![Sample our Communication Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, 2013 & 2014 volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5927/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Information-Science2.jpg"})
Abstract
In this essay, I seek to read the rhetorical theories set forth by Belgians Chaïm Perelman and Paul de Man as responses to the Holocaust. To accomplish this aspiration, I draw from Dominick LaCapra's framework for the analysis of trauma and its expression in historical and theoretical texts. Reading the rhetorical theories of Perelman and de Man, two of the most prominent of the twentieth century, through a lens of trauma theory allows critics to see them as post-war efforts to deal with the implications of the absence of meaning, the murder and loss of 25,257 Belgian Jews, Fascism, genocide, and de Man's collaboration with the Nazis. I argue that Perelman's rhetoric theory better “works-through” the Belgian Holocaust than the one offered by de Man because it offers a vision of reason that can yield justice and places collaborators in the “grey zone” of totalitarian societies and logical positivism, thereby offering de Man partial absolution for his endorsement of the German occupation and anti-Semitism. De Man's rhetorical theory appears to act out the Belgian Holocaust, for it rehearses the act of deconstruction, does not name its traumatic exigence, lacks the theoretical resources to deal with the material past, fails to offer better choices for the present, or provide a vision of the future. Reading rhetorical theories as responses to the exigences of trauma calls for a reconsideration of the contexts and motives driving the creation of the major rhetorical theories of the twentieth century, including those of Heidegger and Grassi.
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2005 conference of the International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Los Angeles.
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2005 conference of the International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Los Angeles.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks the editor and the anonymous reviewers for their rigorous critique and Dominick LaCapra, Bryce and Edith M. Bowmar Professor of Humanistic Studies at Cornell University. The author als thanks Professor Michelle Bolduc, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee for the translations.
Notes
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2005 conference of the International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Los Angeles.
1. Madame Rubincranz in Fela Perelman's Dans le ventre de la baleine (In the Belly of the Whale) (Bruxelles: La Renaissance du Livre, 1947), 36, italics in original.
2. Alice Yaeger Kaplan, French Lessons: A Memoir (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 172.
3. Mieczyslaw Maneli, Perelman's New Rhetoric as Philosophy and Methodology for the Next Century (Boston: Kluwer, 1994), 14.
4. E. J. Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes: A History of the World, 1914–1991 (New York: Vintage Books, 1996). See as well his Interesting Times: A Twentieth-Century Life (New York: Pantheon Books, 2002), 200.
5. Shoshana Felman and Dori Laub, Testimony: Crises of Witnessing in Literature, Psychoanalysis, and History (New York: Routledge, 1991), 1.
6. Allan Megill, Prophets of Extremity: Nietzsche, Heidegger, Foucault, Derrida (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), 111.
7. Christian Delacampagne, A History of Philosophy in the Twentieth Century (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999).
8. Lloyd Bitzer, “The Rhetorical Situation,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 1 (1968): 1–14.
9. I do not mean to conflate crisis, catastrophe, and trauma, although there may be overlap. According to Gigliotti, a “‘limit event’ is an event or practice of such magnitude and profound violence that its effects rupture the otherwise normative foundations of legitimacy and so-called civilising tendencies that underlie the constitution of political and moral community.” See Simone Gigliotti, “Unspeakable Pasts as Limit Events: The Holocaust, Genocide, and the Stolen Generations,” Australian Journal of Politics and History 49 (2003): 164.
10. To juxtapose the rhetorics of Perelman and de Man, I draw from the following works: Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969); Chaïm Perelman, The Realm of Rhetoric (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982); Chaïm Perelman, The Idea of Justice and the Problem of Argument, trans. J. Petrie (New York: Humanities Press, 1963); Chaïm Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and Its Applications (Dordrecht, Holland; Boston: D. Reidel Publishing, 1979; Paul de Man, Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983); Paul de Man, Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1979). My understanding of Perelman and de Man is informed by: Alan Gross and Ray Dearin, Chaïm Perelman (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2003); Lindsay Waters, “Introduction,” in Critical Writings, 1953–1978, ed. Lindsay Waters (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989), ix–lxxiiii.
