Rhetoric and Its Situations

In 'The Rhetorical Situation Lloyd Bitzer argues the objective rhetorical situation dominâtes the rhetorical act. Indeed, so Controlling is he argues, that we should consider it the very ground of rhetorical activity. . . ,1 Bitzer claims flrst the rhetorical situation is empirically determinate, consisting of an objectively recognizable or urgent problem potentially modifiable through persuasive discourse; and a consisting of audience and constraints. exigence and the complex . . . which generate rhetorical discourse, he claims, located in reality, are objective and publicly observable historical facts in the world we experience, are therefore available for scrutiny by an observer or critic who attends to them.2 Second, Bitzer argues the rhetorical situation is a determining situation, in it controls the response of the rhetor who enters it. Thus the rhetorical situation does not invite just any response, but invites a fitting response, for If it makes sense to say situation invites a 'fitting' response, then situation must somehow prescribe the response which fits.8 For Bitzer the rhetor's response is predetermined by the positive facts in the objective situation; and the rhetor who does not act appropriately has, metaphorically, failed to read the prescription accurately.4 In Myth of the Rhetorical Situation Richard Vatz counters Bitzer's thesis by emphasizing the creative role of the rhetor. For Vatz, the rhetorical situation is non-determinate in itself, for no situation can hâve a nature independent of the perception of its interpreter or independent of the rhetoric with which he chooses to characterize it.5 In itself the situation is ambiguous and indeterminate, what William James may hâve called a buzzing, blooming confusion. Second, Vatz claims the rhetorical situation, rather than determining the proper response of the rhetor, is itself determined by the rhetor. The rhetor is a com-