
di chotolllY (to IIIlIve).
8.1.3. Pr()(}f.. within-techn" and proofs ollt.<ide-technc
Pis/cis. the ""x,(,! We sh,,11 keep the word out o( hahit . but (or
ti S it has a scientific connotation whose very Jcfincs the
rhctorical,Jis(cis . It woulJ be he tter to say: convincing re .. sons, ways
of persuasi on, means of c redit, mrJiators of confidence (fidrs). The
hinary divi sion of ,Jisteis is famous: there are the rC;lsons wh ic h arc
olltside (('chne alechnoi) and the reasons whi ch hclong to
redlne (/,i.li reis enl cchnni), in Lat in: proiJariones inarli[iciales I
in French (B. Lamy): eXfrins equeslintrinseques. This opposition is
not di(fi cult to understand i( we recall what a tedul<! is: " speculative
- ---.- - - . _---- . -- ",
i.n:li titlltion of til e means of producing what may o r may not ex ist,
i. f . , which is n OT' natural.
side-tech",; are therefore those which escape tn the rreedolll o( ere-
ruing the conlingcnt.ohject.; .. chey arc tn he found o;,tsije
(the operal or of the lechne); they arc reasons inherent in the nattlre
o( the object. Pnx)(s within-techn' depend. on the contrary. on the
orator's reasoning power.
1J. 1.4. Proofs our.ide-techne
Whal can the orator do with outside-tec/",e! li e cannot
nmdut' f them (induce nor deduce ); he can only, hecause the y arc
"ine rt " ill ;1rmngc thein, show the m to advanta,!c hy
a rncthodi c d di sposition. What arc they? They are fragme nt s of
'oJ' reality which direc tly int o thc di.'i/msi rio, hy a simpl e s/lotliinK
54
ELEMENTS
and not hy transformation; or again: they are ciements of the "dos-
sier" which one cannot invent (Jeduce) anJ which are furnisheJ
by the case itself, by the client (for the muonent we arc in the
purely judicial realm). These pistei, alechlllli arc cla<sificd in the
following way: I. fJraejudicia, the earlier decrees, jurisp",dence
(the problem is to destroy them without attacking them Jirectiy);
2. rumores, public testimony. the CUll'icns US of an entire ci ty;
3. confessions obtained under torture (tunllelllll, '/II(IC,il<l) : no ethical
sentiment. but a social sentiment with regard to torture: Antiquity
recognized the right to torture slaves, but not free men; 4. evidence
(wlmlae) : coni racts, agreements, transact ions het ween iudi v iduals,
even forced relations (theft, murJer, armed rubbery, assault);
5. oath (jusjurandum): this is the element of a tacti c and of a
language: one G ill agree ur rcfuse to swear, nne accepts or rej ects
another's oath. ctc.; 6. testi mony (lfsrimonill): thi s is cs.",cnlially. at
least fo r Aristotle. noble testimony, ei ther from the ;;ncicnt poets
(Solon citing Homer to support the claims of Alhens against Sal-
amis) . or proverbs, or famous contempurari es; hcnce they ;lrc more
like "citations. II
B.I.5. McaninK of tile atc:chnoi
The uextrinsic" proofs are acceptahlc to the judicial (rurnores and
tesrimclllia can serve for the del iberative and the epideictic); hut we
can imagine .hal they serve in private life to judge an action, to
di scern when tn praise, etc. This is what Lamy has done. lienee
these extrinsic proofs can sustain fi ctional represcntations (nuvel,
play); yet we must reali ze thaI they are not ilUlices , which belong
to reasoning; they arc simply tIle elements of a dossier which comes
fmm t h e outside world, from ''" already inst illl!io"alil ed reality; in
lit erature such proofs would serve to compose dlJ,'i .. (there
arc such), which woulJ abanJon any attempt at cOllsistent writ ing.
:lny organizeJ represenlarion, and would prc:;ent only fmgments of
rea lity already constituted as language by socit' ty. This is the real
of the c.llcdmoi: OJHslilUtcd t.:!ellu,'nt s of the sociallallgu:lgc,
"
The Old Rhewtic: an aidc-mbnuire
55
which pass directly into the di scourse, without tnllufomted '"
by allY technical operation on the part of th, orator, of the author.
B.l.6 Proofs witl,in-teehne
Set in opposition to these fragments of the sociall:lnguage given
directly, in a raw state (except for the advantage o( ;","ngement),
,ue the whi ch depenu entirely nn the powcr o( the
L' llfl'dlflOi). ErllcchllUS really mcans here: dcriving from CI
Imleficc Df Ihc orator, f<!!. thc material is fTtlns[cmnea into persuasive
hy a operation. This operation, strictly sr eaking, is
lhulhle (me: illlhi ct i(m anJ JeJuct i<'Il . The I,isfei s (' u(ech,u,i are
(ore divided into two types: I. the exclIl/,11I1Il (inducti on); Z. the
Ctlflt)tnCme (deduc tiu n) ; these are o hvi utlsly a non-scie ntifi c induc-
tion and deduction, simply "puhlic" (for the puhlic). These two
paths art.' ohligatory: all OT<1tllrs. in order to produce pnslICl sion.
demonstrate hy examples or by cnt hymc l1l cs; ,herc arc no other
means (Aristotle) . Vet a kind of quasi-est hetic dilTerence, a dif-
ference "f style, h"s heen int"xluccd betwern the example amI the
cnthymclIle: the eXl'rnlMUm pnx.iuces a gentlel IlCTSUasillll . more highly
pri zt.'d hy (01111110n people; it is a lun,inous (or, 'c that charms throuJ.:h
the pleasure inheTcnt in any compari son; thc enthymcl1le, more
,,(,\Ver(III, more vigorous. produces a violent, force. it
enjoys lilt.' l'ncrgy of the syllogism; it performs a veritahle seizure,
it is proof in all the force of its purity. o( it s esscnce.
D.I. 7. Exemplum
EXl'ttl l,luHI (/)(!TdJciJ"FJllll) is rhetorical inducfion: we proccl'J from :
one partic ular 10 another hy the implicit link of thc gencral: from ,:
an nh;l'rt we infer the class. then (rom this cbs.liO. :l new ohjcCt.
lh
The rxcml,lwn can have any dimension. it em he it woru, a fact.
a group (If :1nd the account of these (acls, It is a persuasivc
'o. 1\11 lII tl' l. .. 1 "\1"",111111 Clv("n hv {.)lIinllllOl": "Some Illlll' ."I . \." wit., h.td Id, H"'II("
"" \ ' It' It, ,.11", 1 loy : .I". 11'1' .. f IltI' s.,' n:'h ; "".,It :.11 ,Iw tttOll' 'l' :I"" 11 ""1:1" Wl" I n,tll l!H':tI
II ",'" , wi." h . 1 , /"""1111'1 1 ",.,11 ,11 II", Rq ... hl" :",d wit" ... h: .. hat! /"Hl'.! i'lln ,"'C ,lf " ;
d , 1:1'111' 1 . 1 !tllk m.tmliv,' rill' ,I:" ,. "/,, .. 1'11.1' '''''1' 1.,. dUII I' \1 :.w:ty :llld In:.II.,d,
56 ELEMENTS
similitude, an hy analogy: one finds good cxrmllkl if one
has the gift of seeing analugies-.md also. of course, cOIl'rarics;11
as its Greek name indicates, it is in the realm of the paradigmilti c.
of Ihe melaphorical. Since Ariswtie, Ihe eX'III/,/",,, has heen sl1h.
divided into real and ficlive; Ihe fictive sulxlivided into I"'ft,hk and
fable; the real covers historical, hut also mythological examples, in
opposition not to the imaginary hut to what nile invent s oneself;
the I](""ble is " short compari son," the fid,le a of
actions. This indic<ltcs the nature of the cxcmlllutJI, which
will Oourish.
8.1.8. T"e exemplary figure:
At the hcginning of the hr:;t century n.c_ . a new ()fill (If (.xern/,luHl
arpears: the exemplary character (cikf;I1, imtl,l.!o) dl' signatcs the
carnation of a virtlle in a figure: Car" ilia tJirfUlurII ,Iit/(I iJl1(1I!,(I (C ic-
em). An imag,, repertoire is estahlisheJ fur usc hy the ,hetori cal
schools (Valerius Maximus. undcr Tihcrius: Fct("(orllnt (Ie dicrflTwll
mrrnm'abiliunI libn novem). (ollowed l:tlcr hy a versified version . This
collection of enjoys vnSl populari ty in the Middle Ages; a
learned poetry pro(Xlses the dehnilivc canon of Illcse characters. a
veritable O lympus of archetypes whom God has placed in the ("(.urse
of the iUUI,f!" virrwis sometimes apprehends quile scctmdary
ch"acrers, who will enjoy a great celehrity, sllch as Amyclas, the
hoatman who c"ried "Cnesar nnJ his fortune" from Epirus to Brin
disi Juring a storm ( = poverty anJ sobriety); there are III :IIIY such
in Dante. The very fact that a repertoire of wuld he con
stituted emphasizes what might be called the sIrtlc flIral vocatiun o(
the exern/,I"",: it is a detachnble fragment, whidl specifically in
vulves a meaning (heroic portrClit, hagiographic 11.lrrativc); it is easy
to understand that it can he traced in writing. hoth di scontinuous
and allegorical, down to the popular press of our own day: Chllrchill,
1/ Eu,",,'um a CH"Irllfirt: "TluK(" " inUIt's ;UlJ wlmh t-,I , Hu IIIIS H' \ '"lr J III h. ,
look ("'0\ :111.((. " ( : in ' m)
EK;unple o( :1 p:u:,hll' ('"111 :1 .' 1"""\ h , ,I So. 11111\ 1 II '" 1'0(' ( In "l' l1 hv I""
any Illille 11.:111 :md I'il"u.
The Old Rhcmric: an
57
John XXIII arc each an imag(), examples intended to persuoJe us
that we must he courageous, that we must be good.
8. I. 9.
Parallel to the exeml)I"III , a mode Ihat is pe/Suasive hy induction,
there is the group of modes of deduction, tlwargurnenra . The am-
biguity of the word argumenlUm is significant here. The usual sense
in ancient times is: ohjecl of a stage fahle (the argumenr of a comedy
by PI""t"'), or again: articulated action (as opposed to IIIwl", .. , a
group of actions). For Cicero, thi s is hoth a "fictive thing which
lIIight have happeneJ" (the plausible) and "a probahle idea uscd
to convince," whose logical hearing Quinti li an clarifies: "manner
of proving one thing hy another, of confirming what is dubious by
what is not , " Thus appears an imlXlTtant duplicity: th;!t ,,( ;1
soning" {"any (orm uf public rC:lsuning" says one rhetnr) which is
impure. easily dram:lliz'lble. which both in the intel -
lectual and in the fi cti onal, in the bgical and in the narrative (do
we not find thi s same ambiguity in many modern "cssays"!) . The
apraratus of the arRumCllIa whi ch begins herc and which will nOI
end until the end of the probatin starts with a powerful device, a
tahcrnflclc u( Jecilictive proof, the enthymeme. which is sometimes
ca ll ed CflJllHlcuturJI, cmnmentlltio, a lit eral translation of the Greek
c'lI /l1wl(' IIItI (any reflection nne h"1s in the mind), hut most often.
hy a signifi canf synecdoche: lIr,f!wnenru.m.
8.1.10 The elll"ymeme
Ti,e entl,ymeme has received two successive signifi cations (which
are not contradictory). 1, For Aristotelians, it is a hased
Oil proh;lhility or signs, and not un rhe true flnti Ihe immediate (:lS
is the c;,se (or the scientific the enlhymcmc is a riJewrical
dcvelnped solely "" the level I1f (he I",hlic (as we s"y: tn put
ollr:-;dvcs on someone's level), slarting frum the 11TOf,Clh'c, i, c. ,
in}! (rom what the puhlic thinks ; it is a deduc tion whose v"luc
concrCIC, pllsitcd in view of a IlTt:scrucuion (a sort o( accepfahl e
spcc lac lc:). as opposed (ll an ahstract deduction made uniqllely for
58 ElEMENTS
analysis; it is a rublic easily emrloycd hy ignorant men.
