Evaluate this claim: Some might say that the rhetorical situation, an expression coined by Lloyd Bitzer, is the most important concept in writing. Why or why not?
Lloyd Bitzer coined the expression “the rhetorical situation.” The rhetorical situation is defined as the “context in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse” (Bitzer, 1). In regards to the “discourse”, we focus on the rhetor or the speaker and the audience in the nature of creating content is “described”, “the characteristics”, and “how and why” it results in “the creation of rhetoric” (Btizer, 1). Some argue that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. I agree that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. Through Bitzer’s explanation he describes the three constituents that comprise everything relevant to the rhetorical situation: “exigence, audience, and constraints” (Bitzer, 8). “Any exigence is an imperfection marked by urgency” (Bitzer, 6). Constraints are “made up of persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because have the power to constrain the decision and action needed to modify exigence” (Bitzer, 8). This shows how the rhetorical situation is the most important concept of writing because writing works to communicate information to an audience. For example, in the image, there is speaker trying to get support for his law to be passed. All the different constraints that a writer or speaker have to deal with when providing their audience with information and working to convince their constituents what their call to action should be formulate rhetorical discourse. The rhetorical situation formulates the purpose for what goes into writing and lays out for writers how to deliver the most effective message.
The concept of rhetorical situation is important to writing because the elements of the situation often frame any writing that follows, but is the rhetorical situation the most important concept to writing?
Bitzer’s idea of the rhetorical situation answers important existential questions about writing. A specific piece of writing’s origin question of “where did this come from?” is answered by the rhetorical situation’s concept of exigence. An exigence is “an imperfection marked by urgency” (Bitzer 6). Understanding how a piece of writing comes to exist or understanding why a writer wishes a text to exist is key to effective writing. Understanding context allows for complexity and gives purpose to texts. The concept of exigence also answers the question “where is this going?” Exigence presents a situation “which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigence” (6). This matters a great deal to writing because every piece of writing exists for a reason whether the author is conscience of this or not. Personal letters, texts, and emails are written to deal with the exigence of distance. Novels can be written because the author is seeking a financial gain. The rhetorical situation is what allows writing to exist at all. That being said, it is doubtful that Bitzer’s ideas are revolutionary. Intuitive thinkers and writers have understood these ideas for centuries. His ideas can help us analyze writing and rhetoric, but it has not fundamentally altered the way that writers write and readers read. Good writing existed for centuries before the existence of Bitzer’s theory. His theory is valuable to the field of rhetorical study, but good writing would exist whether or not this concept of rhetorical situation was ever coined. It existed long before now. It is definitely important, but Bitzer is not the first to explore these ideas.
In “The Rhetorical Situation”, Lloyd Bitzer aims establish the rhetorical situation as a controlling and fundamental concern of rhetorical theory. The rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. Bitzer states that rhetorical discourse obtains its character from the situation which creates it. “A work is rhetorical because it is a response to a situation of a certain kind” (Bitzer 3). There are 3 elements of any rhetorical situation: exigence, audience and constraints. An exigence is a defect, problem or obstacle (Bitzer 6). Rhetoric requires an audience because rhetorical discourse produces change by influencing the decisions of people. Constraints have the power to constrain decision and action needed to change the exigence. Rhetorical discourse happens because of the situation. The situation causes a rhetor to create and present discourse. An example of this is the assassination of John F Kennedy. After report of the assassination, there was an urgent need for information. Reporters then created hundreds of messages (Bitzer 9). The response to a rhetorical situation needs to be fitting to the situation. All of this helps writers form more effective discourse. When there is a problem, writers need to form discourse that will persuade an audience. Since people needed information on the assassination, journalists provided it. The responses shifted with the situation and modified exigencies for the audience. By taking the situation into account, writers can better reach and connect with their audience.
Lloyd Bitzer is probably one of the most influential rhetorical theorists. In his essay he defines his concept, the rhetorical situation, as to be “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigence” (6). In essence he believed that human discourse was dictated and constructed based on a particular situation. Also, in order for there to be any discourse there need to be three constituents: 1. Exigence (a problem) 2. Audience (those who were affected by the problem and will be addressed in discourse) 3. Constraints (limitations of the rhetors and of the situation that affect discourse). I believe that his concepts are very important for examining why writing or speaking is essential for humans. I believe that every piece of writing is motivated. There’s a purpose for the certain style, diction, organization and etc. I don’t agree that any writing can be unmotivated and I feel like that’s what Bitzer was outlining in the rhetorical situation. There must be an essential problem to influence and shape discourse. Also, there is always an audience for the writer, whether it’s someone’s teacher, a committee, friends, or even just yourself. In short there can be no writer without a reader. Then there are the constraints. I agree with Bitzer that every motivated piece of writing in defined within the limits of its context. There can unlimited ways of approaching a situation, but a limited number in rightfully defining it. However, I do question the accusation Bitzer makes about situations always being the dictator of discourse. I believe there are cases when the discourse in fact will dictate the situation. When we choose to place one event as more important than another, we are defining the situation, rather than the situation defining us.
In the “Rhetorical Situation,” by Lloyd Bitzer, he coins this phrase and defines it as, “the nature of those contexts in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse.” (1) His essay goes into explaining the conception of the situation and what it is essentially made up of. As I read on to see what Bitzer explains the rhetorical situation to be he says it is,” a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action.” (4) Even though the rhetorical situation can be an important part of writing, and Bitzer explains it as always being an act of persuasion, I don’t think that this is the most important concept of writing. Writing can have many uses, to entertain, inform or persuade. Aside from persuasion, there are two other forms that writing is also a key part of. Of course, whatever your topic of writing may be, persuasion may very well be the best way to go about with your purpose. With that being said, writing is very situational. If you are writing to enact a new rule like in the illustration on the original blog post, then you will obviously want to choose the means of the rhetorical situation. In this case, this would be the most important concept of writing. However, for example, if you were writing to inform your audience about the Golden Globes nominations, then a rhetorical situation would probably not come into play. A major point that Bitzer makes is that a rhetorical situation is there in order to make a change. Again, writing to entertain is just for people to enjoy things they read and pass free time. There isn’t a real major change being enacted here.
