Gary A. Remer
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- September 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780226439167
- eISBN:
- 9780226439334
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226439334.003.0008
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
Unlike proponents of deliberative democracy, Cicero, like other classical rhetoricians, identifies deliberative oratory, not conversation, as the dominant genre of political speech. Cicero, however, ...
More
Unlike proponents of deliberative democracy, Cicero, like other classical rhetoricians, identifies deliberative oratory, not conversation, as the dominant genre of political speech. Cicero, however, also identifies conversation (sermo) as another kind of rhetoric that was not much discussed by other ancient rhetoricians. His conception of conversation anticipates the ideal of conversation upheld by today’s advocates of deliberative democracy. By comparing both Ciceronian oratory and conversation with deliberative democratic discourse, this chapter explains why Cicero chooses political oratory over conversation as the primary mode of political communication. And in analyzing Cicero’s rationale for selecting oratory over conversation, this chapter shows the relevance of his arguments to contemporary politics. Later in this chapter, the argument is presented that Cicero’s choice of deliberative oratory over deliberation qua conversation better reflects the reality of politics, not only in his time but in our own, and that deliberative democracy’s moral requirements do not sufficiently take into account the actual practice of politics. Ideals are morally useful. The deliberative democrats’ ideal of a deliberative society, however, is sufficiently out-of-touch with politics as practiced (or even possible) that it undermines the value of their deliberative ideal.Less
Unlike proponents of deliberative democracy, Cicero, like other classical rhetoricians, identifies deliberative oratory, not conversation, as the dominant genre of political speech. Cicero, however, also identifies conversation (sermo) as another kind of rhetoric that was not much discussed by other ancient rhetoricians. His conception of conversation anticipates the ideal of conversation upheld by today’s advocates of deliberative democracy. By comparing both Ciceronian oratory and conversation with deliberative democratic discourse, this chapter explains why Cicero chooses political oratory over conversation as the primary mode of political communication. And in analyzing Cicero’s rationale for selecting oratory over conversation, this chapter shows the relevance of his arguments to contemporary politics. Later in this chapter, the argument is presented that Cicero’s choice of deliberative oratory over deliberation qua conversation better reflects the reality of politics, not only in his time but in our own, and that deliberative democracy’s moral requirements do not sufficiently take into account the actual practice of politics. Ideals are morally useful. The deliberative democrats’ ideal of a deliberative society, however, is sufficiently out-of-touch with politics as practiced (or even possible) that it undermines the value of their deliberative ideal.
Michael Hawcroft
- Published in print:
- 1992
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198151852
- eISBN:
- 9780191672866
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198151852.003.0006
- Subject:
- Literature, Drama, European Literature
If it is the persuasive interaction of characters that constitutes the theatricality of Jean Racine's discourse, what becomes of verbal action if characters speak when they are alone, or accompanied ...
More
If it is the persuasive interaction of characters that constitutes the theatricality of Jean Racine's discourse, what becomes of verbal action if characters speak when they are alone, or accompanied by silent and anonymous followers? When d'Aubignac says that in 17th-century French tragedy to speak is to act, he gives the example of Emilie's monologue at the beginning of Cinna. If persuasion is central to an understanding of verbal action involving two or more characters, can it not be useful in appreciating monologues? Does the definition of verbal action have to change to incorporate any features that might be peculiar to monologues? This chapter explores answers to these questions. It also compares lyricism with persuasion and discusses deliberative oratory and judicial oratory in Racine's monologues.Less
If it is the persuasive interaction of characters that constitutes the theatricality of Jean Racine's discourse, what becomes of verbal action if characters speak when they are alone, or accompanied by silent and anonymous followers? When d'Aubignac says that in 17th-century French tragedy to speak is to act, he gives the example of Emilie's monologue at the beginning of Cinna. If persuasion is central to an understanding of verbal action involving two or more characters, can it not be useful in appreciating monologues? Does the definition of verbal action have to change to incorporate any features that might be peculiar to monologues? This chapter explores answers to these questions. It also compares lyricism with persuasion and discusses deliberative oratory and judicial oratory in Racine's monologues.
Gunther Martin
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- September 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199560226
- eISBN:
- 9780191721427
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199560226.003.0008
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter examines the evidence for religious references in deliberative oratory before the Athenian assembly; outside speeches on religious matters, such references are mainly found in times of ...
More
This chapter examines the evidence for religious references in deliberative oratory before the Athenian assembly; outside speeches on religious matters, such references are mainly found in times of crisis. Demosthenes' practice is compared with the speeches in Thucydides and Xenophon; religious argumentation is prominent in his assembly speeches only as an appeal to use the god-sent opportunity, and only in a certain period, in the early 340s. This is interpreted as an attempt on Demosthenes' part to arouse attention to himself by the use of a particular motif; he thereby suggests to the Athenians that their city is in danger while they are inactive.Less
This chapter examines the evidence for religious references in deliberative oratory before the Athenian assembly; outside speeches on religious matters, such references are mainly found in times of crisis. Demosthenes' practice is compared with the speeches in Thucydides and Xenophon; religious argumentation is prominent in his assembly speeches only as an appeal to use the god-sent opportunity, and only in a certain period, in the early 340s. This is interpreted as an attempt on Demosthenes' part to arouse attention to himself by the use of a particular motif; he thereby suggests to the Athenians that their city is in danger while they are inactive.