By virtue of this origin, the cnthymcf11c persuasion. not
demonstrafionj for Aristotle. tllc cnthyrnclTlc is slI(ficicndy defined
hy the I,mba"'c character of ils rremi ses (the probahle admits of
cuntraries); whence the necessity of defining and classifying the
premises of the enthYlll eme (d. inl"" B. I.I3,14, 1 S,16). Z. Afler
Quintilian, and triumphing enlirely in Ihe Middle Ages (since
Boethius), a new definition prevail s: the enlhymeme is defined not
by the cont ent of its premises, hut by the ellipli cal characler (If its
articulation: it is an incomplete sylloj.!isl1l. an ahhreviat ed syll ogism:
it has "neither as many parts nor as distinct parts as the phihlstlpl.i cal
syllogism": One of the two pr(:miscs Of the conclusion can he
pressed: hence it is a syl logism truncated hy the suppression (in
utterance) of a propositiun WllOSC reality seems inClmtcst .. hlc and
which is, for this reason, simply "kept in Illiml" (en 1/'""'") . If we
apply this definition to that n,aSler syllogism of our cuhure (wilh
its odd insislcncc on our mortalily)- and though it s premise is nol
simply probable, which keeps it from being an enthymellle in the
first sense- we arrive at Ihe following cnl hyrncmcs: mcHI is morral,
lienee SOCTLItes is morflll ; S()Cwres is nwrwllxctl u.se mer! (Ire; SO<:TI [l'S
is a nI(ln, /'COICC mortal, etc. We may prefer III tlois fllnereal m(Klci
the more current one proposeu by Port -Royal: "Any h .. ly reflecling
li ght (rom all sides is uneven; the Il1lKHl nneet s li ght from all sides;
hence the moon is an uneven lxKly," ilnd all the cnthymcmalic
forms which can be derived from it (Ihe 1I100n is uncvt.' n hecause
it reOects light from all sides, etc.). This second definililln of the
enthymeme is in fact chi efly that of the L"Ric of Port -Royal, and
we see clearly why (or how) : man in the cl:05,,iG,1 peri(KI helieves
that the syllogism is entirely made wilhin d,e mind ("the nllmhcr
of three propositions is quite propoTiinnal widl the extent of our
, mind"); if thc enthYl11cme is an imperfect syllogi sm. this can (lnly
I he on tlor level 01 (wl'ich is not d, e level IIf the "mind") :
\
it is a perfect syllogi sm in the mind. hilt imperfl'ct in expression;
in short, it is all accident of language, a deviatilln o
59
B,I,II, Metamorphoses of the enthymemc
Here arc sollie varieties of rhetorical sylloRisms: J. the /,."syllo-
ginn, a chain of syllogisms in which the conclusion of one hecnmes
the premise of the next; Z. the surites (SOTCJ.5, a heap). an
Illulation of premises or a sequence of truncated syllugisms; 3. the
el,ie/orire",a (often di scussed in Anti4uity), or developed syllogism,
each prcmi se heilll! accompanied by ils proof; the epicheirel11(1.tic
structure can he extended to an ent ire discourse in five parts:
osition, reasoll for the major premi se. assumption or minor premi se.
proof of the minor, complexion or conclusion: A 0 0 heca use 0 0 0
Now, B . .. hecause ... Therefore C; " 4. the al,/xlTcnt enlh:,!",erne,
or reasoning hased on a trick or play on words; 50 the maxim (glHlme.
ser ucrt ria) : a very elliptical. monoJic form. it is a fragment of an
cnlhymcl11e whose remainder is "Never overeducate your
children (for they reap the envy of their fellow citizens). " .0 A
signi ficanl devcloplncnt. the senrcnria shifts frurn invenrio (of rea-
soning, of synl;lgmatic rhetoric) lu elocurilJ, to style (figures o(
amplification or diminution) ; in the Middle Age<, it nourishes,
contrihuting to a thesaurus of cit;:Hions on all suhjects of wi sdom:
sentences. gnomic verses learned by hcart, r ollecled :md classifieJ
in '1lphahet ical ordero
/J,I.I2. I'lm.mre . of the cntt.ymeme
Since tI,e rhelorical syll ogism is made for tI, e pllhlic (a"d not
under the ;:llI spi ccs of science), psychological considerations arc
, .. An ("lIlto'MInIl"rHo1lt ll (""':': ,1", Mil""r: I. if 10 Itlll II ..... f" willi
\t l ""ol'!t,,IIt""'1I1 m. l o \lI .. ""," (,"m n:ll ul:l1 bw ;uli.l,h(" l ij!lu lI( flllll1 f'lf"ru,"'I ;
no w. M." I fur Mllun; 04 . proo(s ti,:,,,,,," (wIn (:.<:15; So h ("ll((" " is
(" 1 Mllon ,,, Ctr..liIKo
Ilu
o
III:Utlln 1.c.""; lIIro \(" I1If' "I" i .. a f" 'lnulol ("lI r'(" ..... l'!tll nnly:t ,-'<"nna lily
"h,n' 1.\ ;K III '1,,'1. (111:11 c<'" 1"0(" '" :lvl,idcd); (I" A,i"" 'IIt". Ihr .. Itf ,II(" I{t"imi
1.\ :II ""' :IY" lilt" ,0,1",1 . :1\ c"hl,nj! II, drfi nili,.n ,.( 111(" ("nIIlYIIl("mc hy Ihe ,", "11'111 I" II .. I'ltO"II.\(",";
1"'1 , I, ., .llt
O
t 1." "ll o,'llwI, ' IICI:III.\ wlwi tldine- ,t.(" r. nlhyn'c m(" hy " 111,nC:II IIIII," 11, (" ''''''1111
i, 1
0
",0", j"ll v :I "t ' ' 111 I in" " : .. il :.1.0;(1 I >ec, .. i, 1II:Il 1y 11,;11 I WI' it III.. :111: elll Ie , ..,0,1
in ;0 \ tIIl!I,O ril e ("lIIhyrm: mar ic .srllr("1l11f1 (("x:1I1I1'11: : " MIIII :'!. tI\I nn! 1.:111'11 " :m
tl llln" " oll 1""" o, r O) o
60
ELEMENTS
pertinent, and Ari slotic insists upon thclIl . The cnthyrncmc l.li1s
the plCflSlITCS of a progress , of :-1 journey: (lne se fs out (rulll a 1"01111
which has no need to he proved and (rom thefl' olle proceeds toward
another point which docs need to he proved; Olll' has the "J.!rccahlc
feeling (even if under duress) of discovering something new hy a
kiml of natural contagion. of capillarity whi ch e'trm!' the known
(the opinahle) towarJ the unlmown. However, 10 produce all it s
pleasure. this progress mllst he superviseJ: the n.: asoning IIIl1st nut
he carried too far, and nne ffil lst not P:l SS through all the stages in
order to reach a conclusion: that would he tircsollu .. ' (the cpicitci -
rema must he lIsed only on grand occasions); fllr one must cuntcnd
with thc ignorance of the li steners (ignorance that
incapacity to infer by many and to follnw a n:; lsoning at
length); or rather: stich ignor;t nce must he l'xpll1itcd hy the
listener the feeling tltat he has hrought it to an md himself, hy his
own mental power: the enthymemc is not a syllogi sm trtlncated hy
dc(ec t or corruption, but hcGltIsc thc li stener Illtlst he grillllcd the
pleasure of cOlltrihuting to the construction of the argulllent; it .is
something like the pleasure of compl etillg a giv(' n pattern or grid
(cryptograms. crossword puzzles). Port -Royal, though always re -
garding language Jefecliv(' in relation tn mind- and the
/ enthymcl1lc is a syllogism of language- recogni zes this pleasure of
\. incolnpletc reasoning: "Such suppression a p:lrt the
nallers thc vanity of those to whom one IS spcaklllg, hy leavll1g
something to their intelligence; and hy shortening the di scourse,
it makes it stronger and livclier";ll yet we sec the ethi cal change
(in rela'hm ttl Aristotle) : the pleasure (l the ellthynlcme is assigned
less to .. crentive autonomy ( Ill the part o( the li sttncr tilan to an
excellence o( conci.<iion, trilllnphantiy given as the siJ.,(1l o( a .<i url,lus
of thought ovcr bngu:lge (tllOtlght trillI1lphs hy Icngt h OVl'r 1;111 -
guagc) : "onc of the chicI' hemtics o( a di sl.:lHlrse is to he (till o(
/I Au C'l(;lIllI' I,. or I' unfrac t ,o n : ;l Vl' f\ I' fr"l11 l }vid' \ M, .!,/I " whu II \ "" ..
t t
". "', , /,,,rw /Wfll"rl' 1111 /1f1l\1I/, ,,,,'/U' I .... . I" ' .IV( \" ' '' . 11"'11
v"ry t' t'J!:1I1I ('II' 'vlllt' me .. .
1 n l" dt .. YIIHI 0 It' wit" C llt sa ve c m III'W. 11t :IYI' "1'1' 11 ,,, Y"".
Itt' nc(' I cllultl tlt'SIIIlY VIlli . )
61
Il1c;tninJ.,( and to give occasion to the mind to form a thought of KTClltCT
ex lent Ih<ln iu cxlm!ssiun . . . "
B.l.l), TIle enlhymematic premises
The place we start from in order to follow the pleasant path of
the cnlhymcme is its premises. This is a known place, and certain,
hut not with scientific certainty: with our humfln certninly. And
what is it we regarJ as certain! 1. what falls within the realm of
the senscs, what we sce and hear: the sure indi ces , tckmeria; Z. what
fall s within the realm of meaning. that on which men have generally
reached agreement, what is esta!,lisheJ hy laws. what has passed
into usage (",he goJs exist," "honor thy raren,s," etc.): these arc
tlte pmh"hilities. eikflta, or. generically. the pmh"hle (eikosl;
J. hetween thesc two types of humtln "certainty," Ari stotle posit s
a morc fluid category: the semeia, the signs (3 rhing whi ch serves
to make allolher understooJ, IJcr ..;wx1 lilias res intdligilur) .
8.1.14. TIle tekmerion, the wre ina ..
The tekmer;on is the sure index. the necessa ry sign, or cven Uthe
indestructihle sign," thc one whi ch is what it is and cannot he
otherwise. A woman Ilns given hirth: thi s is the slIre index (tr k-
merion) that she has had intercourse with a man, This premi se is
closely re lalcd to',he one which innllgllnltes the scie ntific syllogism.
,hough it is b:l scd only nn universality o( experience. As alw;)ys
when we exhullle this olJ logical (or rhetori cal) material, Iv> are
struck hy it function so renJily among ti,e works of so-called
mass culturc-'-to the point where we may wonder i( Aristotle is not
the philosopher of that culture and consequently does not est"hli sh
the criticism which Gill have sotne grasp of it; thcse in fact,
mohili zc current examples uf physical "cvidence" whi ch mOlY serve
as point s (If departure (or implicit reasoning, for n ce rtain rational
pl'Tccpfion (If the unfolding of the anecdot e, In Golt.lfill$!CT, ,here is
all l,ll'UroCUlioll hy water: this is ol known phcl1omenon, has no
llccd ttl he proved, it is a "natural" prcmi se , II rckHl('riol1; clsewllcre
(ill til e salll e film) a Wtl111;)11 dies I.H.'CItISC her hody heen
62 ELEMENTS
p\;lIed; here, wc have to know that hcing painted with gold keeps
the skin from and therefore provokes flsphyx ia: this, )'t.' illg
rare, needs to hc estahli shed (hy all explanation); IH'- fKe it is nut
a lekmerioll. or fit least it is " suspended" until an ant cn:dcllt cert ainty
is estahli shcd (asphyxia causes tlcath) . It (ollows that the ccklllrritl
do not have , histori cally, the fine stahility whic h Aristot Ie attrihu.es
to them: wklt i!'i public "ccrt "linty" depenJs on pllhlic "knowlnh.:c"
and this varics with periods and societies; to reliliTI to Quilllili;I1l ' s
example (and belie it), I am told t h;lt certain PUPUI :lIioll s make no
connection between giving hirth and the sexual rllatiun (II\!: c hild
slceps in Ihe mocher, God wakens i.) .
B. 1. 15. Eikus. the probable
The second tyre of (human, not scientifi c ) "certainl Y" whi ch
call serve as a premise (or the cnthymc111c is Ihe proh;lhl c, ;t crtlcial
notion in Thi s is a gennal notioll hasl'll on Ille
judgment whi ch men have m"Jc hy imperfect expnimcllt s ;md
induc tions (Perelman proposes ca II ing it I he I"c[cmhlc) . III A ri s-
tolelian prohahility, there me two nuclei: I. the notion of
;'I S di stinct frolll the notion of I.mj\lcndl: tilt, IInivers;11 is ne(.{'sS<lry
(it is the attrihute of science), the general is nor ; it is a human
"generality," ultimately determined stati st ically hy Ihe opinion (If
the grcalcst number; 2. the possihility pf the conlr;1rY; of
the cnthymcmc is received hy the Pllhli c as a slIre syll ogism, il seellls
to start (rom an opinion helieved to he "as hard as roc k" : hut in
relation to science, the prohahl e .. dmit s o( it s contrary: within the
limit s of human experience anll of ethical lifc, whi ch an.' those of
cikos. the contrary is ncver impossible: (lile G1T1Tlot (orest'(. with ; IIlY
(scientifi c ) certainty the reso lu tions of a (ree heing: "a man in gllod
health will sec the sun tomorrow," "a f"t1H..' r ( hildn' n,"
"" theft cOlllmitt ed withollt breaking in rl1w;t II;l ve hn'n ; 111
joh," e tc. very likely, hut the Ctlntr;uy is still pOSSlhll'; lilt, ana lyst.
the rhetori c ian pern: ivcs the force of opinions, hut in all
honesly he keeps them :11 a disf;lIl ce hy intrnducil1J.! them wit h an
The Old H.IIClfJTic: eln
6)
esl" (>II I", ic), which de;1fs him in Ihe eyes of science, where the
contrar y is nevt.'r possihle,
11. 1.16. Semcion. ,lie .<ign
The .'icIIIl'ion, third point of departure (ur the enthymemc,
is;1 l1lur(' ;1I11hi).!uous index, less cenain than the l ekmerirnl , Traces
o( hl()( )4. 1 suggest a Ilnmler, hut Ihis is not a ce rrainty: stich hlood
can result frllln :1 nosehleed or a sacrifice. For the sign to he
vill cing, there must he othcr concomitant signs; or :1).!ain: .-(Ir the
sigl1 (0 (('asc to he polyscmi c (the semcion is in fa ct the polysemi c
sign), a context must he H.'sorted to. Atabnta was not a virgin,
..s ince she would Ttlll through the woods with hoys: for Qtlinli lbn,
tltis remains Itl ht' proved; the proposition is in fact so uncertain
that he rejecls Ihe outside the Orfltor's Icclme: the Cl rator
cannot apprdlt' nd the semcion in order to transform it, hy :111 en.
thymcl11ati c conclusion, into ;1 certainty.