The rhetorical situation could be considered one of the most important concepts in writing. Bitzer defines the rhetorical situation as the nature of the contexts in which the speakers and writers create rhetorical discourse. This goes beyond context of situation but also includes historical context, language, audience, situational constraints and just how the writing came into existence in general. Understanding the concept of rhetorical situation is key for a reader to fully understand the meaning presented within writing or speech. Rhetorical situations are mostly dependent on an exigence, audience and constraints presented. An exigence can be considered rhetorical when it can be positively modified by the audience to which it is being presented. Not all audiences would be considered rhetorical. Bitzer would not consider a body of listeners the same as a rhetorical audience. The audience must be capable of being influenced by the writing at hand. Presenting scientific data to a group of fictional authors wouldn’t be considered rhetorical or effective, because they are not an appropriate audience. Lastly, working within constraints is also important for the rhetor to account for when creating text. Understanding all of these factors in the rhetorical situation are important in making effective writing or oration.
In “The Rhetorical Situation”, Lloyd Bitzer defines the rhetorical situation as the context in which something is produced, such as the setting in which a question is asked, the events surrounding a philosopher’s musings, and everything which leads a poet to produce their work. With this concept in mind, we might consider the ways in which writing is related to the rhetorical situation in which it is created. For instance, the context of this blog post may include the mood I am in after the events of my day, the way I like to type o this computer, the slightly slower typing speed due to wet nails which leaves more time to consider word choice, the fact that my old roommate is studying behind me, my thoughts coming into reading the article after taking a rhetoric class last semester, the constraints of the assignment, and plenty more factors. I do think that this is a very important concept in writing, but I would disagree that it is the _most_ important. This is a little ironic, because my reasoning is much to do with the light in which I view this piece, mainly that I immediately disliked Bitzer for his exclusive use of male pronouns for the general population, and for the arrogance in his assertion that no one in history before him has studied this subject, and then finally in his irritating writing style. These things make me judge the author, but I would still posit that the most important concept of writing is the product itself, and that the rhetorical situation is secondary.
Is Bitzer’s Rhetorical Situation the MOST important concept in writing? Not really, at least not in writing in general. The Rhetorical Situation is most relevant in speech making. Having studied Bitzer in my Rhetoric class we learned that his theory is just an option of many theories. With the ability to choose other theories from people like Aristotle, Plato, Gorgias, Bell Hooks, and Anzaldua, Bitzer is just someone else with a theory in writing. In fact all his Rhetorical Situation seems to explain is speech writing itself. We have the speaker or writer. The speaker is in charge of having the content which he or she shapes based on many factors. These factors are the constraints and the exigence. The constraints being all those little nit picky elements that the speaker may face that affects how he/she composes their piece. The exigence in some cases may be something that the audience does not understand, which in turn may add to the list of constraints the speaker will face when giving a speech. Audience is another element in Bitzer’s Rhetorical Situation. Based on what the speaker knows about the audience he/she will reflect in the word choice, tone, gesture, and other aspects of speech making that involve presentation. So maybe when it comes specifically to speech making is the Rhetorical Situation the most important concept of writing, but other than that it seems a pretty obvious theory that has no real importance to writing. In fact it could be modified to be more specific while covering more in the vast world of writing.
In "The Rhetorical Situation," Lloyd Bitzer lays forth the characteristics he believes a speech or a piece of writing must possess in order for it to be considered rhetorical. First on his list is an exigence, the situation that invites discourse. The exigence may be any sort of imperfection in the world, however, it must be something that can be changed, so that the audience can be persuaded to take some sort of action. However, Bitzer warns that simply describing rhetoric as inviting change is too general, but rather, as Bronislow Malinowski says, "The structure of all this linguistic material is inextricably mixed up with, and dependent upon, the course of the activity in which the utterances are embedded." In other words, rhetoric is a kind of action. An audience capable of being persuaded is another fundamental aspect of rhetorical discourse; the audience must not merely experience the speech or writing, but be influenced by it. Finally, a rhetorical situation must involve a set of constraints for the speaker or writer to argue against, and these may be comprised of traditions, facts, motives, beliefs, and other similar elements.
I agree with the idea that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. Even if not every piece of writing would be considered rhetorical, Bitzer's ideas can still apply to any one. Any written work has to have some situation that calls it forth, whether that be the need to entertain, inform, or persuade. It must have an audience that can be changed by it. All writing faces constraints, even if those are simply the limits of the reader's attention. Much of what Bitzer says can apply to any kind of writing, not only rhetoric.
Bitzer’s points are very interesting and useful but they are limited to a specific type of writing. The rhetorical situation is something that would be very important in a speech but when considering its use in a creative essay, one would second guess its usefulness. That leads me to say that the rhetorical situation, although important, is not the most important concept in writing. One thing I do agree with is that “a speech is given rhetorical significance by the situation” (5). Without a situation, the speech would be meaningless or just a combination of words with no use. Rhetoric is necessary to produce a desired change or action. This is where rhetoric can be seen, as it is seen by Aristotle, as an art of persuasion. Bitzer’s three constituents of rhetoric are crucial for carrying out the rhetorical situation; these points are exigence, audience, and constraints. In order for rhetoric to continue to exist there must be an exigence that can be modified. In order for an exigence to follow through, there must be an audience who’s actions and decisions must be influenced. The audience is what Bitzer states as the “controlling principle” (7). Because there is an active audience in a rhetorical situation, there are also constraints. Constraints may include beliefs, facts, traditions, or interests. I believe this to be the most important point that Bitzer focuses on in his essay. In order to approach an audience successfully, one must acknowledge the constraints their audience is facing.
