Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 17.djvu/110

* KHETORIC. 94 thpso activities consists of all the processes by wliirli, tliiough a variety of meiliu, men express tliemselves and convey their thoughts and feel- ings U) their fellows. This group may be called the ex|ircssive-eomraunioative group of activities. It includes not only the more primitive modes of thought-conveyance, such as gesture, grimace, picture writing, the histrionic dance, and the like, but also the most highly elaborated modes, such as the arts of architecture, sculpture, music, painting, and oral ami written speech. This large class may be subdivided in two ways: (1) according to the medium employed in the process of thought-conveyance, and (2) accordinglj' as the emphasis is thrown upon the individual or the social phase of the process. The first method of classification leads to the differentiation of the several arts; the second to the distinction of processes mainly self -expressive from processes mainly communicative. The subject matter of rhetoric is thus seen to be distinguished from that of allied sciences by the fact (1) that its ■ medium is language, and (2) that the emphasis is thrown upon the phase of communication; that is, upon prose. The proper subject matter of the science may therefore be summed up in the phrase 'Expression in language for cornmuni- catioti's sake,' just as the proper subject matter of poetics may be summed up in the phrase 'Com- munication in language for expression's sake.' But it should not be forgotten that although rhetoric is the science of communication, it is still concerned to a large extent with questions of expression. If we regard rhetoric as it has been outlined above, its underlying problem is seen to concern the reciprocal speech relations of the individual and the community. Of this problem there are three principal phases, as follows : I. Psychological problcjns relating (1) to the nature of the writing or speaking man, (2) to the mental activities involved in the process of (^imposing. Here arise questions regarding (a) the nature and genesis of expression, (b) the characteristics of genius, (c) the acquirement and cultivation of the speech habit, and (d) the factors operating in the experience of the indi- vidual to turn his self-expression into the com- municative channel. The first of these ques- tions has been treated at some length by Dar^^•in in his Expression of tlie Emotions, and' by those who have sought to controvert him ; the "second, by Lombroso and others; and the third, by many recent psychologists. The fourth is as yet prac- tically unexplored. It is obvious, however, to touch upon it briefly, that every successful writer or speaker is on one side receptive, on the other productive. As receptive he is a product of heredity and of the social en- vironment. Through imitation of his fel- lows, this native impulse results in the acquirement of the resources of language, and the individual thus develops a writing or speaking personality. On the other hand, as productive, the writer exhibits the faculties of invention and social imagination. He creates by combining old ideas in new ways that suit better the needs of his contemporaries. He has a sympathetic imagination, vhieh enables him to penetrate into the minds of his hearers, to read their desires, and to conceive how his words will act upon them. His expression is thus, in a sense, drawn Xrom him, and shaped, by his keen realization of RHETORIC. the needs of his hearers. He produces in order to satisfy tliese needs. II. .Social problems, relating to the dynamic ctTect of speech upon the community of liearers or readers. The assumption which underlies dis- cussion of the subject from this point of view is that language is preeminently the social bond — the connective tissue by which society is held together in organized forms. The main questions relate ( 1 ) to the tyi)ical modes of response on the part of individuals and groups of individuals in the community, (2) to the formation of social or public opinion. Diall, Pst/chulogy of the Aggregate Mind of an Audience, has en- deavoreil to show that the minds of an assemblage listening to a powerful speaker undergo a curious process called 'fusion,' by which the members of the audience, losing their individual traits, are reduced, as it were, to a single individual, whose characteristics are tlio.se of an im))ulsive youth of twenty, imbued in general with Jiigh ideals, but lacking in reasoning power and will. But it is important here to distinguish, as Tarde has done (L'Opinion et la foule), between a 'crowd' and a "publie,' the associative principle of the former being physical, of the latter psycliical. The rise of printing, which enables communication of the same matter simultaneously to persons widely separated in space, tends to the formation of a true publie, which is not "fused,' but can freely exercise both reason and volition. III. Formal problems, relating to the medium of communication, namely, language, or, more precisely, discourse, that is. language in organ- ized form. The main problems concern: (1) the nature and origin of discourse; (2) the peculiar function of discourse as (a) on one side, the expression of the individual, and (b) on the other side, the means of social interchange; (3) the structure or morphology of discourse in (a) its minuter forms (words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, figures, rhythms), (b) its larger forms (whole compositions), (c) its typical modes (description, narrative, exposition, argu- ment, persuasion) ; and (4) the typical methods of distribution (books, newspapers, conversation, etc.). The formal aspect of rhetoric has been developed in considerable detail in ancient and modern treatises, but has not been consistently unified or properly connected with the other two phases. It has been the practice of rhetoricians to make certain postulates of a formal character, such as the principle of unity in variety, of symmetry, or of purity, and u|)on these, by a process of deductive reasoning, to build a struc- ture of theory. Of all the princi]iles that have been advanced to explain the structural side of rhetoric, that of organic unity is perhaps most fundamental, and from it may be derived all of the usual rhetorical qualities. But the tiTith is that all such principles are derivative, not pri- mary. A truly scientific exposition would demonstrate that the peculiar forms and quali- ties of any piece of discourse are the natural outcome of the interaction of the individual and society in the process of communication. An oration, for example, is the product of two forces, ( 1 ) the impulse of the individual to a certain kind of self-expression, and (2) the demand of the social mind for a certain kind of communica- tion. The oration is the meeting point of these two forces. , It is the path of least resistance traced by the language of the orator in adapt- S.i^l^