0.1.1 7. I'r.",i"" of rile en//lymcmc
Inspfar as the c,." nthYl1lcme is tl "puhlic" rea"ioning, it was li c it hl
extend its pr;lCtice outside the judicial, and ,t is possihl c (n meet
wich ic (llllsidc rhelmic (and olltside Anli4Ili'y) . Arislotle himself
:-; ttldi cd I he /mlLlicaI sylioRi.wl, or enthymemc, wh ISC c(l nclusion is
a deci sion;11 :lCt; the major prcmise is occupied by a current ma xim
(cikos); in the minor rremise, the agent (myself, for instance) not es
th;lt lu.: finds in the situMion covered hy the maj or premi se;
he concllldes hy a dec; ision of conduct. 11,)w docs il happen, tht' l1,
that the cOllclllSiull so often contmdi ts the 1ll11jllr premise, and
that the ;1Ctioll n'sists knowledge? It hecause, v" ry oftt' n, there
is a d.: vi :llinll (ruin the major to the minor prcmise: the minor
premise stlrrqllitiously implies another maj or prt' mise: "drinking
alcohol is har11lflll to man; now, I am a man; h (" llCC i 1111IS' nol
drillk" and ye l, dl' spile Ihi s Ilne enlhYIllt.:rlle, I drink ; thi .'i is h('clIIse
I "secretl y" rei n l"tI .mother maj or premise: the and thl'
it:c cp ld (jllt' ll ell Ill y thirst, qU4.." H: hing Illy thi rs t is a J.!ood thing (;1
major prl' lIIi se fallliliar ttl adverti sing :lIld I tl harroom
64
ELEMENTS
tions). Anot her possihlc extension of the cnt h ymclI1c: into the
ucolJ" and rational languages , ;11 once Ji stant and puhlic, such ; IS
instituti onal hmguages (puhlic diplomacy, (tlr (' )(;1I11P14.: ) : C hinese
st udents having staged a (lclllonsu ;Hion in (mnt of the Al1ll'ri can
el1lha"y in MosCllw (March 1965), Ihe J elllonslral ion having heen
suppresseJ by the Russi;"!n pol ice, and the Cldnl' sc gU
V
l ' rTll11l: nt
hflving protested aga inst this S\lppression, .. Soviet noll' ;lIl swt: rs the
C hinese pmlcsi by a sl'l emliJ cpichcircllla , worthy pf C icero (cf.
sulrra, B. I. II) : I . maj(l r prclnisc: eikos. general rl l('rc l'xi.H
dilJlorna.ic norms, rfslJCcl ed I>y (I ll cmHllrics; Z. proof of liH.: major
premi se: 'he C/linese r11f mselves resIICe' , in tlleiT UWJI ( tJWHry.
nonns of reCelJlion; J, minur premise: now, rIll' C /l i llf ,'it: SWdl' Jl lS, in
MosCOUJ, luwe tJiokuecl f/l ese 4, proof of tlu,' minor premi se:
the nccount of the demonstration (in5uhs, sfn,'t.' f ml(l olhn
actions fl1cflti nned in rile nimi1utl (odd; 5, the conclusion is 110 1 IIt1ered
(it is <1n e nthYl1leme). hut it is cle.u: it is the IllHe it self ;IS a rl' jectioll
of the C hinese protest : the adversary has 1lC..'t'1l slul\YIl ill
Jiction with thc eikfls :mJ wil h himself.
8.1.18. Place. lopos. locus
T he classes of enthYl11cmat ic premi ses have h(' cil ;ITt icul atl' d . hut
we must still fill these cI<1sscs, find premiscs: we ha ve Ill e main
forms, hut how (0 invent t he contents! This is the ;IJ.!un izing 4"l'S-
lion always roseJ hy Rhetoric "nJ whi ch it st' e ks t tl answer: \IIlulf
is to be said! Whence the importance of rhe answer, att cstt' d to hy
thc brcodth :mJ Ihc success of thai part of the /Il vellri" which is
responsible for supplying with its cuntl'nts and whi ch
hegins here: the TnlJics , the premises com he derived from
certain IILtces . Whal is 0 place! It is, says Arist otl e, th:1I in wh ic h
a plurality uf ortttori cal rC:lsollings coinc ide, Places. S'lYS
arc "certain general hcads II I which can he altached all the I'rt K,fS
lIsed in the va ri ous mailers treated"; Of tlJ,!: lin (LllllY) : " gl'lInal
opini o ns whi ch remind those who conSilII dl l' lll uf ;111 sides hy
The Old Rhcroric: an dide-,"
65
which a ' ''''jeci (;111 be considcrcJ. " Yel Ihe mctophoric app",oc h
to place is 1110re si gnificant ,han it s ahstmct defi!lition , Ma ny
aph"rs have heen "scJ In identify placc. First nf all, why IILrce!
l3ec:lusc, says Ari stotle, in ordc r to remember things, it sullices fo
recognize the place whcre they happen tn he (p,"ce is Ihcrcfore Ihc \
Clel1ll' Ilt o( :-In asso ciation of idc<1s, of a condit ioning, of a
of a mnemo n ics); places then arc not the arguments themselves hut
the comp;Irt me nts in which they arc <lrmngcd, Hence every im;t gc
conjuininJ.! the (lotion of a space with th<1' of storage, of it local ..
iza t ion wit h an l'xtraction: a rcgioll (where one G ill find argument s),
a vein of some miueTlJ/ , a drde. a a :l wf ll , an ane'llI/ .
:I fremll,), :I nd evcn 0 IIiRCOII ./1I 1/e (W. D. Ross); "PI:lccs," S:lys
l1umarsai s, "arc the cell s where everyone COl n find, so to speak, the
suJ1stance of a di scourse and argU:'lents o n all sorts of suhjects. " A
seh;)I;!!;ti c logician, exploiting rhe domestic nature of place ,
pares it to a i:lhd whi ch indicaies the content of :l r(ct.' llf acle
(/lyxiJwlI for C icero, the nrJ.:lI mc nt s. de. iving (rom places,
will prc"' ''t t hemselves for thc case to be orgueJ " like the Ictters
for the word to he written"; hence pl:1Cl':' form that very special
sture house cOll stitllt ed by the alphahc t : a of for ms withollt )
III canil1J.: ill themselves, hut determining mea ning hy sc:iectiun,
arr;lIlgelllt.'llt, actuali zation, In rel ation to place, what is the
h ;Ippcars that we ca n distingui sh three Succcs.o;; ive definitions, or
:I( k';1SI ,hrl'c ori entations of the word, The Topi cs is--or has htx 'n:
I. a Z. a griJ of emply forms; J. 0 storchouse of Ii li ed
furms,
1l.1.1 1J. TI,l' Topic..: a method
<..)rig in;dl y ( fullowi ng Aristodc's TII/,ica, '1nt cri or to hi s Rhetoric)'
rhe Tnpks W;IS a coll ection of cr mHllunplaccs of dial ecli c. i. e. of
till' syl lngi sl11 hased on prohahil ity (int{' rmC't.iiary hl' lwec,,' 11 (Trlain
:l lld l' flll,ahl ..: kIHl\vll,dge), then Ari sre ltl c Inakl' s a 111(' 1111 )(.1 el ir,
ilion' pract ical I";m dialec tic , a 1nt't1Hlll whic h "cnahll'S liS , nil ilny
slIhjl' ct prtlpnsc,,'d, to suppl y con4.:illsinns drawn {rorn prnhahle rl'a -
66 ELEMENT S
sons. n This meaning- of the Topics as a mel hoJ - was ahle to
persist or at Icast 10 TCappe;]r at interval s throughout rhetoric's
history: in lime the mcthoJ hccOlItH.., the flrI (an OTJ,.!;ll1i2l'd knuwlldgc
wi til a v iew to instruct ion: discilJliHlI) ()( finding arJ.! lIllu: nt s (Isidt lrc).
or further: a gro1lp ofllhricf anJ cClsy 111l';1nS (or finding the suhsl;mcc
of even on suhjects wl lich arc cnlircly IlIlkIHIWI'" (Lamy)-
we can underst and philosophy's sll spicions wilh reg. lTd to such a
oncth"J .
B. 1.20. The Topic", grid
The second meaning is that of a network of (tmus , (If a
cybcnletic process to whi ch we suhj ec t tilt' 1I1;II t' fl tl l we want 10
transform into OJ persuasive di scourse . M;ltt crs Illust he rcpR'st.',u ed
thus: a subjccr (CJlwcsri(}) is given to the orator; in urder to find
argumc nt s. the orator "passes" hi s suhj ect nvl'T a grid pf cmpty
forms: (rom thc contac t bctween thc suhject il nd each ctunpa rtmc.:nt
(cach "placc") of the grid (of thc Torics) arpl"a" a pll" i!.le idea ,
an cnthymcmatic premise. There exi sted in AnTiquit y a pedagt'J,! ic
ve rsion of this proceJure: the rhrcill or "useful " cxercise was it Test
of virtuosity given to students whi ch consi sTed in "p:lssing" a themc
through a series of places: {luis! quid! "hi! IJllihm CUT!
oJo! cllwru.lo! Taking hi s inspiration from anciellt Tnpi cs. Lamy, in
the seventeenth century, proposes the following grid: J!l'nre,
ference, definition, enume ration uf parts, etYl11oluJ!Y, conjuJ,!illiolls
(thi s is the associative field uf the verhal rOtH). (t 'ITl(larisol1, re#
pugna ncc, cRects. causcs, etc. Let us suppose that we must prodllce
a di scourse on literature; we "dry up" (with good reason), hilt
fortun3tcly we possess Lamy's Topi cs: we can d,l' n, at least , ask
o urselvcs questions and try t o answer thcm: ttl what '.'genre" will
we :lttach lit e rature r ;lTt! di scoursd c ult ur;ll product iun! If it is all
" ;l rt I" how does it differ fnHn the other art :-.! Ilow ma ny part s afe
we to ;l ssign to it, and whicl, ones! What docs the l' IYl1IlIluJ.!y (If
the word suggest ttl us! it s relalion to it s Ill orphological rH.." i.L:hhors
(fircmT), lil em/, et c. ) ! With what docs literature a
..
The Old Rhelmic: an aide#memoirt
67
relation of re pugnance! Money! T r1lth! e rc.
n
The conjunction of
the grid "nJ the </11<,",51;0 resembles that of the themc "ml it s preJ.
icates, the suhj ect and its attrihutes: the ""ttrihutive Torics' achieves
it s "I"'gee in the tahlcs o( the Lulli sts (ars ilrev;.I) : the gcneral
attributes arc kinds of places. - We sec thc range o( thc topical
grid: the metaphors whi ch aim at place (rol>os ) slIggeM it 4
uite
clearly: the arguments are It;,/'Ien, they lurk in rl"gions, ,kpths (rom
whi ch Ihey lIIust he J",wn, wakeneJ, etc. : thc Topi cs is the midwife
of the LucHI : it is a form which art iculfttcs contents and therehy
product,s fragme nt s of meaning, intelligibl c unit s.
B.I .2 1. TIle Topics: a .<lorcllOu.<e
Til" l' l..ccs arc in princ ipl c cmpty forms; hilt thesc (orms quickly
tended to he fil leJ, always in the samc way, to re411irc
conlent s, at first contingent. then repc.lt ed , reifi cd. Thc Topics
hccaml' a 5torchollse o( ste reotypes, of conseCT:1ted themes. of full
"pieces" whic h arc almost ohligatoriiy employed in the treallncnt
of :lny suhj ect. Whence the hi storical amhiguity of the expres..o;; ion
(ro/>oi koinoi, loci cflJrmumi) : I . thl'y arc empty forms
common til all arguments (the emrti er they are, the more COlnmon,
cf. infra B. 1. 21); 2. they arc stereotypes, hackneyed rropositions.
The Topic5, a (ull Morehouse: this mC:lning not hut
it is alre"dy that of the Sophists who had (cit the necessi ty o (having
a t"hl e (If fhings commonly spoke n of :lnJ \ ,n whi ch one must not
he HCtlrn('feJ . " This rcifi CCl tion of the Topics has hel'n regularly
ex(endcd, lx-yond Aristotle, thro ugh the u Uin authors; it has
triumphed in neo rhctoric and was "hsolulcly general in the Mid,l\e
Ages. C llrtius given a li st of these o hlig<ttory
r " n icd hy tlll'ir lixcd trcatmcnt. Hcre are somc of these rei fl ed places
(in the Middle Ages): I. to/'"S of alTected moJcsty: evcry orator
II Ti ll"' 'UI'" :,1 :lIt' "'fUr;'!." ,I!t y II;o \,<, nil I(" b""f! III ' 1. ((" , ,. " II 11th. " :11111 h:Wl.
,.d"lv I'C I " h.",.d,l'tl h, 'III 1II, ... lnn in.\ lfl lt"illll . (' 1(" .; 1111 d, II.hl : yt ' lilt" '.\ ul-j cc,.\" (.,/
.. I \ ldll .. lI .. w ri d, III ie' 1II, ,,,,mtlIl . F\lt' II ;'1 ' I "' ''It', IlIlId("I " :II1.1 tI, :" ' "l!"