Saying that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept (out of all of them) is, to me, a huge stretch. While Bitzer does provide us with important concepts and relationships between audience and speaker/writer, I honestly believe that it leaves out way more than it offers. Bitzer explains that there has to be an imperfection marked by urgency, and I can't see how that fits into all writing. I think a lot of times that writing can exist without a need and Bitzer doesn't allow for this in his idea. Also, he defines a set of constraints that can influence the rhetor (writer/speaker) and while I think this is important and that it does exist, especially in regards to societal constraints, it's not the most important. Bitzer focuses too much on the situation/surroundings of writing and not enough on the choices that are made when writing. We've looked at significantly more progressive ideas in regards to multimodality and so to define writing in terms of its need to exist seems like a step back. Also, although it might be quite obvious, Bitzer doesn't touch on non-rhetorical writing, he only says "It seems to me that rhetoric is situational." (Bitzer 3) Regardless of whether or not rhetoric is situational or not, not all writing is. In general I believe that Bitzer provides us with important key terms. In my rhetoric class we discussed his terms in relationship to other rhetorical theory and it helps to make connections but in no way is a way to define writing for the simple fact that it leaves out too much.
I understood from Bitzer’s essay that to have a rhetorical situation you first need exigency, audience, and constraint before the discourse. Once there is rhetorical discourse, there must be a situation that is fitting, real, and structured. I feel rhetorical situation is an important concept in writing, but I would never feel confident in saying it is the most important. It is hard to explain exactly how important I think it is, because although I now understand what it is, I am still wrapping my brain around each and every part of my life that fits in the category of a rhetorical situation. I will say that the reason I don’t think I agree that it is the most important concept of writing is because I think it is only that way in the society we have built, which isn’t the society we have to live in. In our society, it makes sense that people say it is, because we are built using courtrooms and presidential debates. Rhetorical situations definitely still exist on a day-to-day basis, but there seems to be a formality to its definition, that I don’t think works perfectly. I also dislike that people can deem it incorrect rhetoric for a situation, because I believe thoughts and discussion can’t really be incorrect; people can disagree, but they can’t be factually unfitting. I also see why it would be considered the most important, because in our world everything needs to be presented and discussed for people to follow it. I understand the argument that we would be nowhere without rhetorical situations, because we would either be stagnant or in chaos. I honestly think I need more time to dwell on this article before I can respond to the question with more clarity.
Lloyd Blitzer’s rhetorical situation is indeed the most important concept of writing. In his paper, Blitzer defines the rhetorical situation as a “natural context of persons, events, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance” (Blitzer 5). The rhetorical situation is crucial in order to decipher appropriate physical and verbal responses and what kind of observations should be made. According to Blitzer, rhetoric is situational when the rhetorical discourse is used to respond to situations, rhetorical speech is given significance by the situation, and it is a necessary condition of rhetorical discourse. Furthermore, the situation controls the rhetorical response, thus proving how important it truly is to writing (Blitzer 6).
Blitzer highlights three constituents of the rhetorical situation, which include exigence, audience, and constraints. He describes exigence as an “imperfection marked by urgency” as well as a defect or obstacle (Blitzer 6). The second constituent he addresses is the audience, which consists of people capable of being “influenced by discourse” and “being mediators of change” (Blitzer 8). Furthermore, to Blitzer every rhetorical situation consists of constraints that control decisions and modify exigences depending on the people, events, objects and relations of the situation (Blitzer 8). These characteristics define the rhetorical situation and ultimately the concept of writing.
Even though the rhetorical situation is viewed as the most important of writing, it still has some downfalls. The rhetorical situation cannot invite just any response; it only invites a response that fits the situation. Furthermore, it must meet the requirements established by the situation, dictating a strong and clear purpose, theme, matter and style of response (Blitzer 10). The rhetorical situation also has to be distinguished from a fictive situation such as the speech in a novel or play. As well as, exhibit complex or simple structures depending on the amount of elements needed to interact (Blitzer 11). Once the situation finds it’s fitting rhetorical response, a decision is made whether it dwindles or the situation carries on such as The Gettysburg Address (Blitzer 13). Without the rhetorical situation there wouldn’t be any rhetoric in the world due to the lack of exigence. Thus, the rhetorical situation outlines all the key characteristics of what goes into writing, proving that it is an imperative concept of writing.
The claim, “rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing” is a strong statement. Considering all aspects of writing and all that writing encompasses it is hard to think that one term is the most important concept. Lloyd Bitzer made a good argument advocating this statement in his essay “The Rhetorical Situation.” Bitzer defines the rhetorical situation as “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse…” Throughout his essay, Bitzer persuades the reader that rhetorical discourse cannot occur without a rhetorical situation (which is ironic because he is using rhetoric in order to prove the existence of rhetorical situation). In order to prove his theory about the rhetorical situation, Bitzer provides many examples of rhetorical discourse that come to life because of particular situations. The examples include men fishing, the Gettysburg Address, inaugural speeches and funeral eulogies. With this he writes, “Rhetorical discourse, I shall argue, does obtain its character-as-rhetorical from the situation which generates it.” Bitzer’s argument is convincing, and I do think that which rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. He supports this theory by explaining that rhetorical situations must be real. Also, he says that fictive rhetorical situations are not established by the story itself. I find this very accurate. Some writers might use a made up story to persuade their readers of something, but the situation is based on a real circumstance. Likewise, there is no persuading (rhetorical discourse) without a real, fitting situation that initiates the discourse. Bitzer writes, “So controlling is situation that we should consider it the very ground of rhetorical activity…” Most situations are considered rhetorical situations, so therefore, writing the medium to convey the rhetorical message. With this in mind, it is obvious that rhetorical is critical in writing.
In “The Rhetorical Situation”, Bitzer defines a rhetorical situation as the “nature of those contexts in which a speaker or writer create rhetorical discourse” (1). He further details three parts of context – audience, exigence, and constraints – which play essential roles in devising the response to any given situation. Bitzer also states that “rhetoric is a mode of altering reality”; this is done by creating discourse which changes reality through the meditation of thought and action (4).
