Friday, October 24, 2014

Ramus Owns Quintilian




The beginning of Arguments in Rhetoric Against Quintilian is somewhat calm. Ramus does not hesitate to rip into Aristotle, Cicero, or Quintilian, but he does so calmly at first. He begins by pointed out areas of praise for Aristotle and Cicero. At this point I began to think: "oh, he's going to take the high road." Yet, as soon as he mentions Quintilian, all hell breaks loose. Based on his introduction, he seems to build Quintilian up before he knocks him all the way down. Ramus then proceeds to Quintilian's claims and removes every ounce of dignity Quintilian may have had: " ... in no one of these parts does he fit in the moral philosophy of rhetoric. In fact this man was sadly lacking in knowledge of dialectic" (p.684, col. 2).


 I wish Quintilian was around to respond to Ramus. Ramus continues to tear apart every ounce of Quintilian's claims on rhetoric, when Quintilian was not able to defend himself. I enjoyed this piece at the beginning, but the further along it went the less I liked it. When someone's viewpoints are attacked and re-attacked, I usually like to hear a defense and counterattack (which may be one of the reasons I'm pursuing law). With Quintilian unable to respond, however, I grew bored with this text rather quickly. Though Ramus, time after time, introduced solid points, I found myself looking for a defense measure, repeatedly.
Posted by at

2 comments:

  1. UnknownOctober 28, 2014 at 8:04 PM

    Mitchell,

    Like you I wish Quintilian would have been around to defend himself against the (repeated) attacks made by Ramus. I found this reading to be entertaining at parts, due to how little Ramus held back on his opinions towards Quintilian, but I also felt bad for Quintilian. Ramus kept making speculations about the responses Quintilian might have towards Ramus and his attacks, but as I reader I wanted Quintilian's words, not the words Ramus put into Quintilian's mouth. I think Ramus did have some interesting points about rhetoric, in regards to taking out morality/ethics I found that intriguing, but both author's views on rhetoric were made during different time periods. Which I had to take into account as a reader, and I think that is something Ramus should have been aware, or more aware of, while he was attacking Quintilian. Regardless I kept waiting to hear Quintilian defend himself, and was disappointed to know that this was not going to happen.

    -Jennie

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownOctober 29, 2014 at 9:22 AM

    While I appreciated several of Ramus' critiques I agree it would have been interesting to see a rebuttal from Quintilian. I feel like Ramus turned a lot of us away by speaking ill of the dead, and one who is highly respected. While it's interesting to consider Ramus' rhetorical reasons for his choices I believe a more conservative approach may have been more appropriate. A debate between these two on the matter of rhetoric would be very interesting.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)