Sunday, March 13, 2011
Topoi in Documentary Film
Goal: To understand the rhetorical concept of topos. Specifically, you will be able to recognize and name the patterns used in documentary film to convey arguments. You will thus gain a better appreciation for the techniques used by filmmakers to persuade their audiences.
Illustrative Example: “The Purebred Challenge,” an amateur documentary.
While the Greek word topos (plural: topoi) may or may not be familiar to you, its English derivative “topic” almost certainly is. In English, this word has come to be synonymous with “theme” or “subject matter.” (For example, “The topic of my paper is ancient Greece.”) However, in the study of rhetoric, topos has a more complex meaning. Here is how Aristotle defined “topic”: A general pattern of argument, out of which more specific arguments can be produced. In other words, topoi are the basic set of rhetorical tools that allow us to be persuasive. They often involve a conceptual “intersection,” as will become more apparent when we examine specific topoi.
To make this abstract idea more concrete, let’s look at a few types of topoi, paying attention to what terms are “intersecting” in each. (Note: these are by no means all the possible topoi that exist.) For each, I will provide specific examples from “The Purebred Challenge,” a documentary that explores issues of responsibility in breeding and adopting purebred dogs in light of these purebreds’ inborn health problems.
-Definition: This topic involves an intersection between the general and the specific. For example, we can make a broad statement—“purebred dogs are prone to congenital diseases”—but then focus in on a specific case—“Cavalier King Charles Spaniels are prone to heart disease.” The hierarchy can even be extrapolated in either direction. Consider this chain of thought, from most general to most specific: 1) Selective breeding of animals by humans produces desired traits but also has negative consequences; 2) Purebred dogs are prone to congenital diseases; 3) Cavalier King Charles Spaniels are prone to heart disease; 4) Basil (a Cavalier King Charles) developed his breed’s characteristic heart problem and will thus have a shortened life. Idea #1 is fairly vague, and may mean little to an audience. By the time we reach Idea #4, there is something concrete for the audience to grasp, and they are more likely to feel invested in the subject.
-Relationship: This topic may involve an intersection between cause and effect. It may also draw out contraries or contradictions. In “The Purebred Challenge,” for example, the idea that there are both benefits and serious drawbacks of owning a purebred dog is conveyed, with more emphasis on the drawbacks (a documentary, almost by definition, is biased). The contrary goes deeper when it is shown that some of the features that have been selectively bred in dogs directly cause health issues, e.g., pugs’ characteristic short muzzle and prominent eyes unsurprisingly lead to respiratory and eye problems.
-Comparison: This topic employs intersections between similarity and difference/degree. “The Purebred Challenge” uses this topic heavily to express relativity; there are relative dangers associated with adopting dogs from responsible breeders, careless breeders, pet stores, and animal shelters. The risk in adopting a purebred is highly dependent upon circumstances, and possible ethical implications are drawn out by presenting the different scenarios, closely juxtaposed in comparison with one another.
-Testimony: This common rhetorical topic isn’t necessarily understood best in terms of intersections; however, it is a reasonably straightforward concept. It uses other people’s words to substantiate an argument. Often, it is very effective to reference authorities in particular fields; witnesses; or authoritative and telling documents. All interview footage you see in a documentary is a form of testimony. “The Purebred Challenge” relies greatly upon the words of authorities. The sections of the documentary using interview footage tend to “speak for themselves.” For example, Mrs. Susan Weeks, a Cavalier King Charles breeder, talks extensively and in some technical detail about the tests responsible breeders will administer to make sure they are breeding healthy Cavaliers. Simultaneously, she eloquently conveys the ethical issues inherent in breeding dogs. After all, she has an agenda: as a breeder, she wants to show how her practices are more responsible than those used by many other breeders, not to mention by puppy mills. Not only are the authorities who speak in interviews knowledgeable about relevant subjects, but by incorporating their opinioned language the filmmaker can flesh out an argument while allowing the voiceover narration to remain fairly objective. This tends to lend more validity to the documentary because it partially disguises the filmmaker’s bias. In rhetorical discourse, covert arguments can sometimes be more effective than outright ones. When a bias is immediately detectable, the portion of the audience predisposed to the opposite bias will quickly be alienated.
In highly developed topoi, and all well-made documentary films, intersections will intersect with other intersections to produce complex arguments. Most viewers are likely unaware of the potent patterns that filmmakers use to create documentaries persuasive enough to influence attitudes and behavior. However, a basic understanding of these techniques allows a more sophisticated appreciation of rhetorical filmmaking as an art and as a potential agent of change.
Illustrative Example: “The Purebred Challenge,” an amateur documentary.