To answer the question of whether this is the single, most important concept in writing, I’d have to answer quite frankly: I don’t know. I don’t think I have a broad enough view of writing and the contributions of theorists to make such a bold statement, but I would agree that what Bitzer proposes is incredibly valuable. He gives writers a means in which to approach writing -- things to be considered. What is especially useful is his outlining of audience, exigence, and constraints. In order to craft an effective message, in any given medium, these three things are perhaps the most crucial of considerations. Exigence, however, is most evidently tied to Bitzer’s concept of a “rhetorical situation”, and is less applicable to writing as a whole. He defines exigence as “an imperfection marked by urgency” (6). When writing a screenplay for an action adventure film, for example, you must take into consideration audience (who is my demographic; what are their expectations of the genre; etc.) and constraints (how long can the film be; how do I stay within a certain MPAA rating; etc.); exigence, however, doesn’t factor into the creation of this writing in any substantial way. So the question becomes “Is ‘the rhetorical situation’ broad enough to cover all writing?”
Throughout most of the piece, Lloyd Bitzer labels an idea, which I believe to be a well known, but simply unnamed concept, as “The Rhetorical Situation.” From what I gather a rhetorical situation provides a context and purpose for writing. It’s a way of guiding rhetoric so that the writing is taking its audience and ostensible purpose into careful consideration. To claim that a rhetorical situation is the most important context of writing, however, is a bold and, in my opinion, inaccurate one. To say that any one concept or technique is key to every style and form of writing is a gross generalization. One could argue that if stripped down, the idea of a rhetorical situation can be applied to every form of writing, for instance, simply stating the importance of considering your audience. In order to apply this perspective, however, the purpose of whatever writing is in question must be evaluated. For example, in an instance where the purpose for the writing is some kind of personal release, an audience does not need to be considered. Additionally in this case, the writing that would come of a personal release would not even fall into a “rhetorical situation” categorically. In his piece, Bitzer even addresses the fact that not all writing occurs in a rhetorical situation (8). With this in mind, how can it be possible to claim that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept in all writing? It is completely dependent on the central purpose, goal, and intention of the writing. There is some logic, however, in arguing the other side. For instance, if oversimplified, it does become clear that there are indeed constraints to writing, even if it were something as simple as only being able to fit a certain amount of characters on a page. In the same way, whether the writing is meant for eyes of the public or the privacy of the writer, there is purpose in each form; if there is purpose, there is exigency. Likewise, if one is not excluding the writer, there will also always be an audience.
Lloyd Bitzer does have an interesting take on speech and writing with his rhetorical situation theory. The theory and its three constituents (exigence, audience, and constraints) are an important aspect of oration and writing (8). Bitzer describes the rhetorical situation as “a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action” (4). He also says that “a work is rhetorical because it is a response to a situation of a certain kind” (3). The rhetorical situation calls for a verbal response that is “as functional and necessary as the physical response” (5).
However, I do not find this idea to be new. Bitzer may have coined the expression itself, but the idea has been shaping speech and writing for a very long time. I also do not deem this the most important concept in writing because I simply do not know enough about the other concepts to choose which one is the most important. This is not something I have ever studied, and though I wish I could state my opinion, I do not have enough prior knowledge on the subject. We have looked over many other interesting concepts with similar themes, but I still feel that there is much more to be learned before making a hasty decision.
While Lloyd Bitzer’s “The Rhetorical Situation” makes some valid and interesting points, considering it to be “the most important concept in writing” seems like a bit of an overstatement. Firstly, it appeared throughout the reading that most of what Bitzer was concerned with was the spoken word. More focused on speech, rather than writing. This being said, however, there were certain concepts that I agreed with, for example, the concept of exigence. As defined by Bitzer, exigence is “an imperfection marked by urgency” (Bitzer 6). These imperfections are important in organizing any particular rhetorical situation. These exigencies function as organizing principles, doing such things as specifying the audience to be addressed and the changes to be affected. He writes “the exigence may or may not be perceived clearly by the rhetor or other persons in the situation; it may be strong or weak depending upon the clarity of their perception and the degree of their interest in it; it may be real or unreal depending on the facts of the case; it may be important or trivial; it may be such that discourse can completely remove it, or it may persist in spite of repeated modifications; it may be completely familiar — one of a type of exigences occurring frequently in our experience — or it may be totally new, unique” (Bitzer 7). The reason I chose to include this large quote is because Bitzer really spells out the imperative application of the exigencies. Observing the variations possible to exist in the exigencies, one can see that an exigence can answer important questions such as “where did this argument originate?”, “where is this argument going?”, “is this argument strong?”, “is this argument new?”, etc., etc. Looking at an exigence and how malleable it is in relation to a presented discourse answer the question of “how strong is this argument?”.
The rhetorical situation could be said to be the most important concept in all of writing if we take importance to be measured by real-world relevance and significance. One could say that, on the basis of Bitzer’s definition for the rhetorical situation, any instance in which writing can be used to effect a change in the world would be a rhetorical situation. Wherever there is an exigence for the written word, there is an opportunity to effect changes, and so if ever we were to call a thing important it would be a thing that could be acted upon in the world (barring abstract or monolithic concepts of import that can’t be changed, such as ‘death’ or ‘life’). This challenges me to think of a situation in which writing could not be considered rhetorical, and at first glance it seems to me that non-rhetorical writing must be writing that lacks an audience and an exigence, which seems a small pool of potential candidates. I suppose that writing fiction could be considered non-rhetorical in that there are not always proper exigences for fiction writing, but at the same time fiction can still be said to serve the purpose of change-making, and requires, often, consideration of audiences and constraints. Science writing, Bitzer states, could also be considered non-rhetorical. This seems more apparently true to me, though I also feel that exigence and audience could be stretched definitionally to fit science writing, if the exigence is a subject matter to be explored and explained by the writing, and the audience is anyone who takes this information in and is changed by it.
I believe that Bitzer's rhetorical situation is the biggest concept in writing, because nothing exists in a vacuum especially not humans writing things. Writing is a product of our situations and even works of fiction in a much more obscure way are reactions to rhetorical situations to some degree. Bitzer's components are what form an effective message which is the largest goal of writing. All effective communication reacts well to an exigence. If a writer is reacting to a rhetorical situation well enough, he/she can impact the world in potentially very large ways depending on the audience.
