Rhetoric Analysis

Words: 1713
Pages: 7

The Necessity of Proper Context in Dialogue
Whether we realize it or not the average person uses rhetoric multiple times in a day. Aristotle was an innovator of rhetorical techniques. He felt it is wrong to use rhetoric in a manipulative way, and believed that it should be used only in a persuasive way. This opinion lead to him writing Rhetoric and he is now remembered and studied by many for his ideas. If his views were not revolutionary they would not still be something that is studied in classrooms around the world today. The great philosopher has been studied and revered since his own lifetime. Aristotle’s Rhetoric made a huge impact on approaches to rhetoric. Many authors have both accepted and reject his concepts but most importantly
…show more content…
Without knowing the whole context of a novel one cannot discuss it at length. They may understand parts of it but are not able to captivate the entire piece. With full knowledge, one could ultimately compare and contrast different parts of the novel. Proper context also allows for minimal misunderstanding. Knowing all sides of a topic allows for clearer views and for fewer misinterpretations. Bakhtin suggests the need to have full context because it allows one to be open-minded without being objectionable to the …show more content…
Monologue is one-sided and often comes off as demanding. Monologue is acceptable in many relationships such as a parent and child, an employer and employee, and a drill sergeant and a cadet. Unless someone is in a position where they expect another to talk to them in a monologic way they will probably find it difficult to accept the view of the other. As Bakhtin stated, “one-sided orientation” can become very vulgar. In monologue, a person may feel as if they are being attacked whereas in dialogue an individual might feel as if they at least have the right to defend themselves and then a situation can avoid the tension and heat that may be there if it is