"I ,III' "\1,1 ,11" " I !II' 1.", h;t ("("; ,I ,IIm:lIt IX;II " 10..; 1\ " "nt,hi"f.: I, h "'c .\1111
ti l(' ,Idlll y' h":t MIII'I" ,- ,I' ll' rI. :1I1 " 'rin .
66 ELEMENTS
must declare that he is crushed hy his subject, that he is incom-
petent, it is ccn ainly no coquetry to say as mllch, etc. (el.cILmrio
propter infinnilatem);" 2. ta,..os of the puer seni/is: thi s is the Illogical
theme of the youth endowed with perfect wisdom or of the old man
endowed with the grace and beauty of youth; J. ' o/>os of the locus
amocn",: the ideal landscape, Elysium or raraJise (trees, groves,
spring, and meadows) has furni shed a good number of lit erary "de-
scriptions" (cf. ekphrasis, A.S. 2l , but its origin is judicial : any de-
monstrative relation of a case made necessary til : QTRHnu:' fItwn a
loco: one had to establi sh proofs on the nature of the pl ace where
the action occurred; topography then invaded lit erature (from Virgil
to Barres) ; once reified, the tapas has a fixed content, inderendent
of context: olive trees and lions are set in northcnl regions: lanclsclIlJc
is detached from place, for its functi on is to constitu'e a universal
sign, that of Nature: landscape is the cuhural sign of Nature;
4. the ad)ruIla (impossibi/ ia): this tol"" descri bes :IS sudJen/y com-
patible contrary phenomena, ohj ects, and beings, a paradoxical
conversion functioning as the disturbing sign of a world "upside
down": 'he wolf flees before ,he ,nee/> (Virgil); thi s luI"" fl oudshes in
the Middle Ages, when it pemlitled a criti cism uf the times: it is
the theme of the grumbler, of the old man who says "now I' ve seen
everything" or " this is really too much. ""All the .. tul>ui, and even
before the Middle Ages, are detachable pieces (a prnof of their
powerful reificati on) that can be mobilized, translxlfted: they arc
the elements of a syntagmatic combine; their placement was subject
11 Tht: uC\U(Jlio prnpfn infirmilLllt m Slill Jl rt vaib quit t: (ummunly In (1111 Cnrul{lr,
this humumU5 u cwotio by Michd COo.lnlnt (lL NII'''''t'' M;uch .. , IQM) : "I am
nut J,!oinJ,! In Ihis ... t:de, Gospr: 1 IS my 5ubjt:ct, ;mJ wily nUl SoU ufl, I ",m
nul up In it , t: tc."
H Twu ('x;1mpl(' s o( atl,ndlil:
Ddillt' : t o Iht: hbck CtoW tll(' 5\\1 ::. lIow shall ioi ll('d: 'IoIlIln 1\1 10\1(' ,11('
tiI'Yt, far lmm tht n('st , sh all ft.lf l('M btal 10 tht sayaJ!(' 1m \'tarl alltl all 1m
luyc."
Thi-llphilc .Ic Viall : "TI,ls 51,e:l m h:lckw:luJ III !>I IUl e-C, rm "II Iht:
bloud 0"W5 rUl'" Ihis rock , .. \lipt:r cClupl rs wilh .. I"o('a, . At .. p :m am ie- nt Iowrr, a
'(' ;u s aJ';ut a yuhurt: ; rut: bums wilhlll IIIC ice, lil t: sun II;IS fUrncd hbdt, I M" t: tht: moun
",,",. ut 10 (:.11 , ,hal ut: r: has It:(' ilS plact . "
.,
T/u.' Old t ill
69
tn a sinj.!lc rcserv;llion: they coulJ nnt he put in /JeToTario (perora-
l ion), whi ch is enl irciy contingcnt, (or it mwit SlIllllnmizc the orario,
Ilowever, eve r since and even toJay , how lU.my stcreotyped COIl -
cltlsitms!
B. 1. 22. Some Torics
Ll" tiS refurn 10 our (or that is wh;lt will all ow liS tn
(ulluw the "d.:!'iccllt" o( our rhelori c;d trec, o( whi ch it is rhe grear
di strihllfive place. Antiquity and classicism have proJuced se vnal
Topics ddined ei ther hy the allinitive grollPing of places, or hy that
of slIhj ccts. In the fi rs t case, we can cit e the general Topics of Port -
Royal, inspired hy the German logi cian Clallherg (16S4); the Topi cs
of Lamy, already ci ted, affords some not ion of it : there arc places
o( grammar (ctynH,I(, j.!y, conjugafa), places (.( logic (genus, pn'pert y,
acci dl'nt, diffcrencc, definition, di vision), the placcs o(
metaph ysics (final cause, efficient calise, effect, whole, parts,
pos ing terlll s): thi s evidently an Ari stotcii an Topics. In thc second
ca.'e, whi ch is thaI of Topics hy suhj ects, we can cite the follOWing
Topi cs: I. tilt., oraturical Topics proper, whi ch includes three topi cs:
a topics of rcasoning, a topics o( mores (elhc: practi cal
ge rlCC, virtue, aOt'erion , Jcvotion) and a topics o( passions (pCJl/l(f:
ange r, Ipvc, (ca r, shame, and thei r contrari 's); 2. a 10/';0 of ./le
part o( a possibl e rhetori c o( rhc cOllli c; C icero and Quin-
tikon liSl ed several places of the lallghahlc: hodily defects, mental
defects , inci dents, extcriors, ctc. ; 3. a roIJ;n: thi s includes
Ihe variowi sOllrces (roln which the theologi ans can draw their
arj.!lIlIIl' ut S: Scriptllre , Fathers, Cutlnc:i ls, etc . i 4. a ro/Jin of
or lol )io of inIl.IRilidliflJ1 ; we find Ihis sket ched in Vico: "The (ollnd ...' r!C;
o( civi li zafi llll l"lIl1sion tn the ;mt criorit y of r oetryl turned to a
of in whi ch thcy IInited (he properti es , fhc qualiti es, or
ti, l' relal ieli lS t,( indi viJlIals (lr \,( r;lCt.'S anJ e ll1pl llyed I (lln cretely
I n (Prill their poctic /.!c nre"; Vico speaks el sewhere o( the " rmit/cnal."
of til(' IlrIlIR;'lCIr if 111" ; in this topi cs o( we lIlily sec an 'UH.TSI! Ir
u( our dlt.'II1:1li c crilici .'i lll, whic h prllct.'ed.c; hy ca lq.! ori rs and not hy
authors: Ib chd .. rd's in short : the asccnsional. Ihe cavt.'rnnus, the
70
ELEMENTS
torrential, the mirroring, the slumbering, etc. <lrc so many "pl aces"
to which the poets' images may be referred.
B.l.23. Commonplaces
The Topics. strictly speaking (the oratorical. Aristotelian topics).
the one which depends on I,isteis enlchnoi. as npposcd to t he topics
of characters and the topics of passions, includes two parts, two
subtopics: 1. a general topics. that of commonplaces; Z. an applied
topics. that of special places. For Aristotle. COllnnonlJ/accs (1Olmi
minoi, loci communissimi) have a meaning quite different (rom the
one we attribute to the expression (under the influence of the third
meaning of the word ToPics. cf. sulJfa. B. I. Z I) . Commonplaces arc
stereotypes, but on the contrary form<11 places: being
gener.1 (the gener.1 is appropriate to the probabld. they arc com-
mon to all subjects. For Aristotle. these commonplaces arc of three
sorts: \. the possible/impossible; confront ed by time (past. future).
these terms afford a topic question: can the thing have been dOIll'
or not. could it be done or notr This place can be applied to relat ions
of contrariety: if it was for a thing to begin. it is possible
for it to end. etc.; 2. existent/non-existent (or reol/unreal); like the
precedin!;. this place can be confronted by time: if a thing unlikely
to occur has nonetheless occurred, what is morc likely has certainly
occurred (happened); there are building materials here: it is likely
that a house will be built (future); 3. morel/e,,: this is the place of
the great and the small; its mainspring is "with all the more reason"
(a fortiori): there is a strong ch.nce that X has attacked his neigh-
bors. since he has attacked his own father. - Although common-
places. by definition. are unspecialized, each is better suited to one
of the three oratorical genres: the pOSlible/iml)()"ible Inatches the
deliberative (is it possible to do this?). the real/unreal matches
the judicial (diu the crime take place?). the more/l"s matches the
epiueictic (prai se or blame).
71
B.1.l4. Sredal
Special place' (cide. idi,,) are places (ropoi) appropriate t(1 'pecific
suhjects; arc generally particu' Ir truths, special pnlp,
(lsifiuns; they are the experimenta l truths attached to politics, law,
finances. to W;lr, naval actions, etc. However. since these pl<-lcCS
(lol,oi) ;nc inc..'xtricahly linked to the praclice of disciplines. o( genres,
(I( particular suhjects, they cannot he enutncmteJ. The thcorct iGl l
prohlem must ht' posed nevertheless, The extension of our "tree"
will ,hilS dl'pend on confronting ItIvcnlio, such ,IS we have known
it to this point, wilh the spec ial n"ture of the content. This con,
frontal ion is the quaf.Hio.
13.l.l5. Tflcsi . and flypo/flc . i . ., causa
The (IIUIC.Hio is the form of ,he special nature o( discollrse. In all
the operations idt'a lly posed hy the rhetorical "machine," a new
variahlc is introduced (which is. actll ally, when it is a tn:1tter of
(TcmiJl1.! the discourse, ,he variahle of the point of departure): the
confent, the point at dehate, in short. the referential. This refer;
entia l. hy contingent definition, can nonetheless he into
two major forms, which constitute the two chief types of (,lwe.Hio:
I. The I,".silio" or Ihesis /rroIJOsiwm): thi s is a general ques,
tion- "ahstr'lCf." we wOlIlJ say today- hut specified, referred (ot",
crwi sc it wou ld not call (or nny special places), though without
(;lIlJ this is its mark) :"Iny par;(lncter of pl'lee or of time (for example:
11111.<1 olle "'''TTy!); 2. The hYI>rIlhesi.1 (hYI)()rhe.li .I): this is a rmriclliar
qllestion rhat specifics facts. cirCll tnst:"lnCes , persons, in short :l time
and a place (f(lr instance: should X - it is ev ident that in
rhetoric the words fl1esis :"Inc..! have an entirely difkrcllt
meaning from that we arc aCcllst\HlleJ to. Now, the hypnthesis,
that tClllporalized ilnJ localized point at del1iltc. has another, pres-
tigillll.s n;lIl1e: (l1U.<;(1. Cdl4.<;(l is a nC,l!lIlium. ;111 afbir, a deal. II C0111 '
hin;lI ion of various cl;nlingcncies; a pruhlematic point in whi ch
cOlltingency is engaged, cspecially tcmporal cOrHi ngellcy. Since
there arc three tenses present, future)' we ha ve three
types (If li lll .Sil, and each type will correspond to 011(' of the three
I
n ELEM ENTS
oratori cal genres that we alrcaJy know: here. then. they arc-
cstahlishcd. locatcJ (ltl our rhcrori cal tree . We c;ln
assign them their attributes:
Gcme A UflirltCt End S,.f,}Ccr Tillie
Ut'/ u lm-
( :""11""11-
illl! (I) ,.Lttn
HF.I.IIl f. R- I1lcrnhcr ... of
to rer-
1lStfuil ptI!-.",hl,'
slIOldcl future c)tt' I1lj11a
AT IVE an ;lsscmlliv
Jis.o;uadt.
harmful
jud,::cs
tn ;lCCIISC! jmtl (' Ill 11\,- fl' a 11
JUUl(.' lAl
defend unjust
P ;IS(
IIWIHl' \IIHc;,1
s pcc t <1 It)fS, 10 rraisel
:1l1ll'lifvinl!
f. rIIlE1CTIC
puhlic hlOlmc ugly
pr escnt 1U11tt'/ lcs'c;
(h)
(:.) llominanl mC1hoJ of Tf':l fwC minl.!
(11) A variety of imluCl io n. ;m ('x(, IIII,lum n ricnlw tow;uJ the (If the
pt' rsun pra iscJ (by implici t compari sons)
8 .1.26. Status causae
Of these three genres, it is the judicial whi ch rect.'i veti the 1110s1
thoruugh commcntary in AntiquitYi the rhch)riGlllrec cXl erHls it
beyon<J its neighhors. The special places of the judicial arc call ed
stLUus A status causae is the heart of the the point
to be judged; this is the moment where the first shock hetween
adversaries, parties, occurSi :lnticipating this confl ict. the orator
must seck out the lJearinK of the quaestio (whence the words:
v'
sfatu .. The .HaWs c((mae greatly excited the taxonomi c passion (If
Anti4l1ity. The simplest classifiGltion li sts Ihree Jlalll s (we
arc dealing with the forTlls the contingent can take} : I . foujeclUrc :
did thi s occur or not (an sit)! is the first place heca"se it is the
imflleJi;lh: result of a first conflic t o( assertions: fC(l sfi / flflU {cd: (Ill
fcccri l! (did you do it! no, it wtlsn't me, is it he!); Z. definilion
("uid sit!): what is the legal qua lification of the fact. IInder what
(jllridical ) namc is it 10 be classified! is it a crimd a s;H...
