rebellion essays

rebellion essays Rebellion in the Fifties During the Fifties the United States was filled with confidence but at the same time insecurity. The United States emerged from WWII as a global superpower and a symbol for freedom. The United States saw its role in world affairs as the protector of free countries from communism. The fear of communism expansionism during the fifties was a major issue. Communism represented radical thinking and ideas, a shift away from conservatism thinking or a shift away from the center, to a shift towards the edge. During the Fifties the fear of communism spreading in America gave rise to movements such as McCarthyism and the House on un-American Activities (HUAC). These movements represented the feelings of Americans towards communism at the time, they represented fear and the way to contain their fears was to weed out the bad seeds. These movements created a shift towards the center again, towards conservatism. This trend towards the center or conservatism can be seen in all aspects of American life. Not only was conservatism evident in the Fifties, but also rebellion. The push to be conservative and persecute individualism was an immense undertaking that it created fear and out of that fear came rebellion. In any controlled environment, such as the one the United States created for itself during the Fifties, there is bound to be some kind of tension or rebellion, rebellion against the pressure of being normal or conservative. There was a great deal of stress being placed on being just like everyone else. The voice of the rebellion was usually the entertainers, artists, or writers. Many of these people expressed their feelings about current issues by disguising it in their stories, movies or, paintings. Many of these people challenged the politics of the mainstream or the center. However there were works done that supported the shift towards the center and conservatism. Three wor...

The 5 Canons of Classical Rhetoric

The 5 Canons of Classical Rhetoric The classical Canons of Rhetoric specify the components of the communication act: inventing and arranging ideas, choosing and delivering clusters of words, and maintaining in memory a storehouse of ideas and repertoire of behaviors. . .  This breakdown is not as facile as it looks. The Canons have stood the test of time. They represent a legitimate taxonomy of processes. Instructors [in our own time] can situate their pedagogical strategies in each of the Canons.(Gerald M. Phillips et al., Communication Incompetencies: A Theory of Training Oral Performance Behavior. Southern Illinois University Press, 1991) As defined by the Roman philosopher Cicero and the unknown author of Rhetorica ad Herennium, the canons of rhetoric are these five overlapping divisions of the rhetorical process: Invention  (Latin, inventio; Greek, heuresis)Invention is the art of finding the appropriate arguments in any rhetorical situation. In his early treatise De Inventione (c. 84 B.C.), Cicero defined invention as the discovery of valid or seemingly valid arguments to render ones cause probable. In contemporary rhetoric, invention generally refers to a wide variety of research methods and discovery strategies. But to be effective, as Aristotle demonstrated 2,500 years ago, invention must also take into consideration the needs, interests, and background of the audience.Arrangement  (Latin, dispositio; Greek, taxis)Arrangement refers to the parts of a speech or, more broadly, the structure of a text. In classical rhetoric, students were taught the distinctive parts of an oration. Although scholars didnt always agree on the number of parts, Cicero and Quintilian identified these six: the exordium (or introduction), the narrative, the partition (or division), the confirmation, the refuta tion, and the peroration (or conclusion). In current-traditional rhetoric, arrangement has often been reduced to the three-part structure (introduction, body, conclusion) embodied by the five-paragraph theme. Style  (Latin, elocutio; Greek, lexis)Style is the way in which something is spoken, written, or performed. Narrowly interpreted, style refers to word choice, sentence structures, and figures of speech. More broadly, style is considered a manifestation of the person speaking or writing. Quintilian identified three levels of style, each suited to one of the three primary functions of rhetoric: the plain style for instructing an audience, the middle style for moving an audience, and the grand style for pleasing an audience.Memory  (Latin, memoria; Greek, mneme)This canon includes all the methods and devices (including figures of speech) that can be used to aid and improve the memory. Roman rhetoricians made a distinction between natural memory (an innate ability) and artificial memory (particular techniques that enhanced natural abilities). Though often disregarded by composition specialists today, memory was a crucial aspect of classical systems of rhetoric. As Frances A. Yates po ints out in The Art of Memory (1966), Memory is not a section of [Platos] treatise, as one part of the art of rhetoric; memory in the platonic sense is the groundwork of the whole. Delivery  (Latin, pronuntiato and actio; Greek, hypocrisis)Delivery refers to the management of voice and gestures in oral discourse. Delivery, Cicero said in De Oratore, has the sole and supreme power in oratory; without it, a speaker of the highest mental capacity can be held in no esteem; while one of moderate abilities, with this qualification, may surpass even those of the highest talent. In written discourse today, says Robert J. Connors, delivery means only one thing: the format and conventions of the final written product as it reaches the hands of the reader (Actio: A Rhetoric of Written Delivery in Rhetorical Memory and Delivery, 1993).   Keep in mind that the five traditional canons are interrelated activities, not rigid formulas, rules, or categories. Though originally intended as aids to the composition and delivery of formal speeches, the canons are adaptable to many communicative situations, both in speech and in writing.

