Lamoille newsdealer. [volume] (Hyde Park, Vt.) 1860-1877, 1867-08-14
NUMBER 80
RHETORIC AND WRITING.

ution ,n modern literature. as it is mani
Tested in the sphere Of poetry. The Of
fects of this movement ip another field, is
thus set forth by the same pen. -
The distinction between oratory aud
literature becomes more marked as society
advances, A century ago they were Of
tonor confoundsd, viii each other than
they are at present. Fine writing was
the rage. Men wrote as if they abound
ed in clap trap. Every prose author bad
his stills, and usually put them on even
to write his letters. Frills and rufles,
gold lace d'pefi~;gs, wers, but outward
signs of the formality of thought ia speak
ing and writing. Nature was banished.
Oratory talked book literature speechif-
ed ; and both we're spoiled The age was
not vel. sufficiently practical to keep either
speakers or writers to the point. The
long standing notion Of ideal substances
still clung to educated minds, and further
insight into natures. details was, needful
to disenchant them Of the doctrine of the
schools, Bacon had not yet completed
his conquest of Plato, and vague gener-
alities took the place of facts. High.
sounding phrases imposed on shallow
hearers, and muffied the speakers igno.
rance Of ,;;hIngs as they are. Writers and
debaters alike were driven to the, ,expeai-
ent of filling wind. bags, and party.spirit
aided Immensely in substituting sound
for sense, and exaggeration for accuracy.
The mode of address proper; TO hearers
and readers forms the essential distinc-
tion between rhetoric and writing: and
this distinction was lost sight of formerly
because neither hearers and readers desir-
ed, nor speakers and writer's could convey,
accurate knowledge. When the state of
society is such that both have obtained
this exact information rhetoric and writ
ing will still resemble each other, but
both will be very unlike what they used
to be. Each will be communication of
ideas, but under different conditions.
The oratory will, 5eless inflated, the writ
ing less speech,like; yet some diffuseness,
s,me transient glitter some familiarity,
will be allowable and necessary in the
orator, which in the author would not
easily be pardoned The pns must have
time to elaborate his, sentences and unfold
his thoughts, the other is supposed to
have taken time already to condeuso and
clarity his ideas. The one must produce
milk, the other cream, Burke nauseated
mis- audience with too mach cream; Boil.
}, iugbroke tired his readers with too much
milk, u,i5 t7'1i5
A writer cannot be too profound. but
speaker may. Hence DR.. Whpteiy doubts
whether q drst.ratc man can be q first rate
t orator, and vice versa. The properties Of
e mind which would qualify him for science
g and literature would disqualify him for
, the rostrum. The habit Of investigating
/, everything, thoroughly before adopting il
!, would be very iuconvenient to the public
Z speaker. Fastidiousness in the use Of
e terms would hamper him extremely and
the precision, cOnciseness aud depth which
would be the chief merits Of his compost
tion, would prove the defeets, Of his ha-
rangue. The orator is. specially concern
5 ed with the feelings and impressions Of
!. his, hearers. and certain license must
). be given him, on this account, over and
G above what can properly be allowed to .
f writer. He not only may, but ought, to
. Indulge in demonstrations and hourishes,
O which are quite uDbecoming in the study.
|. 70 be eloquent he must be free TO adapt
e himself to his audience. He need not re-
0 duce his style altogether to their level,
a but his platform must not be raised top
' high above them, Hence, III has well
been said that eloquence is'in the audience,
!. not in the speaker. 1t is harmony
h struck out of their mental chords by, a
masters hand. 10 play skillfully on his
= instrument he must be sincere. and, con-
. WINGED that he has fathomed his theme.
i But the confidence which fills the breast
d Of the orator rarely falls to; the lot of tho
' deep thinker, who sees all sides Of .ques-
n tion, and is fully alive to its difficulties.
h He cannot be fluent upon 1t, for IN him
/. Auency would be fippancy 1t is the
|. confidence Of the speaker in the soundness
e Of his arguments and the justice Of his
2 cause which, even though it be illfounded,
Il gives the charnl to his periods, and causes
# people to say, 1T is impossible to form
|, an idea Of bis elo4uencc unless you had
a heard him !" OF course; he spoke to the
!. car, to the eye, and not simply to the
IS mind, ,as he speaks who addresses you
10 through bis book. .r,i,A
The conclusion, therefore, toward which
we are driving, is this, that what is COM
to monty called the decline Of oratory is o
Isl