Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

On May 1st, 1983, two of us walked in Dorothy Day’s footsteps in Union Square at Fourteenth Street to distribute the twelve-page anniversary issue of The Catholic Worker. Joseph Zarella had been a full-time volunteer at the Catholic Worker when Peter Maurin was in his prime, in the years from 1935 to 1942. Zarella had travelled with Peter Maurin in 1936 to visit the newly founded houses of the Catholic Worker movement. He remembered the talks that Maurin had given to the struggling groups, as well as to monasteries, seminaries and parishes throughout the country. I had encountered Maurin in the early nineteen forties on visits to the Catholic Worker. What we most remembered about Maurin was his utter selflessness, his total absorption in the message he was impelled to share. We cherish the memory of that craggy face, illuminated from within, as he delivered the carefully phrased concepts. We recall what it was like to have the index finger of that broad peasant hand brandished before our faces as Maurin “made his points.” It was these “points,” lived out dramatically by Dorothy Day, and enfleshed not only in her memorable writing but in the C. W. movement, that captured the minds of young people and set them on fire with zeal to remake the world.

Augustus Taber Murray also examines the importance and degree of interaction between plot and character. He does this by discussing Aristotle’s statements about plot and character in his Poetics: that plot can exist without character, but character cannot exist without plot, and so character is secondary to plot. Murray maintains that Aristotle did not mean that complicated plot should hold the highest place in a tragedy play. This is because the plot was, more often than not, simple and therefore not a major point of tragic interest. Murray conjectures that people today do not accept Aristotle’s statement about character and plot because to modern people, the most memorable things about tragedy plays are often the characters. [30] However, Murray does concede that Aristotle is correct in that "There can be no portrayal of character ... without at least a skeleton outline of plot." [31]

However, Aristotle stated that logos alone is not sufficient. Not only is it not sufficient on its own, but it is no more important than either of the two other pillars. He argued that all three persuasive appeals are necessary.

By Alan Riding
The New York Times
October 28, 1993

Learn more

ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

By Alan Riding
The New York Times
October 28, 1993

Action Action

ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Action Action

ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

However, Aristotle stated that logos alone is not sufficient. Not only is it not sufficient on its own, but it is no more important than either of the two other pillars. He argued that all three persuasive appeals are necessary.

Action Action

ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory
Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

By Alan Riding
The New York Times
October 28, 1993

Action Action

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Action Action

ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Augustus Taber Murray also examines the importance and degree of interaction between plot and character. He does this by discussing Aristotle’s statements about plot and character in his Poetics: that plot can exist without character, but character cannot exist without plot, and so character is secondary to plot. Murray maintains that Aristotle did not mean that complicated plot should hold the highest place in a tragedy play. This is because the plot was, more often than not, simple and therefore not a major point of tragic interest. Murray conjectures that people today do not accept Aristotle’s statement about character and plot because to modern people, the most memorable things about tragedy plays are often the characters. [30] However, Murray does concede that Aristotle is correct in that "There can be no portrayal of character ... without at least a skeleton outline of plot." [31]

Action Action

ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

However, Aristotle stated that logos alone is not sufficient. Not only is it not sufficient on its own, but it is no more important than either of the two other pillars. He argued that all three persuasive appeals are necessary.

Action Action

ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Action Action

Bootstrap Thumbnail Second

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Action Action

Bootstrap Thumbnail Third

Ethos new essays in rhetorical and critical theory

Action Action