The 5 Canons of Classical Rhetoric

The 5 Canons of Classical Rhetoric The classical Canons of Rhetoric specify the components of the communication act: inventing and arranging ideas, choosing and delivering clusters of words, and maintaining in memory a storehouse of ideas and repertoire of behaviors. . .  This breakdown is not as facile as it looks. The Canons have stood the test of time. They represent a legitimate taxonomy of processes. Instructors [in our own time] can situate their pedagogical strategies in each of the Canons.(Gerald M. Phillips et al., Communication Incompetencies: A Theory of Training Oral Performance Behavior. Southern Illinois University Press, 1991) As defined by the Roman philosopher Cicero and the unknown author of Rhetorica ad Herennium, the canons of rhetoric are these five overlapping divisions of the rhetorical process: Invention  (Latin, inventio; Greek, heuresis)Invention is the art of finding the appropriate arguments in any rhetorical situation. In his early treatise De Inventione (c. 84 B.C.), Cicero defined invention as the discovery of valid or seemingly valid arguments to render ones cause probable. In contemporary rhetoric, invention generally refers to a wide variety of research methods and discovery strategies. But to be effective, as Aristotle demonstrated 2,500 years ago, invention must also take into consideration the needs, interests, and background of the audience.Arrangement  (Latin, dispositio; Greek, taxis)Arrangement refers to the parts of a speech or, more broadly, the structure of a text. In classical rhetoric, students were taught the distinctive parts of an oration. Although scholars didnt always agree on the number of parts, Cicero and Quintilian identified these six: the exordium (or introduction), the narrative, the partition (or division), the confirmation, the refuta tion, and the peroration (or conclusion). In current-traditional rhetoric, arrangement has often been reduced to the three-part structure (introduction, body, conclusion) embodied by the five-paragraph theme. Style  (Latin, elocutio; Greek, lexis)Style is the way in which something is spoken, written, or performed. Narrowly interpreted, style refers to word choice, sentence structures, and figures of speech. More broadly, style is considered a manifestation of the person speaking or writing. Quintilian identified three levels of style, each suited to one of the three primary functions of rhetoric: the plain style for instructing an audience, the middle style for moving an audience, and the grand style for pleasing an audience.Memory  (Latin, memoria; Greek, mneme)This canon includes all the methods and devices (including figures of speech) that can be used to aid and improve the memory. Roman rhetoricians made a distinction between natural memory (an innate ability) and artificial memory (particular techniques that enhanced natural abilities). Though often disregarded by composition specialists today, memory was a crucial aspect of classical systems of rhetoric. As Frances A. Yates po ints out in The Art of Memory (1966), Memory is not a section of [Platos] treatise, as one part of the art of rhetoric; memory in the platonic sense is the groundwork of the whole. Delivery  (Latin, pronuntiato and actio; Greek, hypocrisis)Delivery refers to the management of voice and gestures in oral discourse. Delivery, Cicero said in De Oratore, has the sole and supreme power in oratory; without it, a speaker of the highest mental capacity can be held in no esteem; while one of moderate abilities, with this qualification, may surpass even those of the highest talent. In written discourse today, says Robert J. Connors, delivery means only one thing: the format and conventions of the final written product as it reaches the hands of the reader (Actio: A Rhetoric of Written Delivery in Rhetorical Memory and Delivery, 1993).   Keep in mind that the five traditional canons are interrelated activities, not rigid formulas, rules, or categories. Though originally intended as aids to the composition and delivery of formal speeches, the canons are adaptable to many communicative situations, both in speech and in writing.