11. Survival was often a function of chance as well as social status, and the distinction between resistance and collaboration in Belgium (and the other countries occupied by the Nazis) was often obscured by the Nazi use of terror. If the exigencies faced by Perelman and de Man were different, those challenging Perelman were also different from those facing many other Belgian Jews, as the Free University continued to provide him with his salary through covert means during the course of the war. Additionally, Perelman became a citizen of Belgium in 1936, affording him an advantage over non-citizen Jews; the Nazis were slow, particularly during the early years of the occupation, to seize Jews who were citizens. Finally, Perelman was, for a very short time, a member of the Association des Juifs en Belgique (AJB), one of the Jewish councils established by the Nazis in the occupied countries to assist them in identifying and locating Jews. Hannah Arendt has condemned the councils, suggesting that Jewish leaders of these organizations had assisted the Nazis in their efforts. In Perelman's case, it is clear that his aspiration, which was successful, was to “redirect” the AJB toward resistance. De Man left Le Soir in 1943 and did not continue to write anti-Semitic tracts after his departure from the paper. Some say he hid Jews during the Belgium occupation. All of these historical considerations would, if we use the insights of both Primo Levi and Chaïm Perelman, caution us to be careful in judging de Man. See Primo Levi, The Drowned and the Saved (New York: Summit Books, 1988); Jean-Philippe Schreiber, Chaïm Perelman and Double Fidelity (Brussels: Martin Buber Institute; Free University of Brussels, unpublished manuscript, 1999); Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil, rev. and enl. ed. (New York: Penguin Books, 1994).
12. For an English translation of this article, see Martin McQuillan, Paul De Man (London; New York: Routledge, 2001), 127–29.
13. Wulf Kansteiner, “Genealogy of a Category Mistake: A Critical Intellectual History of the Cultural Trauma Metaphor,” Rethinking History 8 (2004): 193–221; Dominick LaCapra, History in Transit: Experience, Identity, Critical Theory (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2004), 112. My understanding of trauma is greatly influenced by LaCapra. He is, I believe, justly critical of the de Manian interpretation of trauma and deconstruction. Some of de Man's colleagues, friends, and students, La Capra maintains, are affected by the problem of transference as they repeat and rehearse de Man's approach to reading texts, which is ahistorical. However, they rightly place de Man's wartime writings in context in their attempts to defend him and his scholarly writings. See Dominick LaCapra, “Personal, the Political and the Textual: Paul De Man as Object of Transference,” History and Memory 4 (1992): 5–38; Jacques Derrida, “Like the Sound of the Sea Deep within a Shell: Paul De Man's War,” in Responses, ed. Werner Hamacher, Neil Hertz, and Thomas Keenan (Lincoln: University of Nebraska, 1989), 127–64.
14. James Crosswhite, “Is There an Audience for This Argument? Fallacies, Theories, and Relativisms,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 28 (1995): 136.
15. Tony Judt, Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945 (New York: Penguin Press, 2005), 17.
16. Crosswhite, “Is There an Audience for This Argument? Fallacies, Theories, and Relativisms,” 136.
17. John Arthos, “Almost Speaking a New Rhetoric: The Strangeness of the Text of La Nouvelle Rhetorique,” Southern Communication Journal 70 (2004): 34.
18. For a comprehensive overview of the Belgian Holocaust, see Dan Mikhman, Belgium and the Holocaust: Jews, Belgians, Germans (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1998).
19. M. M. Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, trans. Michael Holquist (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981), 425–6.
20. Barbara Warnick's study of Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca's role in the new rhetoric concludes that Perelman set the agenda and the theoretical framework for their collaboration. See Barbara Warnick, “Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca's Contribution to the New Rhetoric,” in Listening to Their Voices: The Rhetorical Activities of Historical Women, ed. Molly Meijer Wertheimer (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1997), 69–85. I do not mean to diminish Olbrechts-Tyteca's contribution to the collaboration, for her presence can be felt throughout, and one can associate surnames in three configurations with some justice: “Perelman's new rhetoric,” “Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca's new rhetoric,” and “Olbrechts-Tyteca's new rhetoric.” Indeed, I believe Michael Phillips is on the right track in his study of Olbrecht-Tyteca's comedic theory of rhetoric, which displays her major contribution to the new rhetoric. See Michael Phillips, “Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca and the Functions of Rhetorical Humor,” Paper presented to the International Society for the History of Rhetoric 15th Biennial Congress, Los Angeles: 2005, which is a careful study of Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca, Le Comique du Discours (Bruxelles: Université, 1974). Olbrechts-Tyteca's comedic theory is also a response to the Belgian Holocaust and is designed to frustrate the designs of totalitarianism. Olbrechts-Tyteca was not Jewish, but she was active in the underground, and served on Fela Perelman's “Our Children” committee, which saved a number of children. See Lucien Steinberg, Le Comité de Défense des Juifs en Belgique, 1942–1944 (Bruxelles: Éditions de l'Université de Bruxelles, 1973), 84.