J. quality ("lillIe sit !): is the deed permitted. II seflil. e x( ,",ahle
'
This
is the order o( att enuating ci rcllmstances. To these duct..' places
added" (ourth. tlf a procedura l order: thi s is Ihe
of discl aiming competence (realm o( Cas:o; ali on) . - ( )uce
Tlu' Okl an
73
the arc posited. l)m/)(Jtio is exhausted; we proceed (rom
the tlu.' pretical t' bhpr:Jtion o( Ji scourse (rhetori c is;) fccllll e, spec#
Illative practi cd 1o di scourse it self; we come to the point wht' rc the
"machine" o( Ihl' or;ltor, of the ej!o, must h,.. arliculated arollnd
tilt, mach inc o( the adversary, who on his side will have covered
Ihc salin' J.:rollnd, performed the s;"me t;lsks. This arti cillation, thi s
IlI cslli rlJ.:. is ()hvitlli sly ag(mistic: it is the ai.'i ft1 1f cl!io, (l"i cli(HI p(linl
hctwccn the two parti es.
n. 1.27. S"hjcctivc or ctlJical proof..
TIll" l'Illire IITIII, "ill (the body of logi cal p".,r., wh:>se end is ttl
havillg hcell passed through, we must return to the initial
dir hot"rny that " pened the field "f h"'Clltill allli g" hack lip to the
suhj c(1 ivt., ur l' t hit-al proofs. those that depend nn mot.JiJlR rhe IIC..' tlren.
This is I he dt.' ranlnenl (If psychologic;l l Rhet oric. Two nalnes pre;
vail hen': Plalo (t ypes of di scourse must he found that .u c aLi :lpl ed
to types of and Pascal (the inner rno"cl11ent o( the (II her' s
IhuliglH he di scovered) . As (or Ari stotl e, he ac knowledges :I
psychul(lj..! ical rhl'lori c, hut si nce he continues In make it depend
(In a fer/me, it is ;J "projected" psychology: psychology ;15 e ve ryone
imagines if : nol "what is in the mind" o( the puhli c. hut what thc
puhli c helil'v('s others "h:lv(' in mind": this is ; In enaoxon . a "proh.
ahlt ... " psyc!lolllJ.!Y, as opposed to "trllc" psyc1" llogy. as the t.nthy#
111l'II\e is opposed to the "trlle" (demonstrative ) sylltlgisrn. Befon.
Ar islotl e . techl1oJ.!raphcrs recommended ttlking into i1 ccounf sHch
psyc holt 1j..!ical slales as pity; hut Ari stutl e W;lS innovative in can.'(ull y
dassi fyinJ.! die passions not according to what Ihey arc, hut :Il>
cording to wll ;lt they arc helieved to he: he docs 1101 dcsc rihc thclII
scil-l1lili call y, hut out the argument s whic h can he used willi
rl' sl'tTI 10 tilt' Jlllhlit.: \ ideas ahout passilm. The pas''' i(lns arc Sl't.' #
c ili call y prtOnli Sl's, places: Ari slotle's rhttor ical "psycholtll-:Y" is :1
dl' s(' riptioll (II the (If pass ional rrohahiliry. The psycilo lugica l
proofs are di vided info two major grollps: ('tlu: (charil ctlors. tOIH: S.
qtl :diti es) ;llId I'lflill.; (I'; .. ",s ions, senlilllt' I1I S. "HeelS).
74 ELEMENTS
B. l.28. Ethe. characters. tones
Ethe are the attributes of the orator (and not til",e of the puhlic,
pathe): these are the character traits whi ch the orator must show
the public (his sincerity is of little account) in order to make a
good impression: these are his "airs," his qualities. hi s expressions.
Hence there is no question here of an expressive psychology; it is
a psydiology of the imaginary (in the psychoanalytic sense: of the
imaginary as an imagerepertoire): I must signify what I want to he
far the other. This is why- in the perspective of this theat ri cal
psychology- it is better to speak of tones than of characters: tone
in the musical sense which the word had in Greek
music. Ethos is, strictly speaking, a connotation: the orator gives a
piece of information and at (he same lime says: I am thi s, I ;1m not
that. For Ari stotle. there are three "airs" whi ch as a group constitute
the orator's personal authority: I . 1,',ronesi5: the quality of one who
deliberates carefully, who weighs the pro and the COil : thi s is an
objective wi sdom, a paraded good sense; Z. arete: the showing of a
frankness which does not fear tI. c consequences and expresses itself
by means of direct remarks, stamped with a theatri cal straightfnr-
wardness; J. cunoia: a matter of not shocking, of not being pro-
vocati ve, of being sympathetic (and perhaps even Invable), of
entering into a pleasing complicity with the public. In short, while
he speaks and unfolds the protocol of logical pnx)fs, the orator must
also keep saying: follow me (phronesil), esteem me (arete) and love
me (wnoia).
8.1.29. Pat/,e, sentiments
Path" are affects of the listener (and 110 Innger of the speaker) ,
at least what he imagines them to be. Aristotle docs not deal with
them except from the perspective of a teelme, that is to ,aI', as
prutascs of the argumentative links: a distance he m:uks by the cslO
(/Vanted that) which precedes the description of each passio" a"d
whi ch, as we have seen. is the operator of the probable. " Each
I'passion" is identified in its habitus (the gcncT<l1 Ji spositions which
favor it). according to its ohj ect (for whom it is felt!, and according
,.

Tlu! Old Hhcrnric: "n aiJe-mcrno;re 75
to the circumst;lnccs whi ch provoke IIcrystallization" (anRcr/CCllm.
luurnUfrir,"h',i/', ("",ttTll\!, in/V(I[itwldhdl,{"lne,.<, etc.).
The point Il1l1st he insisted on, (or this Ari stotle's profound \
modernity and makes him ,he ideal patron o( a society of "m;, ss
clliture": all these passions "re deliherately taken in their l"u",/it y:
anJ,:cr is what evcrY(lnC thinks aholH anger, passion is never anything
hilt what people say it is : pUTe intcrt cx tuality, (thi s is
how Paolu and h ;mccsca understood it. who loved each other only
hecallse Ihey had read ahollt Lancclol's love) . Rhelorical psych,,"'gy
is thcrc: (orc qllite the opposite o( a rcductivc psychlliogy which
would try to .scc whal is he/lina what people S;l y and whi c h would
<lllempr to red lice .mger. for instai lCe . to something
hiddcn. For Aristotle, puhlic opinion is the first .md last datum;
he has IHI he rmencutic notion (of dec ipherment); for him. the
passitJlls arc picces of whi c h the orator mll st
si mply he (amiliar with; whcncc the notion (a 1!Yid of not
as a coll ec liun of essences hut as a collection of opinions. For the
rcduc livc psyc hology (prevailing today) Ari stotle SlIhslitulCS (in
advance ) ;1 clas." ili catory psycho!ogy which distingui shes
guagcs." It may seem quite hanal (;-md no douht wrong) to ,hat
yotlng 111(.' 0 arc more et1si ly t1ngercd than old men; hut thi s pbtitllde
(;lnd thi s mi stake ) hecomes inte resting i( we reali ze that such a
prt1pnsiri oll is II1crely an clement of that ,l!(' nnc.d "Iflj!lwge of Oril{'T
wlli c h Ari stodc reconstitutes. aCCl.\rding perhaps to the :UCIIlIlIl1 of
Ari ."lolclifln philo:mphy: "what everyone he lieves to he trill' is
tll;,lIy true" (Etll. Nic. , X. 2. 117Jal) .
11. 1.30. Semina probationum
Thlls cltlSCS the lielJ or the network of hltlCH[io. rhe- hcuri stic
pfrp'lraliotl of Ihe matcria ls of di sc(lurse. Now we must .Ipproach
(heltio if !'df: tll C order o( it.<; P:lrt s (lJi sI1w. ir;o) ,lIld it s re di zat ion in
words (J : 'ocwin) . What arc the "programrn;lric" relations pI" lm.lcllfio
and ()nHin! iJUilllili;lIl put s it in a word (;111 image) : hc rcculIllllcnd:-;
tI:-; ing CVt.'1l in lIt1JT(uio (i .e., heflin' the argIlIlH:ntaliv(' rart pnlpcr)
n' rlaill ":-; cl'll.<; ttf prtHtf.<;" Illf(l('{it.U1I Im,lxllifHlIHlI
76 ELEMEN TS
Thus IJl veralio and Onuio ,hefe is ;1 rdati tlll of
o ne Intl st suggest, the n he sil e n t. rc introJ ll cc , star t lip lal er ti ll . In
other words, the mat erial s of I "Cfcrllio ;u c a ln: :ldy pic(cs of 1;1Il J,! ll agc ,
<
posited in ;1 stat e ur rcvcn ihi/ily, whi ch nnw 1l1wil he ill sc: rt cd info
a n inevitahle and irre versihl e order. wh ic h is Ihat of ,Ill' dI SCOUI'Sl ' .
Whence the second major ope rati on of (cd mc: or U t', H-
Illent of the constraint s of SlIcccs.c; ioll .
B.2. Dispositio
We have see n tha t rite situ;ltion of in
constitut ed a n important st:lkc. Without H..'tlirninJ,.! to litis prtl hl{'Il1,
we shall define dislJosi liu as the a rrangclI1e nt ((.' itil l' r in ,he aCli vc,
ope rational sense, or in the rcHi c"! se nse ) of the m;Ijnr part s
of the di scollrse. The hCl"i t trclll l"i latioll is perhaps: coml,,,sifioll , re-
calling that in L:. lin CfnJlI' Wi i'iu is sOIHcthinJ,! llsl' : it re rn s solely to
the arra ngemcnt of words withi n the SCll fl.' ncc; COH10f flCio desiJ,! nal cs
the Ji str ihuli otl o( l11 ilt e rials within l' fl Ch part. ACl"tl rdil1g to a ll
:ll1gmenfat ive syntagmat ics, theil, we ha ve: t Il c Il'vl'I" r t I\ c Sl' III l' IlCl'
(comIHJSifio), the level of fhe part (n mlo<.:c.llio), ti ll' level IIf discourse
(dislmsifio). T he mai n pmts the di scourse were posih' d very ca rl y
hy (cr .. I"/'Ta A. 1. 2. ) and Iheir di slrih"li,," has ""I vari ed
much subsequentl y: Q uintili ;l n art iclilal l'S fi vl' part s (he dOll hl cs rhe
thirJ parr intu c07lfinHafio anJ reflllllfio), Aristoli c fOllr: it is the
latler divi si"n Ihat will he adopled here.
8. 2. 1.
Befo re cnulIle rating thesc fi xed part s, we fIlti St indi cate the Pp-
ex istence of a movahl e part : c,,'cssjo o r this is II
ce remo ni a l pi ece, Ihe suhj ect or attached to it hy a vny
loose link, a nd whose ftlnction is to show the or;Hor at hi s hest; it
is Inosl oft en a ctlloJ,!y of places or pe rson!' (fo r l' Xal11 plt: , til l' Pf;l isc
of S ic il y in C icero's Vcrres ). Thi s mov;'lhl e lIll i l , tll ii sidc cl assili-
c lti tlfl , a nd (lite miJ,.!llt sa y, slIpcrrlllll1e rll ry Iri J,.! in
d<I'/ml.'i is- is all 0rcr;lIor o( .... pl' L" I<lt:iC. a so rt of S(;lIl1p. ;r siJ,.! n;IIIHC
of the "SOVl'fl'i gll languaJ,.!c " ( ("lrJ,! i<l s's Jakuhson's l'l/t' lie) .

I
,.
The Old Hheloric: l in 77
Y ct just as a paint ing is ;llwa ys signed in the S;lllle pl ace, so diKTcssio
has ended "I' hy hei ng pbceJ more or less regul arl y nel ween 'WITal;"
and ( oJlfinmuio.
B. 2.2. l'aradigmatic . trllc/Ure o( tile (our part ..
st art s (rom .. dichotomy whi ch was fl lre .. dy, in o rhl' r
te rms, that or ll1tlCHtio: iml,cllere animos {to move)/rem dOCffr (to
inform, to convince). The first te rm ( appe;ll to the sentime nt s)
cove rs the exordium and the el,iloRlle, i.e. , the two extremities o(
the di sco urse. T he second te rm (appeal to (acts, to rcason) cove rs
narrario o( (acts o r deeds) fl nd con[innlltio (cstahlishment
of pruofs o r means of persuasion). i. e. , the two medi an p;ut s of the
JiscolJrse. The synlag",ati c order Ihcrcfore does not fo llow Ihe
paradigmati c order, ;lnd we arc faced wi t h a
t wo slices of "passio nal" mate ri al frame a demonstrative "'oc:
dc mom tr:1ti vc
4

l'XIJl llil llll Ctm/i rnklflo cl, ilt 'j.l: II C
\,- --------'\
emoti ve
We shall He;" the four part s acco rding to the p;l radigmat ic order:
ex(mJitlln/cpi I(lgllc , nanat io n/confirl1lat i l lO.
