The rhetoric of reaction

Featured in

  • Published 20060505
  • ISBN: 9780733316081
  • Extent: 264 pp
  • Paperback (234 x 153mm)

RHETORIC WAS UNDERSTOOD by Aristotle to include those many, often refined, techniques of argumentation unavoidable in domains of life, such as politics and law, where persuasion is necessary but conclusive demonstration is unavailable. It is unavoidable, significant and there are good and bad forms of it. As Samuel Goldwyn might observe, however, we’ve passed a lot of water since then. Today, “rhetoric” is almost always spoken of pejoratively, and more often than not, dismissively: words without weight (“empty rhetoric”), which add nothing but adornment (“mere rhetoric”). If, in Australia, it is already suspicious to be eloquent, it is unpardonable to be rhetorical.

What I have in mind is somewhere between the refined and the corrupt. The sorts of rhetoric I discuss here are significant, but none of them is to be recommended. Certainly, they are all about persuasion. I’m not a fan of them, but they’re not “mere” hot air, or sweet words, or just style as opposed to substance. Indeed, they’re not mere anything and they are far from empty. They have their role and significance in public debate.

Already a subscriber? Sign in here

Share article

About the author

Martin Krygier

Martin Krygier is Professor of Law at the University of New South Wales, and co-director of its European Law Centre. In 1997, he delivered...

More from this edition

The pain of disrespect

GR OnlineON MARCH 31 this year, a cultural performance was organised to raise funds for the tsunami victims in Sumatra. It was specifically staged for...

Tales from the desert camps

ReportageGETTING WORK IN Australian detention centres was once surprisingly easy. First, you sent your CV to Australasian Correctional Management's head office in Sydney and...

Stay up to date with the latest, news, articles and special offers from Griffith Review.