21. Thomas M. Conley, Rhetoric in the European Tradition (New York: Longman, 1990), 299.
22. Dominick LaCapra, Representing the Holocaust: History, Theory, Trauma (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994), 113.
23. James J. Paxson, “Historicizing Paul De Man's Master Trope Prosopopeia: Belgium's Trauma of 1940, the Nazi Volkskörper, and Versions of the Allegorical Body Politic,” in Historizing Theory, ed. Peter C. Herman (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2003), 69.
24. Kaplan, French Lessons: A Memoir, 172
25. LaCapra, Representing the Holocaust: History, Theory, Trauma, 114.
26. Geoffry Hartman, “Blindness and Insight,” New Republic, March 7, 1988, 31.
27. Douglas Thomas, “Reading De Man Reading Rhetoric,” Communication Theory 6 (1996) 199.
28. Douglas Thomas, “Reading De Man Reading Rhetoric,” Communication Theory 6 (1996), 200.
29. Brian Vickers, In Defence of Rhetoric (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), 457.
30. Brian Vickers, In Defence of Rhetoric (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), 457.
31. Dominick LaCapra, Writing History, Writing Trauma (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press), 43–85.
32. See Tony Judt's eloquent eulogy to Edward Said, who coined the notion that Palestinians were “victims of victims.” Jews fleeing the anti-Semitism and the Holocaust contributed to the expulsion of 800,000 Palestinians and the destruction of more than 450 Palestinian villages in 1947–1948. Judt correctly observes: “Today there is no longer the slightest pretense by well-informed Israelis that the Arabs left in 1948 of their own free will or at the behest of foreign despots, as we were once taught” (34). Perelman and his wife were extremely active in supporting the cause of Zionism, thereby aiding a movement contributing to the trauma of another people. I raise this point to illustrate the tragic consequences of World War II and the Holocaust. See Tony Judt, “The Rootless Cosmopolitan,” Nation, July 19, 2004, 29–35.
33. Eric L. Santner, Stranded Objects (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990), 15.
34. LaCapra, Writing History, Writing Trauma, 49.
35. See Tony Judt, Past Imperfect: French Intellectuals, 1944–1956 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992); Tony Judt, The Burden of Responsibility: Blum, Camus, Aron, and the French Twentieth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998). See also Richard Wolin, The Seduction of Unreason: The Intellectual Romance with Fascism: From Nietzsche to Postmodernism (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004); Mark Lilla, The Reckless Mind: Intellectuals in Politics (New York: New York Review of Books, 2001); Delacampagne, A History of Philosophy in the Twentieth Century, 224; H. J. Pos, “Speech by Mr. H. J. Pos,” in Library of the Xth International Congress of Philosophy, ed. H. J. Pos, E. W. Beth, and J. H. A. Hollak (Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing, 1948), 3–10.
36. LaCapra, Writing History, Writing Trauma 71.
37. LaCapra, Representing the Holocaust, 210.
38. Delacampagne, A History of Philosophy in the Twentieth Century, xvii.
39. Delacampagne, A History of Philosophy in the Twentieth Century, xvii.
40. For a survey of these opinions, see Evan Carton, “The Holocaust, French Structuralism, the American Literary Academy, and Jewish Identity Politics,” in Historizing Theory, ed. Peter C. Herman (Albany: State University of New York, 2004), 17–48.
41. Conley, Rhetoric in the European Tradition, 281.
42. Conley, Rhetoric in the European Tradition, 287, 293, 300.
43. Geoffry Hartman, “Blindness and Insight,” 31, 30. Three years later, Hartman qualified these judgments as a “doubtful guess.” See Geoffrey H. Hartman, Minor Prophecies: The Literary Essay in the Culture Wars (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991), 143.
44. Derrida, “Like the Sound of the Sea Deep within a Shell: Paul De Man's War,” 129.
45. Derrida, “Like the Sound of the Sea Deep within a Shell: Paul De Man's War,” 129.
46. Derrida, “Like the Sound of the Sea Deep within a Shell: Paul De Man's War,” 129.
47. Kaplan, French Lessons, 172.
48. Chaïm Perelman, “Le libre examen, hier et aujourd'hui,” Revue de l'Université de Bruxelles 1 (1949): 39–50.
49. Tobin Seibers, “Mourning Becomes Paul De Man,” in Responses, 363–367.
50. McQuillan, Paul De Man, 103. See also Schreiber, Chaïm Perelman and Double Fidelity.
51. Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1st ed. (New York: Schocken Books, 2004).
