{"id":7093,"date":"2007-05-16T12:04:48","date_gmt":"2007-05-16T12:04:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.earthwidemoth.com\/blog\/2007\/05\/16\/lyon-rhetoric-a\/"},"modified":"2007-05-16T12:04:48","modified_gmt":"2007-05-16T12:04:48","slug":"lyon-rhetoric-a","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.earthwidemoth.com\/blog\/2007\/05\/16\/lyon-rhetoric-a\/","title":{"rendered":"Lyon, "Rhetoric and Hermeneutics""},"content":{"rendered":"\u23f3 Approximate reading time: <\/span> 4<\/span> mins<\/span><\/span>

Lyon, Arabella. "Rhetoric and Hermeneutics." Perspectives on Rhetorical
\nInvention. Eds. Janet Atwill and Janice Lauer. Knoxville, Tenn.: Univ. of
\nTennessee P, 2002. 36-52.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Lyon works at the intersection of rhetoric and hermeneutics<\/b> in an
\neffort to make sense of the relationship between the two concepts. To
\nweigh the terms and explore their interrelationship, she uses invention<\/b>
\nas a fulcrum. Rhetoric and hermeneutics, Lyon explains, both can be
\nthought inventive, but they are not equal terms with respect to invention.
\nLyon is concerned that "[b]y turning toward interpretation and away from
\nproduction and making, rhetoricians have diminished the place of rhetoric as an
\naction in the world" (36). With this, Lyon makes a strong argument for the
\ninventive orientation of rhetoric the must not be lost with turns to rhetorical
\ncriticism, hermeneutic invention, or rhetorical reading. Hermeneutics and
\nrhetoric are "not the same project" (37).<\/p>\n

Lyon attributes one explanation of the interpretive renewal in traditional
\nrhetoric to Dilip Gaonkar and Michael Leff who "draw attention to the
\nrelationship between interprettion and agency" (39), keeping them separate
\nrather than working to harmonize them. Next, Lyon sets out to examine two
\ntreatments of the relationship between hermeneutics and rhetoric: one she
\nregards favorably by Hans-Georg
\nGadamer<\/a> and one she regards skeptically by Steven Mailloux. Gadamer reserves
\nsome distinctions between hermeneutics and rhetoric; toward a "philosophical
\nhermeneutics" he says they are "interdependent" and they "work synergistically"
\n(40). Lyon explains Gadamer’s stance: "Hermeneutics is a re-vision of an earlier
\nproduction, an earlier invention. Hence, hermeneutics is dependent on what is
\nsaid or written. There is a crucial rhetorical event (invention) priotr to
\ninterpretation" (41). <\/p>\n

Mailloux, on the other hand, defines rhetoric in such a way that "emphasizes
\nthe cultural effects of and response to a text and ignores the rhetor’s activity
\nof purposeful production" (42). Lyon takes exception with Mailloux’s discussion
\nof how interpretation works, particularly for his mention of "translation" and
\n"transformation" (42c). She contends that by collapsing rhetoric and
\nhermeneutics<\/b>, Mailloux’s approach glosses significant distinctions between
\nthe two concepts as it relies on a logic that slides from hermeneutics to
\nrhetoric: "hermeneutics is argument is rhetoric." This risks reducing rhetorical
\ntheory to "linguistic situations" alone (45c). <\/p>\n

Continuing, Lyon discloses a preference for keeping hermeneutics and rhetoric
\ndistinct. She examines three interpretive-productive modes to attenuate
\nthe distinctions: rhetorical invention, hermeneutical invention, and
\nrhetorical reading<\/b>. Rhetorical invention applies to a certain contextual
\nnovelty (not wholly made up because of the accruals of language), whereas
\nhermeneutical invention is much more closely aligned with paraphrasing.
\nHermeneutical invention, like rhetorical reading, is "a mediation<\/b>" (48d,
\n49a). <\/p>\n

Finally, Lyon reasserts what is useful from Gadamer’s nuanced stance on the
\nsubtle distinctions between hermeneutics and rhetoric. Gadamer’s fusing of
\nhorizons allows for prejudice, for bias, for the ways texts act on us and
\ninfiltrate us, as "the text becomes part of our being" (50). Lyon calls for
\ncaution over allowing interpretive modes to detract from rhetorical invention:
\n"Rhetoric’s increasing affiliation with textual reception, specifically
\nGadamer’s hermeneutics, while increasing concern with discourse and text,
\npotentially diminishes many aspects of textual production and rhetoric" (50). <\/p>\n