While the Greek word topos (plural: topoi) may or may not be familiar to you, its English derivative “topic” almost certainly is. In English, this word has come to be synonymous with “theme” or “subject matter.” (For example, “The topic of my paper is ancient Greece.”) However, in the study of rhetoric, topos has a more complex meaning. Here is how Aristotle defined “topic”: A general pattern of argument, out of which more specific arguments can be produced. In other words, topoi are the basic set of rhetorical tools that allow us to be persuasive. They often involve a conceptual “intersection,” as will become more apparent when we examine specific topoi.
To make this abstract idea more concrete, let’s look at a few types of topoi, paying attention to what terms are “intersecting” in each. (Note: these are by no means all the possible topoi that exist.) For each, I will provide specific examples from “The Purebred Challenge,” a documentary that explores issues of responsibility in breeding and adopting purebred dogs in light of these purebreds’ inborn health problems.
-Definition: This topic involves an intersection between the general and the specific. For example, we can make a broad statement—“purebred dogs are prone to congenital diseases”—but then focus in on a specific case—“Cavalier King Charles Spaniels are prone to heart disease.” The hierarchy can even be extrapolated in either direction. Consider this chain of thought, from most general to most specific: 1) Selective breeding of animals by humans produces desired traits but also has negative consequences; 2) Purebred dogs are prone to congenital diseases; 3) Cavalier King Charles Spaniels are prone to heart disease; 4) Basil (a Cavalier King Charles) developed his breed’s characteristic heart problem and will thus have a shortened life. Idea #1 is fairly vague, and may mean little to an audience. By the time we reach Idea #4, there is something concrete for the audience to grasp, and they are more likely to feel invested in the subject.
-Relationship: This topic may involve an intersection between cause and effect. It may also draw out contraries or contradictions. In “The Purebred Challenge,” for example, the idea that there are both benefits and serious drawbacks of owning a purebred dog is conveyed, with more emphasis on the drawbacks (a documentary, almost by definition, is biased). The contrary goes deeper when it is shown that some of the features that have been selectively bred in dogs directly cause health issues, e.g., pugs’ characteristic short muzzle and prominent eyes unsurprisingly lead to respiratory and eye problems.
-Comparison: This topic employs intersections between similarity and difference/degree. “The Purebred Challenge” uses this topic heavily to express relativity; there are relative dangers associated with adopting dogs from responsible breeders, careless breeders, pet stores, and animal shelters. The risk in adopting a purebred is highly dependent upon circumstances, and possible ethical implications are drawn out by presenting the different scenarios, closely juxtaposed in comparison with one another.
-Testimony: This common rhetorical topic isn’t necessarily understood best in terms of intersections; however, it is a reasonably straightforward concept. It uses other people’s words to substantiate an argument. Often, it is very effective to reference authorities in particular fields; witnesses; or authoritative and telling documents. All interview footage you see in a documentary is a form of testimony. “The Purebred Challenge” relies greatly upon the words of authorities. The sections of the documentary using interview footage tend to “speak for themselves.” For example, Mrs. Susan Weeks, a Cavalier King Charles breeder, talks extensively and in some technical detail about the tests responsible breeders will administer to make sure they are breeding healthy Cavaliers. Simultaneously, she eloquently conveys the ethical issues inherent in breeding dogs. After all, she has an agenda: as a breeder, she wants to show how her practices are more responsible than those used by many other breeders, not to mention by puppy mills. Not only are the authorities who speak in interviews knowledgeable about relevant subjects, but by incorporating their opinioned language the filmmaker can flesh out an argument while allowing the voiceover narration to remain fairly objective. This tends to lend more validity to the documentary because it partially disguises the filmmaker’s bias. In rhetorical discourse, covert arguments can sometimes be more effective than outright ones. When a bias is immediately detectable, the portion of the audience predisposed to the opposite bias will quickly be alienated.
In highly developed topoi, and all well-made documentary films, intersections will intersect with other intersections to produce complex arguments. Most viewers are likely unaware of the potent patterns that filmmakers use to create documentaries persuasive enough to influence attitudes and behavior. However, a basic understanding of these techniques allows a more sophisticated appreciation of rhetorical filmmaking as an art and as a potential agent of change.
Documentary on Sodexo Uses of Topoi
What makes certain films more interesting than others? How is it that filmmakers are capable of inciting complex arguments without taking sides on a matter? According to Aristotle, a topic is a general argumentative pattern out of which arguments about specific subjects can be generated. In my Sodexo documentary I interview Barbara, a barrista for Sodexo and huge advocate of improving the labor conditions of the company, and Dani a native Argentinian that has made it as supervisor of the Centennial Halls Dining Hall.
