When Do We Want It? Never!
Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 02:52PM From Ask Figaro:
Dear Figaro,
As an academic rhetorician—the type of guy who calls demonstrative rhetoric what it is, epideictic rhetoric—I am increasingly, year by year, aggravated by various public figures engaging in excessive hypophora. Whether it’s a political figure or a coach in college sports, people overuse rhetorical questions. The rhetorical question followed by the quick answer seems rhetorically schizophrenic to me since people use it so much.
Any thoughts on why rhetorical questions are being overused?
Quintilian B. Nasty
Dear Quint,
You’re right that the hypophora (hy-PAH-phor-a)— the figure that asks a rhetorical question and then answers it — is getting a workout these days. You know why that is? I’ll tell you why that is. Our society has become increasingly demonstrative, as your question implies. (“What do we want? Groupthink! When do we want it? Now!”)
In a demonstrative society, deliberation goes out the figurative window. Any opinion or fact that’s contrary to the received wisdom smacks of disloyalty. And what’s the best way to deliver received wisdom? By immediate answers to rhetorical questions.
Demonstrative rhetoric — or epideictic, as you Greek-talking Romans insist on calling it — brings the tribe together through talk of shared values. It can inspire patriotism and self-sacrifice, but too much of it results in tribalism. And tribalism is democracy’s kryptonite.
The American founders knew that tribalism inevitably leads to dictatorship. It was the one thing they feared the most. And who is Figaro to argue?
Nobody, that’s who.
Fig.
Reader Comments (15)
Fig.
my daily Figaro!
Rhetoric about rhetoric, that's why.
First of all, rhetorical questions cannot ever be overused; they're just too fundamental. Look at some basic categories:
(a) pysma: the asking of multiple questions successively, which would together require a complex reply.
(b) anthypophora: the immediately answering of ones own question.
(c) anteisagoge: The answering of a question with a question.
There are, of course, others, forming the entire area of erotesis. Your lament is that the common rhetorical usages of questions in daily life is due to 'group think' and tribalism. These ideas are completely unfounded. If asked, most people using these figures would simply say they were just trying to make a point. Sometimes experts can become such sticklers, they become unreasonable.
The most important thing about questions is that they direct the minds of the listeners. For example if I ask you, "What color are your mother's eyes?", I've gotten to think about your mother and her eyes, whether you want to or not. What if I say,"You know doctors say french fries are bad for you?" That question begs the questions: 1) which doctors? 2) where is this information? 3) are french fries really bad for you? being asked several consecutive questions is an inquisition, while being asked the same questions repeatedly is a baggering. This all part of the psycholgy of questions. Understanding how to use questions properly is underappreciated science and art. I wish people handled the entire area better, but I'd never accuse anyone of being tribal due to their lack of sophistication.
But Quintilian's question was not about the phenomenon but the trend of the hypophora; it was about the figure's growing use. The hypophora's employment in demonstrative rhetoric is the symptom of the larger, when- I- want- your- opinion- I'll- give- it- to- you phenomenon. that's where the tribalism comes in.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
Fig.
The former is better in print, but the later is a bit better when spoken.
David Brock - you could have worked the term "happy meal" into your discourse above. It would have meshed well.