52. Schreiber, Chaïm Perelman and Double Fidelity.
53. Perelman, Dans le Ventre de la Baleine.
54. The choice to use the story of Jonah illustrates an attempt to work through the Holocaust with Jewish thought, an influence that finds its way into Chaïm Perelman's new rhetoric. Jonah deals with gentiles who are open to and embrace justice when confronted with the prophetic word. Similarly, Fela Perelman celebrated the “magnificent” help of the Belgian population in hiding Jewish children from the Gestapo. She was in charge of a “Godmothers” committee that oversaw the hiding of Jewish children in the homes of non-Jewish families. Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca was a member of this committee. In addition, the story of Jonah yields multiple reasonable interpretations. These patterns of reading and understanding find their way into Chaïm Perelman's scholarship. On the influence of Judaic habits of thought on Chaïm Perelman and the new rhetoric project, see David A. Frank, “The New Rhetoric, Judaism and Post-Enlightenment Thought: The Cultural Origins of Perelmanian Philosophy,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 83 (1997): 311–31. Perelman tried to achieve a rapprochement between classical and Jewish thought; see David A. Frank, “Dialectical Rapprochement in the New Rhetoric,” Argumentation and Advocacy 33 (1998): 111–37. Perelman also turned to Jewish thought as a counter-model to classical thought; see David A. Frank, “The Jewish Counter-Model: Talmudic Argumentation, the New Rhetoric Project, and the Classical Tradition of Rhetoric,” The Journal of Communication and Religion 26 (2003): 163–95.
55. Noemi Mattis-Perelman, “Interview in Shoah Foundation's Visual History Testamonies” (Shoah Foundation: Los Angeles, 1994).
56. Maxime Steinberg, L'Étoile et le Fusil, Collection “Condition Humaine” (Bruxelles: Vie Ouvrière, 1984).
57. See Schreiber, Chaïm Perelman and Double Fidelity. He cites the Hebrew University bulletin Scopus (February 1984): 5.
58. McQuillan, Paul De Man, 129.
59. McQuillan, Paul De Man, 129.
60. For an exhaustive treatment of the de Man affair, see Responses: On Paul De Man's Wartime Journalism.
61. See Judt, Past Imperfect: French Intellectuals, 1944–1956; Judt, The Burden of Responsibility: Blum, Camus, Aron, and the French Twentieth Century.
62. For a superb work on collaborators in France, see Alice Yaeger Kaplan, The Collaborator: The Trial and Execution of Robert Brasillach (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000). See also AliceYaeger Kaplan, Reproductions of Banality: Fascism, Literature, and French Intellectual Life (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986).
63. Martin Conway, Collaboration in Belgium: Léon Degrelle and the Rexist Movement, 1940–1944 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993).
64. Dick Pells, “Treason of the Intellectuals,” Theory Culture and Society 8 (1991): 22; Zeev Sternhell, Neither Right nor Left: Fascist Ideology in France (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986), 21.
65. Hendrik de Man and Peter Dodge, A Documentary Study of Hendrik De Man, Socialist Critic of Marxism (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979), 327. I do note that the manifesto did not contain explicit anti-Semitic language.
66. Peter Dodge, “Introduction,” in A Documentary Study of Hendrik De Man, 15.
67. Werner Hamacher, “Journals, Politics,” in Responses, 462.
68. Conway, Collaboration in Belgium, 286.
69. Jan Wolenski, “The Reception of Frege in Poland,” History and Philosophy of Logic 25 (2004): 47.
70. Chaïm Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications, 55.
71. Chaïm Perelman, De la Justice (Bruxelles: Université Libre de Bruxelles, 1945).
72. Perelman, The Idea of Justice and the Problem of Argument, 56.
73. See David A. Frank and Michelle Bolduc, “From Vita Contemplativa to Vita Activa: Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca's Rhetorical Turn,” Advances in the History of Rhetoric 7 (2004): 65–87.
74. Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and Its Applications, 8.
75. Mattis-Perelman, “Interview.”
76. Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications, 55.