The 5 Canons of Classical Rhetoric

The 5 Canons of Classical Rhetoric The classical Canons of Rhetoric specify the components of the communication act: inventing and arranging ideas, choosing and delivering clusters of words, and maintaining in memory a storehouse of ideas and repertoire of behaviors. . .  This breakdown is not as facile as it looks. The Canons have stood the test of time. They represent a legitimate taxonomy of processes. Instructors [in our own time] can situate their pedagogical strategies in each of the Canons.(Gerald M. Phillips et al., Communication Incompetencies: A Theory of Training Oral Performance Behavior. Southern Illinois University Press, 1991) As defined by the Roman philosopher Cicero and the unknown author of Rhetorica ad Herennium, the canons of rhetoric are these five overlapping divisions of the rhetorical process: Invention  (Latin, inventio; Greek, heuresis)Invention is the art of finding the appropriate arguments in any rhetorical situation. In his early treatise De Inventione (c. 84 B.C.), Cicero defined invention as the discovery of valid or seemingly valid arguments to render ones cause probable. In contemporary rhetoric, invention generally refers to a wide variety of research methods and discovery strategies. But to be effective, as Aristotle demonstrated 2,500 years ago, invention must also take into consideration the needs, interests, and background of the audience.Arrangement  (Latin, dispositio; Greek, taxis)Arrangement refers to the parts of a speech or, more broadly, the structure of a text. In classical rhetoric, students were taught the distinctive parts of an oration. Although scholars didnt always agree on the number of parts, Cicero and Quintilian identified these six: the exordium (or introduction), the narrative, the partition (or division), the confirmation, the refuta tion, and the peroration (or conclusion). In current-traditional rhetoric, arrangement has often been reduced to the three-part structure (introduction, body, conclusion) embodied by the five-paragraph theme. Style  (Latin, elocutio; Greek, lexis)Style is the way in which something is spoken, written, or performed. Narrowly interpreted, style refers to word choice, sentence structures, and figures of speech. More broadly, style is considered a manifestation of the person speaking or writing. Quintilian identified three levels of style, each suited to one of the three primary functions of rhetoric: the plain style for instructing an audience, the middle style for moving an audience, and the grand style for pleasing an audience.Memory  (Latin, memoria; Greek, mneme)This canon includes all the methods and devices (including figures of speech) that can be used to aid and improve the memory. Roman rhetoricians made a distinction between natural memory (an innate ability) and artificial memory (particular techniques that enhanced natural abilities). Though often disregarded by composition specialists today, memory was a crucial aspect of classical systems of rhetoric. As Frances A. Yates po ints out in The Art of Memory (1966), Memory is not a section of [Platos] treatise, as one part of the art of rhetoric; memory in the platonic sense is the groundwork of the whole. Delivery  (Latin, pronuntiato and actio; Greek, hypocrisis)Delivery refers to the management of voice and gestures in oral discourse. Delivery, Cicero said in De Oratore, has the sole and supreme power in oratory; without it, a speaker of the highest mental capacity can be held in no esteem; while one of moderate abilities, with this qualification, may surpass even those of the highest talent. In written discourse today, says Robert J. Connors, delivery means only one thing: the format and conventions of the final written product as it reaches the hands of the reader (Actio: A Rhetoric of Written Delivery in Rhetorical Memory and Delivery, 1993).   Keep in mind that the five traditional canons are interrelated activities, not rigid formulas, rules, or categories. Though originally intended as aids to the composition and delivery of formal speeches, the canons are adaptable to many communicative situations, both in speech and in writing.