Lloyd Bitzer coined the expression “the rhetorical situation.” The rhetorical situation is defined as the “context in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse” (Bitzer, 1). In regards to the “discourse”, we focus on the rhetor or the speaker and the audience in the nature of creating content is “described”, “the characteristics”, and “how and why” it results in “the creation of rhetoric” (Btizer, 1). Some argue that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. I agree that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. Through Bitzer’s explanation he describes the three constituents that comprise everything relevant to the rhetorical situation: “exigence, audience, and constraints” (Bitzer, 8). “Any exigence is an imperfection marked by urgency” (Bitzer, 6). Constraints are “made up of persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because have the power to constrain the decision and action needed to modify exigence” (Bitzer, 8). This shows how the rhetorical situation is the most important concept of writing because writing works to communicate information to an audience. For example, in the image, there is speaker trying to get support for his law to be passed. All the different constraints that a writer or speaker have to deal with when providing their audience with information and working to convince their constituents what their call to action should be formulate rhetorical discourse. The rhetorical situation formulates the purpose for what goes into writing and lays out for writers how to deliver the most effective message.
ReplyDeleteThe concept of rhetorical situation is important to writing because the elements of the situation often frame any writing that follows, but is the rhetorical situation the most important concept to writing?
ReplyDeleteBitzer’s idea of the rhetorical situation answers important existential questions about writing. A specific piece of writing’s origin question of “where did this come from?” is answered by the rhetorical situation’s concept of exigence. An exigence is “an imperfection marked by urgency” (Bitzer 6). Understanding how a piece of writing comes to exist or understanding why a writer wishes a text to exist is key to effective writing. Understanding context allows for complexity and gives purpose to texts. The concept of exigence also answers the question “where is this going?” Exigence presents a situation “which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigence” (6). This matters a great deal to writing because every piece of writing exists for a reason whether the author is conscience of this or not. Personal letters, texts, and emails are written to deal with the exigence of distance. Novels can be written because the author is seeking a financial gain. The rhetorical situation is what allows writing to exist at all. That being said, it is doubtful that Bitzer’s ideas are revolutionary. Intuitive thinkers and writers have understood these ideas for centuries. His ideas can help us analyze writing and rhetoric, but it has not fundamentally altered the way that writers write and readers read. Good writing existed for centuries before the existence of Bitzer’s theory. His theory is valuable to the field of rhetorical study, but good writing would exist whether or not this concept of rhetorical situation was ever coined. It existed long before now. It is definitely important, but Bitzer is not the first to explore these ideas.
In “The Rhetorical Situation”, Lloyd Bitzer aims establish the rhetorical situation as a controlling and fundamental concern of rhetorical theory. The rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. Bitzer states that rhetorical discourse obtains its character from the situation which creates it. “A work is rhetorical because it is a response to a situation of a certain kind” (Bitzer 3). There are 3 elements of any rhetorical situation: exigence, audience and constraints. An exigence is a defect, problem or obstacle (Bitzer 6). Rhetoric requires an audience because rhetorical discourse produces change by influencing the decisions of people. Constraints have the power to constrain decision and action needed to change the exigence. Rhetorical discourse happens because of the situation. The situation causes a rhetor to create and present discourse. An example of this is the assassination of John F Kennedy. After report of the assassination, there was an urgent need for information. Reporters then created hundreds of messages (Bitzer 9). The response to a rhetorical situation needs to be fitting to the situation. All of this helps writers form more effective discourse. When there is a problem, writers need to form discourse that will persuade an audience. Since people needed information on the assassination, journalists provided it. The responses shifted with the situation and modified exigencies for the audience. By taking the situation into account, writers can better reach and connect with their audience.
ReplyDeleteLloyd Bitzer is probably one of the most influential rhetorical theorists. In his essay he defines his concept, the rhetorical situation, as to be “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigence” (6). In essence he believed that human discourse was dictated and constructed based on a particular situation. Also, in order for there to be any discourse there need to be three constituents:
ReplyDelete1. Exigence (a problem)
2. Audience (those who were affected by the problem and will be addressed in discourse)
3. Constraints (limitations of the rhetors and of the situation that affect discourse).
I believe that his concepts are very important for examining why writing or speaking is essential for humans. I believe that every piece of writing is motivated. There’s a purpose for the certain style, diction, organization and etc. I don’t agree that any writing can be unmotivated and I feel like that’s what Bitzer was outlining in the rhetorical situation. There must be an essential problem to influence and shape discourse. Also, there is always an audience for the writer, whether it’s someone’s teacher, a committee, friends, or even just yourself. In short there can be no writer without a reader. Then there are the constraints. I agree with Bitzer that every motivated piece of writing in defined within the limits of its context. There can unlimited ways of approaching a situation, but a limited number in rightfully defining it. However, I do question the accusation Bitzer makes about situations always being the dictator of discourse. I believe there are cases when the discourse in fact will dictate the situation. When we choose to place one event as more important than another, we are defining the situation, rather than the situation defining us.
In the “Rhetorical Situation,” by Lloyd Bitzer, he coins this phrase and defines it as, “the nature of those contexts in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse.” (1) His essay goes into explaining the conception of the situation and what it is essentially made up of. As I read on to see what Bitzer explains the rhetorical situation to be he says it is,” a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action.” (4) Even though the rhetorical situation can be an important part of writing, and Bitzer explains it as always being an act of persuasion, I don’t think that this is the most important concept of writing. Writing can have many uses, to entertain, inform or persuade. Aside from persuasion, there are two other forms that writing is also a key part of. Of course, whatever your topic of writing may be, persuasion may very well be the best way to go about with your purpose. With that being said, writing is very situational. If you are writing to enact a new rule like in the illustration on the original blog post, then you will obviously want to choose the means of the rhetorical situation. In this case, this would be the most important concept of writing. However, for example, if you were writing to inform your audience about the Golden Globes nominations, then a rhetorical situation would probably not come into play. A major point that Bitzer makes is that a rhetorical situation is there in order to make a change. Again, writing to entertain is just for people to enjoy things they read and pass free time. There isn’t a real major change being enacted here.