77. Crosswhite, “Is There an Audience for This Argument? Fallacies, Theories, and Relativisms,” 135.
78. Chaïm Perelman, “Le Libre Examen, Hier et Aujourd'hui,” 46.
79. Chaïm Perelman, “Le Libre Examen, Hier et Aujourd'hui,”, 48
80. Chaïm Perelman, “Le Libre Examen, Hier et Aujourd'hui,”, 48
81. Lindsay Waters, “Introduction,” in Critical Writings, 1953–1978, ed. Lindsay Waters (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989), xxx.
82. Lindsay Waters, “Introduction,” in Critical Writings, 1953–1978, ed. Lindsay Waters (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989), xxviii.
83. Levi, Drowned and Saved,
84. Jon Wiener, “An Academic Waldheim,” The Listener, March 10, 1988, 13–15; Risa Sodi, “An Interview with Primo Levi,” Partisan Review 53 (1986): 355–66.
85. Arendt observes: “Under conditions of terror most people will comply but some people will not, just as the lesson of the countries to which the Final Solution was proposed is that ‘it could happen' in most places but it did not happen everywhere. Humanly speaking, no more is required, and no more can be reasonably asked, for this planet to remain a place fit for human habitation.” Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil, rev. and enl. ed. (New York: Penguin Books, 1994), 233. See Samuel P. and Pearl M. Oliner, The Altruistic Personality: Rescuers of Jews in Nazi Europe (New York: Free Press, 1988) for evidence that those who were raised in families that encouraged questioning and reasoning were more likely to resist the Nazis than those who were subjected to physical punishment.
86. Julien Benda, The Treason of the Intellectuals (La Trahison Des Clercs) (New York: Norton, 1969).
87. See the introduction to Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation.
88. Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 468–73.
89. Lucy S. Dawidowicz, A Holocaust Reader (New York: Behrman House, 1976), 132–3.
90. Lucy S. Dawidowicz, A Holocaust Reader (New York: Behrman House, 1976), 132–3.
91. Saul Friedländer, Memory, History, and the Extermination of the Jews of Europe (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993), 111.
92. LaCapra, Writing History, Writing Trauma, 136–7.
93. McQuillan, Paul De Man, 129.
94. Sandor Goodhart, “Disfiguring De Man: Literature, History, and Collaboration,” in Responses: On Paul De Man's Wartime Journalism, 231.
95. Alice Yaeger Kaplan, “Paul De Man, Le Soir, and the Francophone Collaboration (1940–1942),” in Responses, 279.
96. Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 2nd enl. ed. (New York: Meridian Books, 1958), 462.
97. Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications, 118.
98. Paul de Man, The Resistance to Theory (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986), 19.
99. Pos, “Speech by Mr. H. J. Pos.”
100. Michel Foucault, “What is Enlightenment?” in The Foucault Reader, ed. Paul Rabinow (New York: Pantheon Books, 1984), 32–50.
101. Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications, 12.
102. Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications.
103. Frank and Bolduc, “Chaïm Perelman's “First Philosophies and Regressive Philosophy”: Commentary and Translation,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 16 (2003): 198.
104. Frank and Bolduc, “Chaïm Perelman's “First Philosophies and Regressive Philosophy”: Commentary and Translation,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 16 (2003): 198.
105. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, 48.
106. See Peter Goodrich, Legal Discourse: Studies in Linguistics, Rhetoric and Legal Analysis, Language, Discourse, Society (London: Macmillan, 1987), 111.
107. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, 14.
108. Chaïm Perelman, “La Question Juive,” Synthèses 3 (1946): 47–63.
109. See Goldhagen's book for evidence of Germany's “innate” anti-Semitism. and Vital's argument that the Holocaust, Zionism, and Israel were inevitable: Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, 1st ed. (New York: Knopf, 1996); David Vital, A People Apart: The Jews in Europe, 1789–1939 (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1999).
110. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, 52; Simone Weil, The Need for Roots: Prelude to a Declaration of Duties toward Mankind (New York: Putnam, 1952), 190–1.
111. Mieczyslaw Maneli, Interview by David A. Frank, New York, April 1994.
112. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation; Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca, “De la Temporalité Comme Caractère de l'Argumentation,” Archivio di Filosofia 2 (1958): 115–33.