11. 2.3. TI.e heginning and II.e end
T he fo rmali zatio n of hcginnings and e nds, of openi ngs a nd cl os;
inJ,.! ... , il"i a prohl em whi ch exceeds rhet o ri c (rit es, pro tocols, lirur-
T he opposition of the exordium a nd the e pil ogue, in cl ea rly
coma itllt l'd fonns, has doubtless something archai z; ng ahout it ; he,Ke.
in developing and secul ari zing itself, the rhetori c;l l codc h;l s come
to IOlerat(' discollrses without cXl'rdiul11 (in the dcl ihcrative genre),
accord ill J,.! to rhe rul e of in mcclilu Tes, and even to rCCOll1lllCluJ
ahrupt l' nds ( )socratcs, for exampl e). In its canon ical f(lrm, ,he
oppusilitm invol ves a diO'c rcnt iati on : in thc exordiul11 ,
thc orat or mllst C0 l11111 enCe wilh prudcnce, rese rve , propo rtion; in
78 ELEMENTS
the epilogue he need no longer contain hilllsd(' he cOllImit s himself
deeply, brings forlh "II the reso urces of the Imochi"ery of ""lIlOs.
B.2.4. The proem
In archaic poetry, that of the h""ls, the 1", 'ii"IO" (procIII) is wh"t
comes hefore the song (uime): it is the prelude of the lyre players
who. before the contest, limhcr their fingers and rake adv:mtal!l' of
the occfl sion to win over the jury in advance (traCl'S of tllis pl'rsist
in Wagncr's Die Mcislcrsilll('T) . Thc lIillle is "n "Id (' pi c h" lI"d: Ihe
reciter hegan to tell the sto ry at a Ino rc o r less .uhitrary 1I1011\('.' n( :
he could have "taken it up" c;lflicr or lal er (the story is "infinit e");
the first worJs cut Ihe virtual thrcfld of a narrative widHllH origin .
This arbitrariness of the heginning was I1Imkcd hy the words c.' X ou
(starting from whic h): I am start in!.! rro lll here; the hard
(I( thc ;Isks the Muse to sing the return of Ulys:"es " 5ItlTriu/.!
witeTe11cT .dle ,)lcases. " The func tillil llf tl, c pft It' 'n is, II,e ll, tt ) CXl lff is.:
the arhitrarincss of any hcginning. Why begi n herc rat her d,;tn
there! For what reason does speech cut intn what ('unge (author
uf I'memes ) calls the raw UlIlI/"J!Tm/llltlJ:llltl ! This errt of the k"ifc
mwif he lIladc less harsh, this anarchy rC4uircs a protocul of decision:
thi s is thc IJToijirnon. Its evident role is to 1(l1IIe. as if heginninJ,! tu
speak. encm,ntcring language werc 10 risk w"king the unknllwn .
thc scandal ous. the monstrous. In eac h of liS, thnc' is a terrifying
v (ormality ahout "breaking" silence (or the mlu.' r languagc). exce pt
for thme habbl ers who /ling til elll scives he"dlong illto speech ""d
"take" it by forcc, anywhere ami everywhere: thi s is wh:rt is ":r il ed
"spontaneity." Such, perhaps, is the hasis (rom which Iht' rheturical
exordium. the regul ated inauguration o( di s('ollrse , pruCt': l'tb.
8.2.5. TIIC
Thc exordi um c .. noni cally includes two mOlllel"S: I. dlC ff l/' l t llill
IJCJ1ctJoknlial', or ent crpri se o( seductiun with regard to tI,,: puhl k,
which must immediatel y 11C conciliated hy an assay (I( c(l mpl ici t y.
The ca/'l,uio has heen lIlll' of tlu..' llIoM SI :lhl l.' of 'he rhe-
tori cal system (it n" ",i, hcd well intll tire Middl e Ages, :rnd is st ill
The Old Rhetoric' an aide-mi mnire 79
found today) ; it ('"lIows a highly elaborate model , codificd according
to the of causes: the means uf seduction varies 'lC-
corJing to Ihe relation uf the catlse to thc dux(I, to current, nurmal
{lPinion; ( I. if the cause is identifi ed with the doxa, if it a "no;, mal"
cause, in good repute, Ihere is no use suhj ec ting the judge 10 ;lny
to any pressure; this is the genre known as endnxoJl,
honcsunn; h. if the cause is more or less neutral in relation In the
dOXI, a positive "ction is required in order to conquer the judge's
inerti a , to waken hi s curiosity. to make him attentive (auenlum) :
thi s is the genre known as c.u1oxun, humile; c. if rhe cause is ambig-
IIOllS, i( (or instance two doxai " re in conflict, the judge's must
he won. the judge must he rendered bcnevoluYn, 11C madc to sidc
witlr the speakcr; this is the genre known as am/,hid,>x<"., duhium;
if the c"usc is confused, obscurc, the judgc must he made to follow
YIlU ;IS hi s J,.!uidc, ;I S an enlighteller. he must he rendered clocilcm,
receptive, ",alleahle; this is the genre known as dY' /",,,,ko/()Ul/,cIOn,
UhscuTum; finally, if the cause provokes ;1stll nish-
lIlent hy its locati on very far from the dllm (for inst"nce: to plead
against" father. an old man, a child, I blind man, 10 procced
counter to thc "human touch"), a vague act inn (a connotati on)
IIpon the judge no longer suffices. a tn.I': rcmeuy is required. hilt
re l1l n ly must nonetheless he indirect. (t r the judge mll st not
he openl y affronted or shocked: this is iminu.uio, an aut ll nOl1l(lllS
(r"gment (and no longer a simple tonc) which is pl aced .. (ter the
heginninJ,.!: for example. tn pretend to he overwhelmed hy rhe ad
versary. Stich "re the modcs of the ca/>!(lIi() /'clle"o/cnfiQ, Z. Thc
IKITtilio. second moment o( thc ex" rJiuln, .mnounces the divi sions
tI,at will he "d .. pt cd, the rlan that will he f .. II, )wed (th" ,)drfili""e.'
G ill he Illultipli ed. one can he pl ncc..' d at the of each part) ;
Ihe adv;lI1tagc , QlIintilian says , is tLat we never find long something
whose end is announced in
13.2.6. Ti,e cpi/oKue
Illlw arc we ,t) know if a di scourse i:-: hnhdu.d! This is quite as
arhitrar y as the Ixginning. li enee there IIlIl St I"'e .t sign for the CIH..l.
80 ELEMENTS
a sign of closure (as in ccrt;lIn manuscripts: lOci {air la RelIc CflU?
Tumid" . declinct"). This sign has heen rationali zed II"der the alihi
of pleasure (which would prove how consc ioll.o;; till" Ancients were
of tile I'tcdium" oftheirspcccht.s!). Ari sttltic has I11cnthll1cd if. mit
apropos of the epilogue. but apropos of the period: the pcrint! is ' lIl
"agreeable" sentence because it is the contrary of dll" olle which
docs not come to an end; on the contr;uy is it dis;lgrccahlc not to
he able to anticipate what is clIming, 10 have no ending in sight.
The epilogue (peroTario, ccmdusio, (ufllulm. crowning touch) in
eludes two levels: I. the level "f"things" (/",silll ill rei", , ): a question
of continuing and summarizing (enumcratio, refilm rel}Cliljo); Z. the
levcl of "sentiments" <I""ilit in ",/eeti/",,): thi s pathetic , even tearful
conclusion was little IIsed hy the Greeks, where an u, her would
impose silence upon the orator who tugged the too hard
:lnd Xl long; but in Rome the epilogue was the occasion for fl great
piece of theatef, (or thc advocate's gestures; to reveal the accused
surrounded by his relatives anti children, to exhihit a hloody dagger,
fragments of bone taken from the wound: Quilltilian li sts all these
devices .
B.2.7. Narratio
N(ITT(Hiu (Jic,I!esis) is inJeed thc account of Ihl" facts invulvcd in
thc cause (since caU$a is the (,wles,;o imhued with cuntingency),
hut this account is conceived solely from the point of view of Ihe
11r(IOf, if. is "the perstlasive exposition of a thing done, or c1;limcd
to have hccn done." The narr,ltion is therefore not a Tt!fi(al (in the
disinterested sense of the word) hut an argu11lcrHativc protasis. It
has
l
consequently, two ohligatory I. ils
no digrcssions, no no direct argIlIlH.: ntaliol\ ; Ihere
no fcrlme proper to lIQTTcuip; it must he merely ell'clT, "roht,/JIc, l1fil'/;
Z. it s (lIll ctioll ;llity: it is a prl' par;Hion for arguIHt:nt:llion; Ihe hl'si
preparation is the (lnc whose l11eaning is concealed. whose proofs
nrc di sse minated as imperceptihlc seeds (semillll "rolJaliflllltll l) .
ratio involves two types of dCl11cnl s: facts and dcscripl ions.
,
"
The Old Rheroric: an 81
B.2.B, Orelo naturalis/ordo artificiali.
In ancient rhetoric, the exposition o( (acts is slIhjcct to a single
structural rtlle: that the connections he prohahle. nut la ter. in the
Middle A/:es, when Rhet ori c was completely detached from the
judicial. nlJJTlllio hccarne an autonomous genre anti the arri .ngcmcnt
of it s parr s (ordo) hecame a thenre .ical prohlem: this is the 01'1''''
sition of onlo flLlfliTtdis and ordo arfi/iciCilis. "Every order," says a
contemporary of Alcuin, "is eit her natuml or artificial. The order
is natural if Ihe fa cts arc told in the wry order in which they
occurred; the order is artificial if one sets oul, not frolll the heginninJ,.!
of what has happened, but from the middle. " This is the prohkm
of the na, hhack. Ord" arti/icialis requires a segmentation of the
sequ('nce o( since it is a question o( ohtaining movahle,
vcrsihlr unit s; it implies or pr(ltluces a speci:11 intclligihility, (lnc
deliherately shown, since it destroys the (mythic) "nature" of linea,
timc. The opposition of the two "orders" may hea r not on the facts
hut on the very parts of Ihe discourse: thcn OTJO is whal
respects the traditional norm (c)CorditllTl, IIc.1TTatill, con/inlll.1(io.
loglle). and onlo lITrififialis is wh:lt disrupt s Ihis order accon.ling to
ci rcumstances; paradoxic:l lly (.md thi s p:,Tadox is no douht a
quell t onc) t hen means t: ulwTtlI, and (lTrificiolis means spon
tant.'otlS, contingent. natum!'
B.Z.9. 11tc de . cription .
Along."i dc the strictly chronolngic;l l---{lr diachronic. or di e-
narratio admits o( an ilspcctual, dllra tive axi s formed
hy it hnvering sequence o( stasC's: descril'lion5. These have ht't'n
powerfu ll y enwded. There have heen chiefly: w/"'I(TCI/.',ies, ,'r de
scriptions of places; dlTOJlOgral,/lies. or descriptions of time. of
rinds , of ages ; or portr;lIt s. We know the (ortunc of
thc:-; e "piecl's" in ' Oll r literature, outside the judicial. - Lastly we
IIIl1St indi cate, to fini sh with tldTTClliu . th;1t the di scourse ca n SOl11l'-
lillles indudr iI second narmtion; the flrst having h('cn very short ,
il rl'slll11cd slIhseqllcnlly in detail ("Ilerc in dC(flil is how Ihe
82
ELEMENTS
thing I just spoken of transpire..!"): t hi s is the "I,i.lieRc, i" the
relJe(ita tllJTTtuio.
8.1,10. Confirmotio
Narratio, or the account of the fa ct s, is followed hy co"fimuuio,
or the account of the arguments : it is here that Ihe "proof.<" e lah
orate"! in the course of inlJenlio me utt ered . Co"fin""lio (a"oJcixis )
can inclu..!e three elements: I. Im'I,,,,ilio (/'TIIllte, i, ): a conce ntraled
definition o f the cause. of the J'<,int in deh"te; it ca n he simpl e or
multipl e . depending on the headings ("Socrates was accuseJ of
corrupting the young and of introducing new liT
gumenlluio, whi ch is the account of convincing reasons; no part ic
ular struc turation is recommcndlfd, except this: 011(.' I1H1S1 begin hy
the strong reasons, continue hy the weak proofs, and cnJ hy some
very strong proofs; J. occasiona lly, at the end of the Cl lllfiTlIIlIlio,
the cont inuous discourse (oraliv conriruw) is int errtlpt ed hy a v{'ry
lively di .. loguc with the adversary l<1wycr or a witness: another voke
breaks into Ihe monologue: thi s is airercalio. This ofalOri c:l1 episode
was unknown to the G reeks; it is attacheJ to the genre HORatill "r
accusatory int errogation ("QUOUS<lue land" m, Ceui/in" . .. " ).
B.2.11. Other segmentation. of di.<cour.<e
The J'<lwerful encoding of the Di.'/><lSilill (of whi ch a deer "ace
remains in our pedagogy of the "plan") atlests to Ihe fa ct thaI
humani sm, in it s conception of language , was dl'cply concerned
with the prohl em o( syntagmflt ic unit s. is one sq.,:men
tat ion anumg others. Here arc several o( these scgl1lenlafions, start
ing (rOl1t the largest units: I. the discourse as a whule can (orm a
unit, if we set it in opposition to other discourses; this is the case
of classification hy genres or hy styles; it is ;l lso the e lse of
of suhjccu, .1 fourth type of figure after tropes, figures o( words. and
figures of thought : the figure or , uf,jeCl emhraces Ihe wh,,1e of the
orcHio; Dionysius o( Hali c lfnassus di stingui slll'd thrct': cl. thc Jirect
(saying what one mea ns); h. the oh/itJllc (indin'ci discourse: Bossllct
threatening the kings, Imder (he color uf rcli},!iou); c. the contrary
BJ
(antiphrasis, irony); 2. the parts of the Diposilio \whi ch we know);
3. the pi ece, the fragment, ck/ ,hflds or deseri/>ti" (whi ch we also
know); 4. in the Middle Ages, arliculu ..o; is a unit o( development :
in a collective work, an anthology of Dislmlllliones or a Summa, a
summary is given of the di spute..! question ( introduced hy UtrUIIl);
5. ,JCriod is a sentence structured act.:urding to ;m organ ic model
(with heginning and enu); it has :I t least two mcrnhcrs (elevation
anJ lowering, las is and alJOlasis) and at most four . Relow thi s (an,1
in (ruth. starting from the period or pt 'ri oJic sent ence), hegins the
sent ence, ohject of (omlKJsilio, a t ec hnical operation ueriving from
Elocuric).