ReplyDeleteThe rhetorical situation could be considered one of the most important concepts in writing. Bitzer defines the rhetorical situation as the nature of the contexts in which the speakers and writers create rhetorical discourse. This goes beyond context of situation but also includes historical context, language, audience, situational constraints and just how the writing came into existence in general. Understanding the concept of rhetorical situation is key for a reader to fully understand the meaning presented within writing or speech. Rhetorical situations are mostly dependent on an exigence, audience and constraints presented. An exigence can be considered rhetorical when it can be positively modified by the audience to which it is being presented. Not all audiences would be considered rhetorical. Bitzer would not consider a body of listeners the same as a rhetorical audience. The audience must be capable of being influenced by the writing at hand. Presenting scientific data to a group of fictional authors wouldn’t be considered rhetorical or effective, because they are not an appropriate audience. Lastly, working within constraints is also important for the rhetor to account for when creating text. Understanding all of these factors in the rhetorical situation are important in making effective writing or oration.
ReplyDeleteIn “The Rhetorical Situation”, Lloyd Bitzer defines the rhetorical situation as the context in which something is produced, such as the setting in which a question is asked, the events surrounding a philosopher’s musings, and everything which leads a poet to produce their work. With this concept in mind, we might consider the ways in which writing is related to the rhetorical situation in which it is created. For instance, the context of this blog post may include the mood I am in after the events of my day, the way I like to type o this computer, the slightly slower typing speed due to wet nails which leaves more time to consider word choice, the fact that my old roommate is studying behind me, my thoughts coming into reading the article after taking a rhetoric class last semester, the constraints of the assignment, and plenty more factors. I do think that this is a very important concept in writing, but I would disagree that it is the _most_ important. This is a little ironic, because my reasoning is much to do with the light in which I view this piece, mainly that I immediately disliked Bitzer for his exclusive use of male pronouns for the general population, and for the arrogance in his assertion that no one in history before him has studied this subject, and then finally in his irritating writing style. These things make me judge the author, but I would still posit that the most important concept of writing is the product itself, and that the rhetorical situation is secondary.
ReplyDeleteIs Bitzer’s Rhetorical Situation the MOST important concept in writing? Not really, at least not in writing in general. The Rhetorical Situation is most relevant in speech making. Having studied Bitzer in my Rhetoric class we learned that his theory is just an option of many theories. With the ability to choose other theories from people like Aristotle, Plato, Gorgias, Bell Hooks, and Anzaldua, Bitzer is just someone else with a theory in writing. In fact all his Rhetorical Situation seems to explain is speech writing itself. We have the speaker or writer. The speaker is in charge of having the content which he or she shapes based on many factors. These factors are the constraints and the exigence. The constraints being all those little nit picky elements that the speaker may face that affects how he/she composes their piece. The exigence in some cases may be something that the audience does not understand, which in turn may add to the list of constraints the speaker will face when giving a speech. Audience is another element in Bitzer’s Rhetorical Situation. Based on what the speaker knows about the audience he/she will reflect in the word choice, tone, gesture, and other aspects of speech making that involve presentation. So maybe when it comes specifically to speech making is the Rhetorical Situation the most important concept of writing, but other than that it seems a pretty obvious theory that has no real importance to writing. In fact it could be modified to be more specific while covering more in the vast world of writing.
ReplyDeleteIn "The Rhetorical Situation," Lloyd Bitzer lays forth the characteristics he believes a speech or a piece of writing must possess in order for it to be considered rhetorical. First on his list is an exigence, the situation that invites discourse. The exigence may be any sort of imperfection in the world, however, it must be something that can be changed, so that the audience can be persuaded to take some sort of action. However, Bitzer warns that simply describing rhetoric as inviting change is too general, but rather, as Bronislow Malinowski says, "The structure of all this linguistic material is inextricably mixed up with, and dependent upon, the course of the activity in which the utterances are embedded." In other words, rhetoric is a kind of action. An audience capable of being persuaded is another fundamental aspect of rhetorical discourse; the audience must not merely experience the speech or writing, but be influenced by it. Finally, a rhetorical situation must involve a set of constraints for the speaker or writer to argue against, and these may be comprised of traditions, facts, motives, beliefs, and other similar elements.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the idea that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. Even if not every piece of writing would be considered rhetorical, Bitzer's ideas can still apply to any one. Any written work has to have some situation that calls it forth, whether that be the need to entertain, inform, or persuade. It must have an audience that can be changed by it. All writing faces constraints, even if those are simply the limits of the reader's attention. Much of what Bitzer says can apply to any kind of writing, not only rhetoric.
Bitzer’s points are very interesting and useful but they are limited to a specific type of writing. The rhetorical situation is something that would be very important in a speech but when considering its use in a creative essay, one would second guess its usefulness. That leads me to say that the rhetorical situation, although important, is not the most important concept in writing.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I do agree with is that “a speech is given rhetorical significance by the situation” (5). Without a situation, the speech would be meaningless or just a combination of words with no use. Rhetoric is necessary to produce a desired change or action. This is where rhetoric can be seen, as it is seen by Aristotle, as an art of persuasion. Bitzer’s three constituents of rhetoric are crucial for carrying out the rhetorical situation; these points are exigence, audience, and constraints. In order for rhetoric to continue to exist there must be an exigence that can be modified. In order for an exigence to follow through, there must be an audience who’s actions and decisions must be influenced. The audience is what Bitzer states as the “controlling principle” (7). Because there is an active audience in a rhetorical situation, there are also constraints. Constraints may include beliefs, facts, traditions, or interests. I believe this to be the most important point that Bitzer focuses on in his essay. In order to approach an audience successfully, one must acknowledge the constraints their audience is facing.