113. Chaïm Perelman, “Reply to Stanley H. Rosen,” Inquiry 2 (1959): 85–8.
114. Adam Kissel, Deliberative Architectonic Rhetoric: A New Method for Resolving Interdisciplinary Conflicts (Dissertation proposal, University of Chicago, 2005), 18.
115. Thomas B. Farrell, “Rhetoric as Philosophy: The Humanist Tradition,” Rhetoric Review 21 (2002): 99.
116. Christopher Norris, Paul De Man, Deconstruction and the Critique of Aesthetic Ideology (New York: Routledge, 1988), 190.
117. Waters, “Introduction,” lxi.
118. Waters, “Introduction,” xxxiv.
119. Paul de Man, The Resistance to Theory, 19.
120. Paul de Man, The Resistance to Theory, 19.
121. Thomas, “Reading De Man Reading Rhetoric,” 194; Philip Buyck, “Oratory against Oratory: Paul De Man on Nietzsche on Rhetoric,” in (Dis)Continuities: Essays on Paul De Man, ed. Luc Herman, Kris Humbeeck, and Geert Lernout (Amsterdam; Atlanta, GA: Restant, 1989), 149–161.
122. Richard Van Oort, “Performative-Constative Revisited: The Genetics of Austin's Theory of Speech Acts,” Anthropoetics 2 (1997): Introduction. http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ (accessed February 22, 2007).
123. Richard Van Oort, “Performative-Constative Revisited: The Genetics of Austin's Theory of Speech Acts,” Anthropoetics 2 (1997): Introduction. http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ (accessed February 22, 2007).
124. De Man, Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust, 131.
125. Kaplan, French Lessons: A Memoir, 171.
126. Kaplan, French Lessons: A Memoir, 171.
127. Buyck, “Oratory against Oratory,” 160.
128. Buyck, “Oratory against Oratory,” 160.
129. De Man, The Resistance to Theory, 19.
130. Waters, “Introduction,” xxxi.
131. Paul de Man, Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism, 165.
132. Ian Balfour. “History against Historicism, Formal Matters, and the Event of the Text: de Man with Benjamin,” in Legacies of Paul De Man, ed. Marc Redfield (New York: Fordham University Press, 2007), 49–61.
133. Edward W. Said, The World, the Text, and the Critic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983), 163.
134. Terry Eagleton, Figures of Dissent: Critical Essays on Fish, Spivak, Zizek and Others (London; New York: Verso, 2003), 157.
135. Frank Lentricchia, After the New Criticism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 310.
136. LaCapra, Representing the Holocaust: History, Theory, Trauma, 209.
137. De Man, Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust, 10.
138. J. Douglas Neal, “Deconstruction,” in The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism, ed. Michael Groden, Martin Kreiswirth, and Imre Szeman (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005), 241.
139. J. Douglas Neal, “Deconstruction,” in The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism, ed. Michael Groden, Martin Kreiswirth, and Imre Szeman (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005), 241.
140. Linda Belau, Trauma and the Material Signifier (2001), http://www.iath.virginia.edu/pmc/text-only/issue.101/11.2belau.txt (accessed February 23, 2006).
141. Santner, Stranded Objects, 15.
142. Seibers, “Mourning Becomes Paul De Man,” in Responses, 364.
143. Jacques Derrida, “Biodegradables: Seven Diary Fragments,” Critical Inquiry 15 (1989): 825.
144. Cynthia Chase, “Paul De Man,” in The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism, ed. Michael Groden, Martin Kreiswirth, and Imre Szeman (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005), 253.
145. David Lehman, Signs of the Times: Deconstruction and the Fall of Paul De Man (New York: Poseidon Press, 1991).
146. Perelman, “Le libre examen, hier et aujourd'hui,” 47.
147. Simon Critchley, The Ethics of Deconstruction: Derrida and Levinas (Cambridge: Blackwell, 1992), 126. See also James Crosswhite, The Rhetoric of Reason: Writing and the Attractions of Argument (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996), 24.
148. Edward Schiappa, Defining Reality: Definitions and the Politics of Meaning, Rhetorical Philosophy and Theory (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2003); Edward Schiappa, “Dissociation in the Arguments of Rhetorical Theory,” Journal of the American Forensics Association 22 (1985): 75–82; Susan Handelman, Fragments of Redemption (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991); Gross and Dearin, Chaïm Perelman.
149. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, 413.
150. Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications, 159–67.
151. Victor Klemperer and Martin Brady, The Language of the Third Reich: Lti, Lingua Tertii Imperii: A Philologist's Notebook (London: Athlone Press, 2000).
152. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, 442.
153. Perelman, Dans le Ventre de la Baleine, 14.
154. Hartman, “Blindness and Insight,” 29.
155. Marjorie Perloff, “Response to Jacques Derrida,” Critical Inquiry 15 (1989): 776.
156. Steinberg, Le Comité de Défense des Juifs en Belgique, 1942–1944, 168.
157. Steinberg, Le Comité de Défense des Juifs en Belgique, 1942–1944, 169.
158. On the chronology of de Man's postwar movements, see de Man et al., Responses: On Paul De Man's Wartime Journalism, xx.
159. Jonathan Glover, Humanity: A Moral History of the Twentieth Century (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000), 382.
160. Jonathan Glover, Humanity: A Moral History of the Twentieth Century (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000), 351.
161. Gross and Dearin, Chaim Perelman, x–xi.
162. Peter Goodrich, Legal Discourse: Studies in Linguistics, Rhetoric and Legal Analysis (London: Macmillan, 1987), 111; Frans H. van Eemeren, et al., Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory (Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996), 120; John W. Ray, “Perelman's Universal Audience,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 64 (1978): 361–75.
163. David A. Frank, “After the New Rhetoric,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 89 (2003): 253–61.
164. Megill, Prophets of Extremity, Chapter 3.
165. Megill, Prophets of Extremity, Chapter 3. 119.
166. Megill, Prophets of Extremity, Chapter 3. 119–20.
167. That Heidegger justified National Socialism with his philosophy is developed in what Bokina calls “the most complete and balanced intellectual biography of Martin Heidegger,” Rüdiger Safranski's Martin Heidegger: Between Good and Evil (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998). See in particular Chapters 12–14. John Bokina, “Heidegger Again, but with a Difference,” Telos 115 (1999): 179.
168. Berel Lang, Heidegger's Silence (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1996); Lilla, The Reckless Mind: Intellectuals in Politics, 29–30.
169. Richard Wolin, The Politics of Being: The Political Thought of Martin Heidegger (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), 192, fn 9.
170. Allen Michael Scult, Being Jewish/Reading Heidegger: An Ontological Encounter (Ashland, OH: Fordham University Press, 2004). Scult has written, positively, about Perelman's new rhetoric, which makes his move to Heidegger curious if not perplexing. See Allen Scult, “A Note on the Range and Utility of the Universal Audience,” Argumentation and Advocacy 22 (1985): 83–7.
171. Wolin, The Seduction of Unreason, 97.
172. Anson Rabinbach, “Heidegger's Letter on Humanism as Text and Event,” New German Critique 62 (1994): 19.
173. Richard A. Etlin, Art, Culture, and Media under the Third Reich (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), 274.
174. James Hankins, “Two Twentieth-Century Interpreters of Renaissance Humanism: Eugenio Garin and Paul Oskar Kristeller,” Comparative Criticism 23 (2001): 17.
175. Ernesto Grassi, Rhetoric as Philosophy: The Humanist Tradition (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1980), 8–9.
176. On Grassi's role in promoting Heidegger and Fascism, see Víctor Farías, Joseph Margolis, and Tom Rockmore, Heidegger and Nazism (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), 7, 59, 61–7, 236.
177. Sonja K. Foss, Karen A. Foss, and Robert Trapp, Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric (Prospect Heights: Waveland, 1991), 146–7.
178. Dominic Anthony LaRusso, “Rhetoric in the Italian Renaissance,” in Renaissance Eloquence: Studies in the Theory and Practice of Renaissance Rhetoric, ed. James J. Murphy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983), 55.
179. Ernesto Grassi, The Primordial Metaphor (Binghamton, NY: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1994), 35.
180. See Andreea Deciu Ritivoi, Paul Ricoeur: Tradition and Innovation in Rhetorical Theory (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006); Norberto Bobbio, A Political Life (Cambridge, UK: Polity/Blackwell, 2002).
181. Judt, Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945, 840.
182. Judt, Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945, 840.
183. Elizabeth Bryant, “Growth Spurs Tension in Germany's Jewish Community,” Washington Post, January 28, 2006, B09.
184. Jeffrey M. Peck, Being Jewish in the New Germany (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2006).
185. LaCapra, Writing History, Writing Trauma, 71.
186. Maneli, Perelman's New Rhetoric as Philosophy and Methodology for the Next Century, 14–15.