B.3. Eloeutio
The argument s found anJ hroadly distrihuted in the parts of the
di scourse remain to he I1Pllt intn words" : this is the (unCI ion o( thi s
Ihird part of the techne rhelorike known as /exi, or e/ocUlio, to which
we arc acc lIslmll cd to pejoratively reducing rhetori c beGIllSC of the
int erest the Moderns have taken in the fi gures of rhetori c , a part
(hut only a part) of EloCUlio.
B.3. 1. Development of Elocut io
Since the origin nf Rhetori c, Elocurio has in fact considerahly
evolved. Mi ssi ng (rom Corax's classification, it arrears whe n Gor
gias wants to "rrly estheti c criteria (drawn .rom poetry) to
Aristotl e treats it less abun..!antly than the rest of rhetori c; it de
vel " ps chi efly with the Latins Quintilian), fl uwers spiri
tuall y wilh Dinnysius of Halicarnasslls anJ the anonymous author
of Ihe Peri HYI'.II>s, ami ends hy ah:;orbing all Rhetoric, idenlir, ed
sulely as " liJ..:IITes. " However, in its ca nonical stat e, Elocurio defines
a fidd whic h hears on all language: it includes hoth OUT
(until the h(,art of the MidJle Ages) ami what is called dirtio" , Ihe
o( rhe voice. The heSf tr<lnslarion of eiocHtio is perhaps not
docutiClfI (h K) lilllil ctl) hut eJIIHtCial;Oll or even lo( ulirlTl (ioclitory
activiIY)
ELEMENTS
B.3.1. Ti,e network
The internal c!ossifications of fluwli" Ole m:my. d""hllt" for
two reasons: first . because this tcchnc had to pass Ihftlligh differenf
idioms (Greek. Latin. Rmnance languages) . each of whi ch co"ld
inll cc t the nature of thc "figures"; second. hCGUlse the
promotion of this pent of rhetoric compell ed terminological
vent ions (a patent fact in the hewildering naming of ligures). We
shall simplify thi s network here. The mOlher'''PI'"silioll is that of
the paradigm anJ the syntagm: I . to chm.,e the words (deeli",
Z. to assemble them (synlhesis. co'"l)(lsili,,) .
B.3.3. "Colors"
Elecfio implies that in langll;lgc we can suhstitute one 'crill for
another: cleclio is possible hccallsc synonymy is parI of the system
of language (Quintilian); Ihe speaker Gill suhstittll"l' one signifit'r
for another, he can even, in this suhstitution. prodtlce a sl'COnd;ITY
meaning (connotatiun). All the kinds of slIhstilUtiu"s, wh:Ht'vcr
their scope anti fashion, are TTClI)cs ("conversions") , hut ,he
ing of the word is ordinmily rt.'c..iucec..i in order to he :lhle to set it
in opposilion to "Figures." The truly general terms, which (over
equally all the classes of substitlltiuns, arc ""nulluCIlB" and "colon."
These two words clearly show, by their very connotations, how the
Ancients conceived language: I. there is it naked hase, a proper
level. a normal state of communi cation, slartinl! (rom whi ch we
can c1aborale a more complicatcJ expressiun. Onl(lIllcHteJ, endowt.'d
with a greater or lesser disfance in relation to the original grollnd.
This postulate is deci sive, for it seems that even today it Jctcrlllines
all the nttempts at reinvigorati on of rhctoric: to recover rhetoric is
inevitably to believe in the existence of a Rill) helwecn two sl'ltcs
, of langu;lge; conversely, rhetoric is always conJelllneo in the name
! of a rej ection of the hierarchy of languages. hetween which only a
) UOuctliating" and not a fixed hased n :""fe is
1. the layer (rhctoT1c) has an :mll11armg functl un: the
"proper" slale of language inert. lhe scctmtbry st ale is "living":
colors. light s, flowers (colon's, I"minu, [loTes ); the ornamcnts ar(' on
The Old Rhe,oric: an aid.-m"moire 85
the side of passi on. of the body; they render speech desirable; there
is a "ellustll' of language (Cicero); 3. the colors are sometimes used
"to sp;ue 11u.,ucsty the emharrassment of too naked an exposition"
(Quintilian); in other words. as a possible eurhemism. color indexes
a tahoo. that of "nudity": like the blush which reddens
a fa ce. culllr exposes desire by hiding its object: it is the very dialectic
of the garment (schemll means costume. Figura appearance).
8.3.4. Taxonomic frenzy
What we ca ll generically figures of rhetoric. but which with
hi storical rigor and to avoid the ambiguity between Tropes and
Figures it would be better to call "ornaments." have been for cen-
turies and today are the object of a veritable frenzy of clas-
sification. indifferent to the mockery which nonetheless sprang up
very early. It appears that these figures of rhetoric can be invented
merely by naming and classifying them: hundreds of terms. either
very banal in form (epilhet. relicence) or very barbaric (analllll/JO-
duroll. epaIlMi/,I"sis, llIpinosis, etc.). dozens uf groupings. Why this
r .. ge for segmenwtion. for denomination, this sort of delirious ac 'v "
tivity of language upon languagd No doubt (at least thi s is one ). (, .. I
st ructural explanati on) because rhe:oric tries 10 code s/,eech I/Jarolel
and no longer language llanguel. i.e . the very space where. in
principle. Ihe cude ceases. This problem was seen by Sallssure: what
to do with the stable amalgams of words. of fixeJ syntagms. whi ch
participate both in language and in speech. in st ructure and in
combinat ion! It is to the degree that Rhetoric has pref,gured a \
linguisti cs of speech (other than statistical}. which is a contradic- .'
tion in terms. that it has exhausted itself trying to huld within a ',
necessa.rily morc and more discriminating network the "mtlnners of ;
spc;lking," i. e. , trying to master the unmastemblc: a true mirage. .
B.3.5. C/a<sification of ornaments
All these ornaments (hundreJs of them) have been Jistrihuted
down through hi story according to certain binary oppos itiuns:
86 ELEMENTS
tropes/figures, grammatical tro/Jes /rhetorical tro/>es, figures uf grammar
/figures of r/"'toric, figures of words/figures of dwught, tno/Jes/fiR'(res of
diction. From one author to the: next, the classifications are con ..
tradictory: the tropes arc here set in oppositiun to the figures, and
there are said to belong to them; for Lamy hyperbole is a trope, for
Cicero a figure of thought, etc. A word the three most
frequent oppositions: I. Tropes/Figures: this is the oldest of the
distinctions, that of Antiquity; in the Trope, the conversion of
meaning bears on one unit, Oil a word (for example. catachrcsis:
the arm of a windmill, the leg of a table); in the Figure, the con-
version requires several words. a whole little syntagm (for instance ,
the periphrasis: the decent ob.,curily of a learned language) . This op-
position would correspond by and large to that of the system ami
the snytagm. 2. Grammar/Rheroric: the tropes of gml1lmar are con-
versions of meaning which have passed into current usage. to {he
p()int where we no longer "sense" the ornament: sfelJ on j!tl.'i
(metonymy for acceleralor) , primrose palh (trivi ali zed metaphor),
whereas the tropes of rhetoric are still felt to be an unusual usage:
Nature's laundry for the Flood (Tertullian). Ihe ice floe "fthe
etc. This opposition would correspond by and large Iu Ihat of de-
notation and connotation. J. Words/Thought: the opposition of
figures of words and of figures of thought is the most banal: figur.s
of words exist where the figure would disappear if we changed Ihe
words (i.e. , the anacoluthon, which depends entirely on the order
of the words: Cleopatra', nose, had it been ,horler, the face of the world
. . . ); the figures of thought remain whatever words are cho,en
(i.e. , the antithesis: I am the wound a!ul tile k.nife, etc.); this third
opposition is a mental one, it brings into play signifieds ami sig-
nifiers, the fomler able to exist without the latt er. - II is slill
possible to conceive of new classifications of f'gures, and indeed
one can suggest that no onc concerned with rhetoric fails to be
tempted to classify the figures in his turn and in hi s way. Yet we
st ill lack (but perhapssuch a thing is impossible to produce) a purely
operational classification of Ihe principal figures: di c. tionaries of
rhe toric. inueed. permit us lu discover what a cllleullSftlus is,
.'
The OIJ Wlefuric (III clide mcmoirc
87
Of .. n t'l)(Ilwl""I,sis. or a /><Jralel)sis. to proceed from the often quife
her",el ic na"'e to t he example; hut no hook allows us to Illake the
converse- trajectury, to proceed from the senfence (found in a text)
10 name of the figure; if I read: so mucu mllThlc trcmhiinl! ot/CT
'" much , /uklow, what h .. ,k will tell me this is a if I do
not already know thi'! We lack 'Ill inductive instrument, useful if
we want to Olnalyzc the classical texts according tll thei r "ctuell
mctfllangwlgc . .
8.J.6. Ucv;cw of some fif:Ures
Tlll. 're can of course he no question of giving a list of the
naments" acknowledJ.!ed fly the ancient rhetoric under the general
fl ,tlne of "flgures": dictionaries of rhetoric exist. Yct I hclicve it is
useful to rcvic..'w lhe definition of ten or so figures, t:lken :It n1llJom,
so as to give it concrete perspective to these remarks dcccio.
I . Alliccrt.aioH is a close repetition of conson .. nts in a hrief syntagm
(d,e flf when it is the timhres that "re we
"lx,/,/IfI"1 (i/ "Ieure "nIlS mon cOCllr emnme il/I/cut sur ville).
It has heen suggested that alliteration is frc lIently less intentional
Ihan the crilics and stylisticians tend to 13. F. Skinner has
shown that in Shakespeare's sonnets Ihe allikrations do not exceed
what ont' might expect from Ihe normal frequency of let te rs and
groups of letters. 2. Anacoluthon is a hre;1k in (sometimes dcfecrivt")
comitruction (RarllcT ,JT'oclaim ie, WcshJUJT'clilrul, C/lTOllRh nI:Y hosf, I
dUll lie wl,id, IUllh no .'Imnach to tllis fight,lIet him deparl .. . ) .
J. occurs where the language lacks rhe "proper" tl'fm
and it is necessary In usc a "figure" (legs of a lahle) . 4. Elli/"is
consists in suppressing syntactic clement s lu the point where
rl'lligihility may he affect cd ()c j'1(.-onscwH, {elit
fidrlc!); dlip.o;is h;,s offen heen saiJ to represent a "natural" stall' (If
,he bngu:lg(:: ,he "normal" mode of speech. in pronunciation, in
syntax , in dreams, in children's languflgc. 5. J I:Y/lcrhole consists in
cxaJ.!J.!eraring: either' hy ;mgmcnling (uuxcsis : Co ride {rurl'T clulH r/l('
wind), {lr hy dimini shing (IlII,infJsis: slotvCT (heln (I torroise ) . 6. Irony
or ilfllil,itrmis consists in saying (lilt' t liing t hat is meant to he
88 ELEMENTS
SI<KxI as something else (conn.'tatinn); as 1'. d< Neufchalcau says:
"S/If! dlooscs her words: (hey all seem but (he (one s/lc WiCS
Kivcs (/uite anolher mCl.IninR. " 7. PL"Ti/,/IfUSis is ar it s origin ...
detuur of made to avoid a tahlO l"Iot:ltion. If
is deprecatory, it is called />eTissuloj!ia. 8. UCficcracc or u/)osiu/)CsiJ
marks an interruption in discourse due to a sudden change in fcding
(as in Ihe Virgilian Quus e/(o). 9. Su.st,cmiull delays Ihc Ullcrall ce,
by addition of interpolaled clauses, h.,(orc reso lving il: 011 Ihe level
of I he senlence this is SllStlense.
