Rhetorical history and rhetorical criticism: A distinction

Abstract

The writer argues that, conceptually, rhetorical history (the study of the historical effects of rhetorical discourse) and rhetorical criticism (the analysis of rhetorical discourse and acts for a series of essentially normative or advisory purposes) must pursue different goals, ought to be judged by differing criteria, and usually employ varying sources of evidence. Among other recommendations, he suggests not simply teaching “methods” and “approaches” but teaching much about the personal, aesthetic, normative, predictive, and social functions of rhetorical analysis.