Saying that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept (out of all of them) is, to me, a huge stretch. While Bitzer does provide us with important concepts and relationships between audience and speaker/writer, I honestly believe that it leaves out way more than it offers. Bitzer explains that there has to be an imperfection marked by urgency, and I can't see how that fits into all writing. I think a lot of times that writing can exist without a need and Bitzer doesn't allow for this in his idea. Also, he defines a set of constraints that can influence the rhetor (writer/speaker) and while I think this is important and that it does exist, especially in regards to societal constraints, it's not the most important. Bitzer focuses too much on the situation/surroundings of writing and not enough on the choices that are made when writing. We've looked at significantly more progressive ideas in regards to multimodality and so to define writing in terms of its need to exist seems like a step back. Also, although it might be quite obvious, Bitzer doesn't touch on non-rhetorical writing, he only says "It seems to me that rhetoric is situational." (Bitzer 3) Regardless of whether or not rhetoric is situational or not, not all writing is. In general I believe that Bitzer provides us with important key terms. In my rhetoric class we discussed his terms in relationship to other rhetorical theory and it helps to make connections but in no way is a way to define writing for the simple fact that it leaves out too much.
ReplyDeleteI understood from Bitzer’s essay that to have a rhetorical situation you first need exigency, audience, and constraint before the discourse. Once there is rhetorical discourse, there must be a situation that is fitting, real, and structured. I feel rhetorical situation is an important concept in writing, but I would never feel confident in saying it is the most important. It is hard to explain exactly how important I think it is, because although I now understand what it is, I am still wrapping my brain around each and every part of my life that fits in the category of a rhetorical situation.
ReplyDeleteI will say that the reason I don’t think I agree that it is the most important concept of writing is because I think it is only that way in the society we have built, which isn’t the society we have to live in. In our society, it makes sense that people say it is, because we are built using courtrooms and presidential debates. Rhetorical situations definitely still exist on a day-to-day basis, but there seems to be a formality to its definition, that I don’t think works perfectly. I also dislike that people can deem it incorrect rhetoric for a situation, because I believe thoughts and discussion can’t really be incorrect; people can disagree, but they can’t be factually unfitting.
I also see why it would be considered the most important, because in our world everything needs to be presented and discussed for people to follow it. I understand the argument that we would be nowhere without rhetorical situations, because we would either be stagnant or in chaos. I honestly think I need more time to dwell on this article before I can respond to the question with more clarity.
Lloyd Blitzer’s rhetorical situation is indeed the most important concept of writing. In his paper, Blitzer defines the rhetorical situation as a “natural context of persons, events, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance” (Blitzer 5). The rhetorical situation is crucial in order to decipher appropriate physical and verbal responses and what kind of observations should be made. According to Blitzer, rhetoric is situational when the rhetorical discourse is used to respond to situations, rhetorical speech is given significance by the situation, and it is a necessary condition of rhetorical discourse. Furthermore, the situation controls the rhetorical response, thus proving how important it truly is to writing (Blitzer 6).
ReplyDeleteBlitzer highlights three constituents of the rhetorical situation, which include exigence, audience, and constraints. He describes exigence as an “imperfection marked by urgency” as well as a defect or obstacle (Blitzer 6). The second constituent he addresses is the audience, which consists of people capable of being “influenced by discourse” and “being mediators of change” (Blitzer 8). Furthermore, to Blitzer every rhetorical situation consists of constraints that control decisions and modify exigences depending on the people, events, objects and relations of the situation (Blitzer 8). These characteristics define the rhetorical situation and ultimately the concept of writing.
Even though the rhetorical situation is viewed as the most important of writing, it still has some downfalls. The rhetorical situation cannot invite just any response; it only invites a response that fits the situation. Furthermore, it must meet the requirements established by the situation, dictating a strong and clear purpose, theme, matter and style of response (Blitzer 10). The rhetorical situation also has to be distinguished from a fictive situation such as the speech in a novel or play. As well as, exhibit complex or simple structures depending on the amount of elements needed to interact (Blitzer 11). Once the situation finds it’s fitting rhetorical response, a decision is made whether it dwindles or the situation carries on such as The Gettysburg Address (Blitzer 13). Without the rhetorical situation there wouldn’t be any rhetoric in the world due to the lack of exigence. Thus, the rhetorical situation outlines all the key characteristics of what goes into writing, proving that it is an imperative concept of writing.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe claim, “rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing” is a strong statement. Considering all aspects of writing and all that writing encompasses it is hard to think that one term is the most important concept. Lloyd Bitzer made a good argument advocating this statement in his essay “The Rhetorical Situation.” Bitzer defines the rhetorical situation as “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse…” Throughout his essay, Bitzer persuades the reader that rhetorical discourse cannot occur without a rhetorical situation (which is ironic because he is using rhetoric in order to prove the existence of rhetorical situation). In order to prove his theory about the rhetorical situation, Bitzer provides many examples of rhetorical discourse that come to life because of particular situations. The examples include men fishing, the Gettysburg Address, inaugural speeches and funeral eulogies. With this he writes, “Rhetorical discourse, I shall argue, does obtain its character-as-rhetorical from the situation which generates it.” Bitzer’s argument is convincing, and I do think that which rhetorical situation is the most important concept in writing. He supports this theory by explaining that rhetorical situations must be real. Also, he says that fictive rhetorical situations are not established by the story itself. I find this very accurate. Some writers might use a made up story to persuade their readers of something, but the situation is based on a real circumstance. Likewise, there is no persuading (rhetorical discourse) without a real, fitting situation that initiates the discourse. Bitzer writes, “So controlling is situation that we should consider it the very ground of rhetorical activity…” Most situations are considered rhetorical situations, so therefore, writing the medium to convey the rhetorical message. With this in mind, it is obvious that rhetorical is critical in writing.
ReplyDeleteIn “The Rhetorical Situation”, Bitzer defines a rhetorical situation as the “nature of those contexts in which a speaker or writer create rhetorical discourse” (1). He further details three parts of context – audience, exigence, and constraints – which play essential roles in devising the response to any given situation. Bitzer also states that “rhetoric is a mode of altering reality”; this is done by creating discourse which changes reality through the meditation of thought and action (4).