B.3.7. Proper and Figured
As we have seen, every structure of UfigUTCS
IO
is hascJ on thc
notion that there exist two lan,::uagcs, nne proper ;md olle figured,
and that consequently Rhetoric, in its c1octllionary p:ut, is a lahlc
of J evillt;orLS of language. Since Antiqllity, rhe lIlela#riletori cal
expressions whi ch attest to thi s belief arc cuuntless: in clu(wio (field
of figures), words are Ii 'W1tC;/X"tcJ," "sfTlryed," "dctliLw:d" from their
normal, familiar Arislotle sees ill it a I:lSle for alienation:
one Itlllst Udistance oncselrrrultl ordinary locutiuns ... : we (ccl
in this respect the same impressions llS in the prese nce of slrllngers
or foreigners: style is to be given a foreign air, (or what COlnCS (rom
far llway excites admiration . .. I-Ience there is II rei;\( it m (l .HraJl,l!enCss
between thc ucommonplace words" each of us uses (hut who is Ihis
UWC"!), ,UlJ thc "unaccustomed words," words alien to everyday
usc: "b;uh;uisms" (words of foreign pcoplcs), neologi sms, meta,
phors. etc. For Aristotle there lIlust he a mixture of the two h.: r#
minologies, (or if only ordinary words .ue the result is low
discourse. and if only unaccuc; tomeJ words arc used, the result is
an e'ligmaric di sc(lurse. Frum fltHionalllfJfciK" and ll "n", dlsrTlln,!.!t', tl,e
opposition has gradually shiftet! to What is Ihe proper
Illc;t ning l "It is thc first signification o( the word" (1)1I1n;trsa is):
"When the word signifies that (or which it was originally c::; tah,
IisIH.' d." Yet the proper mc,ming cannot hl' Ihl" earliest lIIeaning
(archaism is alienating), hut the mc:minJ..: iJIIlflcdiordy tJlIfCfiuT III rlu!
lTClllieHi "I rllc the pHlpcr, l i lc trlle is, ()ll((' :I).!ain, 111C
!
I
,
,i
The Old Rlu!luric: an aitl.e-mcmuirl!'
R9
(Ihe Falher). In classical Rhetonc, the (,neRoin/( has hcen MlUral-
izd. Whel1ce Ihe paradox: how r an the propcr meaning he Ihe
"n ... tur.d" meaning :md the meaning be the "original" mean-
ing!
D.3.8. Function and origin of the figures
We may here distinguish two groups of ,xplanalioI1S. I . Ext'/lI-
fuuicHlS 11) /Imcliou: a. the secondary langll<ll:e derives from Ihe nc,
cessity It I cuphclIlize, to evade the tahoos; h. the scCtmdary
is a lechni4ue of iIIusir", (in Ihe sense of painting: I",rspeclive,
sh"dl)ws, fTfHlll1e , I'oeil); it redistributes things, makes them secm
other than they are, ur as they .ue but in an impressive manner;
c. Ihere is a p leasure inherent in the association of ideas (we shoold
s:.y: a tudi,",) . 2. Ext,raMli()ns Iry orip,in: Ihese explanatim" slart from
the postuhllc .that the figures exist "in nature." i.e., in the "people"
(Racine; "One 1ll.CO merely listen to ;l hctweelt WOf11t' n (I(
Ihe lowes I condition: what ahundance in Ihe figures! They lavi sh
metonymy, ca,"chresis, hyperhole. etc. "); and F. de Neufchale"u:
\/In town, at the court, in the fields, ;It markel, the eloquence of
the he:ut breathes forth in How ,hen <Ire we to fl'c{)f1c ile
the "n:uura'" orif.:in of the figurf' r. and their secondary, posterior
r;'lnk in the structurc of language? The cI;lssic answt' r is Ihat art
chooses the figures (with regard to a just eval";'1tion of their di stance,
which I1HISt he measured), it docs not create them; in s hort the
figured is all artificial combination uf natur I cl emenls.
B.3.9. Vico and poetry
Slarling from thi s last hypothesis (Ihe figures I",ve a "nalur"I"
tlrigin), we may further distingui sh two kinds o( explanati(lils. The
first is lIIy,hie, romantic, in thc very hrofld sense of the tcrrn: rhe
"proper" I;II1}.!uflJ.!e is poor, it docs not suffice (or all needs, hilI il
is supplemented hy Ihe explosion of anotht'r language, "Ihose divinc
hlo"omings of Ih .. spirit which the Greeks e,lIed Trot'c.," (I lug,,);
{lr agail1 (Vi<.:o, dted hy Mit.:hl'lt-r), Poetry IX' ill1-! the oril.!il1al lal1#
gllage, rhe (Illir }.!rcal archely!'a l fi;":lIfl' s were invenled ill Oldef, not
90 ELEMENTS
by write" hut hy humanity in its poetic Mew/'/lIIr, Ihen Me-
Wll)m), then S)necdlKhe, then /WfI); Ihey were employed
,ulIurall). Then how coulJ they have !rewllle "figure, of rheloric"!
Vico gives a very structural answer: ahslril ct ion was horn,
i.e . when the "figure" WftS apprehended in a paradigl1latic tippO'
sitiun with another language ,
B.3.1O. The langua!:c 01 the pa, . ;on .
The conJ explan"lion is psychologi cal: il is ""'1 p( LalllY and
the classical writers: the Figures arc the language of passion . Passi( lIl
distorts the perspective of things and compels special words: "If
men conceived all the things which prcnt thelllselves to Iheir
minds. simply. as they arc in themselves. Ihey wpuld all speak of
them in the same manner : geometers aimusl always employ the
same language" (Lamy) . Thisisan intcrcMing view, f(lr iflhc figures
arc the "morphemes" of hy the li g\ln.: s we calt know the
classical taxonomy of the passions. ;md Illitilhly th;u (If the pas." itm
l)f love, fnun R'1Cinc t() Proust. J-=(lr cx<tll,ple: CXdllrJldlifnt Cllrrl'sl"lt II1ds
to the ahrupt seizure of speech. to an el110tive :lphasia; doul, . tlu;
iJiuuion (n;nue of a figure) to the uncertainti es of heh;lvillr (What
to do! this! that!). to the difficult reading o( Ihe "signs" emilled
hy the other; elli/Jsis. to Ihe censoring o( everylhing which hampers
passion ; Iwralc/Jsis (saying OIlC is not goillg to say what one
finally will say). to the renewal o( Ihe "scene, " III Ihe demlln of
rel>elilion, to the ohsessional rehear sing of "onc's duc";
IIYIHJI"x}sis, to the scene which nne im;tj.!illcs vividly I II ullesdf, 10
the inner fantasy, to the scenario jt';l lollSY). etc.
Whereby we understand better how the tigurcJ call he a langu:lgt'
at once JWlural and sccmll.wry: it is n;Hurall1l'ClIISl' the passiulls arc
in naturei il is second,lfY hecause morality rcqlli rcs Ihal rlll' se samc
passions, though "natural. " he distanced. pbn'J in !I,l' region of
Sin; it is hecausc, fur a c1:usical writer, "n:tlllrc" is cvi l, that the
flj.!lIrcs o( rhetoric are at once hasic and sllspect .
, .
The Old IUlet(Jric: an dide-mcmoire
91
8.3.11. Compositio
Now WC' must return to the first opposition, the one which serves
as the p<,int of deparrure for the nClwork of Elocwio: to ei.ecl io, t he
suhSCitulive licld o( the ornaments, is opposed coml>osifiu, the as-
socialive fidJ o( the words within the sentence. We shall not t"ke
sides he re as to the lingui sti c definition o( the "sentence": it is
merciy. for us, th.'It unit of di scourse intermediary hetwcen IHOITS
""Hilmi.1 (major " art o( ""arin) anJ (small group of words).
The ancient Rheloric codifi ed twu lyres of "construelions": I . a
"geometric" construction : that of the I)eriod (Ari stotl e) "" sentence
having in itself a hcginning. an end. anti an cxlenl which c;tn he
readily encompassed"; the struct ur e o( the peri od Jepcnds on an
int ernal syslem of wmmru (strokes) anJ of colons (memhers); their
nu",he r is varia hie and disput ed; in general, three or four colons
arc required. suhjeci to o""osition (Ill or f- 2I3- 4); the rc(erence
of Ihi s sy<lem is vilalized (the oscillalion o( ,he hre"th) or sporlive
(Ihe peri"d reproduces the e lli psis of the stadium: "course. " turn.
a return) ; 2. a "dynamic" const ruct ion (Dionysills o( llal ica rntl ssus) :
the sent e nce is then concci ved as a sublimated. vitalizcd pe riod
transcended hy "movement"; no longer n qllcstion of a coursc and
a reHl ro, hut of a ri se anJ a des(cnt; this kind o( is morc
importanl tI",n the choice of words: it JepcnJs on a kind o( innate
sense on the part o( the writer. This " movemcnl " has litree mnd<..'::; :
1I. wild. jolting (Pindar, Thucydidcs); b. l(e"I1". enc"scd. s"".>lh -
(Sappho, Isoc r(ltes, C icero) ; c. mixed, a storehouse o( these
hoveri ng cases.
T"u.. umd"dcs Ihe rhet()rical nCfUI(>Tk- ,ince ."" /llwe decided I() fc,,,,,,
miclc .11(' 1HIT. S of die tec hnc rhctoriic c (luI.( are s(ric! ty (l1ctHrical, II Ys -
{erical, linkrd 10 ,"c vnice: act io and memoria. ArI'Y 'listuricdl con-
w/l<ltCtJCf (aside frum {he le,let r/lilf (/lerc i ... (I iroll"Y in
emncitlCS clloKliul-! f/l C secfJJlll metakUlRIU1gc we #Ulve jU.H wicd I;y (J
p<: rt lrat it 1 "nit/c(IITtlnl tllc fint) would exceed rite Imrci y c1itklt"ric illfCrtlieHl
of III i .... .... iml"e HllIHIWf. Yct, Il/)(Irl ktWillJ{ lll e (mcienf Wu!(oric. I sll oHId
like ro .... (ly what n'JJ!j lin." far me l)er.wl1afly of IIlis mcmoTll /,le jourHey (I
92 ELEMENTS
descent dlmuRI, time, a descent rhrouR/1 r/lt' f1cltuflrk, ill clown CI dcmhlc
river), "What remains for me" means: tile llllC.HiollS whiclt n'rn:/I lil t'
from "lis ancient em/,ire in m)' present enlerlJrise and wltidt I fllrl flO
aolf)id, having come Ihis c,se 10 Hhewric.
First of all, rhe conviclion lhar HUm) fC'(lwre.'i of OUT lircnlluTc, of (JUT
imfrucfiufl , of uur institwions 0/ lanj.!lulRc (lfId is "Ierc (j si ll,l! lc ill5lilwion
wi,lu",' would be il/l4Jni'Ulled !IT wlller.Hood diffaenlly if we
knew (i.e. , if we did nol censor) lile rl' Cloricul Ct.le ",I,id,
Iu.ts Riven its language to our CUhltTC; nei ther (I (cdmielw!. nOT WI
nor an ell,ic of Hheloric lire now I,msible, bUI CI hi slory! Ye.l. " l,i"oT)
of HhelOric (as research, as book, a.< le",:hing) is ",d"y lIecess"T), l>To,"'-
elled /ry it new way of Ihinking (/illgui.<lics, hisroriwl ,Kiellce,
psyc/,oo'Ullysis, Marxism) .
Next, this noliun (hat ,here i1 a kind of sluhlxlnl l>ehvcrJl
ArislOlle ([min whom rhewnc I,mceeded) all,1 our ""''' cu/r"re, 'IS if
Ariswtelianism, detul since the as (I "hilmol"IY (uul m
Je(ul as an estheric since RmnanticisJn, surviucd in II ( orrUIH, djffrued,
iuarliculure SIdle in rlU! culfund "metice uf Weslenl .soeicfics-t'l fmu:rice
II"ougl, democracy, on <In ideoloK) of ,"e "1(l"ClIICSI IIUlIII,cr, " of
I/le of eu.rrent ''/Jinion: every"ling tlull " kind
uf Ari.IIf>lcliclll vulgare srill ,lefilles " 'YI,e of Irans-I,i"oric,,1 Occide,", a
civilizalion (our own) w"ich i" 111lJ1 of rI,e cndllxa: IIOW If> avoid ,"i.<
realizaliun Ihal ArislOrle (/ry hi, /Hlelies, Iry "is logic, by his rl,ell/ric)
furnishes fcrr die entire IanRulIgc-n.cl1TlUive. dis(ursitJc. dnd dr,l!urnen-
fativc-ilf "mass cmnmunicQr;(}lIs, .. a eumlJle. te ClfwlYlictJl ",'Tid (sttrrtiu,l!
frolll Il,e noliun of "Ihe l>Tuhable") a,'" lhal I, e rel>resen" o/lIill1(l1
I,omugencily of a m<",language and of it wI,icl, III
define an al'I,lied science! In a demc)C1'lItic system, Aristofc1icllIism would
rI,en be Il,e besr of cu/rural s(KioloRie, .
Laslly, Il,is observalion, dislurbing as il is ill irs furcshorrclleJ f,mn,
IIUlI all our lileralure, formed /ry R"el(Jric alld s,,"'imalel" ', 1lIllIlllllisll1,
has emerged from a I>olirico-jl(diciaf Ule llenis' ill the
error whiclr limits Rhetoric fO "Fi,1!ures") : in r/ lllse WliC.'ll' till.!
most brutal con/licu-t'Jf money, of "m/JCTty. of In' ((Iken ""cr,
contained. Jomcslirared, alld Sl(sfLliJlcd Iry stat e I,ower. where stale
,
r '
.'.
..
', .
..
"

<'
>.
..
.: .
..
93
"illlli"IIS rCR,,!'''e feigned sl>etch and wdifies all remurse III Ihe sigllifier:
Il,ere is where IIlIr lilcmlure i, "'JTfI. This is why reJllrillg HhCl,mr 10
lire rrrr,k of a merely hisICnical objecl; seeking, ill Il,t "a"'e of lext, ur
writing. I I fleUlIJTClCrice of langl(lI,l!C; arul ne"er separating uurselves from
revolutionary Kienee-rhese are one and (he smne llLSk
1970