ReplyDeleteTo answer the question of whether this is the single, most important concept in writing, I’d have to answer quite frankly: I don’t know. I don’t think I have a broad enough view of writing and the contributions of theorists to make such a bold statement, but I would agree that what Bitzer proposes is incredibly valuable. He gives writers a means in which to approach writing -- things to be considered. What is especially useful is his outlining of audience, exigence, and constraints. In order to craft an effective message, in any given medium, these three things are perhaps the most crucial of considerations. Exigence, however, is most evidently tied to Bitzer’s concept of a “rhetorical situation”, and is less applicable to writing as a whole. He defines exigence as “an imperfection marked by urgency” (6). When writing a screenplay for an action adventure film, for example, you must take into consideration audience (who is my demographic; what are their expectations of the genre; etc.) and constraints (how long can the film be; how do I stay within a certain MPAA rating; etc.); exigence, however, doesn’t factor into the creation of this writing in any substantial way. So the question becomes “Is ‘the rhetorical situation’ broad enough to cover all writing?”
Throughout most of the piece, Lloyd Bitzer labels an idea, which I believe to be a well known, but simply unnamed concept, as “The Rhetorical Situation.” From what I gather a rhetorical situation provides a context and purpose for writing. It’s a way of guiding rhetoric so that the writing is taking its audience and ostensible purpose into careful consideration. To claim that a rhetorical situation is the most important context of writing, however, is a bold and, in my opinion, inaccurate one.
ReplyDeleteTo say that any one concept or technique is key to every style and form of writing is a gross generalization. One could argue that if stripped down, the idea of a rhetorical situation can be applied to every form of writing, for instance, simply stating the importance of considering your audience. In order to apply this perspective, however, the purpose of whatever writing is in question must be evaluated. For example, in an instance where the purpose for the writing is some kind of personal release, an audience does not need to be considered. Additionally in this case, the writing that would come of a personal release would not even fall into a “rhetorical situation” categorically. In his piece, Bitzer even addresses the fact that not all writing occurs in a rhetorical situation (8). With this in mind, how can it be possible to claim that the rhetorical situation is the most important concept in all writing? It is completely dependent on the central purpose, goal, and intention of the writing.
There is some logic, however, in arguing the other side. For instance, if oversimplified, it does become clear that there are indeed constraints to writing, even if it were something as simple as only being able to fit a certain amount of characters on a page. In the same way, whether the writing is meant for eyes of the public or the privacy of the writer, there is purpose in each form; if there is purpose, there is exigency. Likewise, if one is not excluding the writer, there will also always be an audience.
Lloyd Bitzer does have an interesting take on speech and writing with his rhetorical situation theory. The theory and its three constituents (exigence, audience, and constraints) are an important aspect of oration and writing (8). Bitzer describes the rhetorical situation as “a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action” (4). He also says that “a work is rhetorical because it is a response to a situation of a certain kind” (3). The rhetorical situation calls for a verbal response that is “as functional and necessary as the physical response” (5).
ReplyDeleteHowever, I do not find this idea to be new. Bitzer may have coined the expression itself, but the idea has been shaping speech and writing for a very long time. I also do not deem this the most important concept in writing because I simply do not know enough about the other concepts to choose which one is the most important. This is not something I have ever studied, and though I wish I could state my opinion, I do not have enough prior knowledge on the subject. We have looked over many other interesting concepts with similar themes, but I still feel that there is much more to be learned before making a hasty decision.
While Lloyd Bitzer’s “The Rhetorical Situation” makes some valid and interesting points, considering it to be “the most important concept in writing” seems like a bit of an overstatement. Firstly, it appeared throughout the reading that most of what Bitzer was concerned with was the spoken word. More focused on speech, rather than writing. This being said, however, there were certain concepts that I agreed with, for example, the concept of exigence. As defined by Bitzer, exigence is “an imperfection marked by urgency” (Bitzer 6). These imperfections are important in organizing any particular rhetorical situation. These exigencies function as organizing principles, doing such things as specifying the audience to be addressed and the changes to be affected. He writes “the exigence may or may not be perceived clearly by the rhetor or other persons in the situation; it may be strong or weak depending upon the clarity of their perception and the degree of their interest in it; it may be real or unreal depending on the facts of the case; it may be important or trivial; it may be such that discourse can completely remove it, or it may persist in spite of repeated modifications; it may be completely familiar — one of a type of exigences occurring frequently in our experience — or it may be totally new, unique” (Bitzer 7). The reason I chose to include this large quote is because Bitzer really spells out the imperative application of the exigencies. Observing the variations possible to exist in the exigencies, one can see that an exigence can answer important questions such as “where did this argument originate?”, “where is this argument going?”, “is this argument strong?”, “is this argument new?”, etc., etc. Looking at an exigence and how malleable it is in relation to a presented discourse answer the question of “how strong is this argument?”.
ReplyDeleteFrom Spencer:
ReplyDeleteThe rhetorical situation could be said to be the most important concept in all of writing if we take importance to be measured by real-world relevance and significance. One could say that, on the basis of Bitzer’s definition for the rhetorical situation, any instance in which writing can be used to effect a change in the world would be a rhetorical situation. Wherever there is an exigence for the written word, there is an opportunity to effect changes, and so if ever we were to call a thing important it would be a thing that could be acted upon in the world (barring abstract or monolithic concepts of import that can’t be changed, such as ‘death’ or ‘life’).
This challenges me to think of a situation in which writing could not be considered rhetorical, and at first glance it seems to me that non-rhetorical writing must be writing that lacks an audience and an exigence, which seems a small pool of potential candidates. I suppose that writing fiction could be considered non-rhetorical in that there are not always proper exigences for fiction writing, but at the same time fiction can still be said to serve the purpose of change-making, and requires, often, consideration of audiences and constraints. Science writing, Bitzer states, could also be considered non-rhetorical. This seems more apparently true to me, though I also feel that exigence and audience could be stretched definitionally to fit science writing, if the exigence is a subject matter to be explored and explained by the writing, and the audience is anyone who takes this information in and is changed by it.
I believe that Bitzer's rhetorical situation is the biggest concept in writing, because nothing exists in a vacuum especially not humans writing things. Writing is a product of our situations and even works of fiction in a much more obscure way are reactions to rhetorical situations to some degree. Bitzer's components are what form an effective message which is the largest goal of writing. All effective communication reacts well to an exigence. If a writer is reacting to a rhetorical situation well enough, he/she can impact the world in potentially very large ways depending on the audience.
ReplyDelete