Topoi in its most basic form, consists of a kind of conceptual intersection or a pair of complementary and/or conflicting terms that we can use to locate and define our subject. Take an image of a dining hall worker cleaning up, for instance. In this image a complementary term could be the Sodexo Employee in uniform working at the University of Denver’s Centennial Halls dining hall. Conflicting terms may be the students eating in the dining hall after open hours, while the Sodexo Employee is struggling to get everything clean and leave their job.
In more developed form, intersections intersect with other intersections to create the kinds of highly complex, multifaceted patterns that generate highly complex, multifaceted arguments. In my documentary for instance, although Barbara and Hugh are both Sodexo employees, their opinions on labor unions are completely opposite. Barbara also mentions that there is discrimination against non native employees, and that it is almost unlikely that they get promoted in the hierarchy of Sodexo positions, yet Dani, a native Argentinean is the supervisor of the Halls cafeteria.
Some topoi consist of being able to identify the general and the specific. The general topoi in my documentary would be Sodexo employees in general, while the specific topoi would be the three specific Sodexo employees I interview.
Other topoi consist of the division between the whole and parts of the whole. The whole in my documentary would be the company Sodexo, and the parts would be the University of Denver, the dining hall, and it’s employees.
Other topoi consist of the cause and effect relationship, contraries and contradictions. My documentary informs people about the effects of Sodexo on its workers. Barbara plans on leaving the company this year because of poor working conditions, for instance. The people I interview also contradict each other. Barabara’s statement that most employees that are immigrants are not considered for higher positions is contradicted. Dani is a native Argentinean with the title of supervisor. Try watching another documentary and seeing where the filmmaker uses topoi, to develop the complexity of his arguments.
Anthology of Plato's Themes and Enthymemes
Anthology of Plato's themes
How is it that politicians are able to persuade the masses through speech? What techniques do they use to leave the crowd with no other option than to see the world through their perspective? According to Aristotle, an enthymeme is a combination of statements that makes an argument while implicitly evoking the worldview within which that argument makes sense. In other words, enthymemes are used in trying to argue a point effectively so that the audience can arrive to a similar conclusion to yours through your arguments.
In the Gorgias, Socrates suggests that rhetoric is something that is appealing on the surface but with no substance, while philosophy may not be appealing on the surface but is filled with substance. While making the argument Socrates uses tons of analogies/arguments to support this claim, thus bringing forth a specific worldview in which rhetoric is in fact a non-substantial art form. There are many convincing arguments that could easily contradict this claim, but Socrates’ use of enthymeme is so strong and his opponent’s so weak, that the crowd clearly sides with Socrates’ argument.
My interpretation of Plato’s Gorgias, is centered on select French art songs and the interpretation of these songs through performance. In my preface I argue that although a performer may have an exquisite voice, they can lack the power of interpretation and conveying emotion. This concept is similar to the Socrates’ argument of the body and soul, and would further validate his argument. I also argue that although French art song may seem bloodless and lacking in emotional power, many artists have proved the contrary. This argument would serve to disprove Socrates’ argument that most things that are aesthetically pleasing lack in substance. The pieces I chose in my anthology both disprove and agree with Socrates’ arguments, thus inciting a world view that acknowledges many perspectives on Platos’ themes.
How is it that politicians are able to persuade the masses through speech? What techniques do they use to leave the crowd with no other option than to see the world through their perspective? According to Aristotle, an enthymeme is a combination of statements that makes an argument while implicitly evoking the worldview within which that argument makes sense. In other words, enthymemes are used in trying to argue a point effectively so that the audience can arrive to a similar conclusion to yours through your arguments.
In the Gorgias, Socrates suggests that rhetoric is something that is appealing on the surface but with no substance, while philosophy may not be appealing on the surface but is filled with substance. While making the argument Socrates uses tons of analogies/arguments to support this claim, thus bringing forth a specific worldview in which rhetoric is in fact a non-substantial art form. There are many convincing arguments that could easily contradict this claim, but Socrates’ use of enthymeme is so strong and his opponent’s so weak, that the crowd clearly sides with Socrates’ argument.
My interpretation of Plato’s Gorgias, is centered on select French art songs and the interpretation of these songs through performance. In my preface I argue that although a performer may have an exquisite voice, they can lack the power of interpretation and conveying emotion. This concept is similar to the Socrates’ argument of the body and soul, and would further validate his argument. I also argue that although French art song may seem bloodless and lacking in emotional power, many artists have proved the contrary. This argument would serve to disprove Socrates’ argument that most things that are aesthetically pleasing lack in substance. The pieces I chose in my anthology both disprove and agree with Socrates’ arguments, thus inciting a world view that acknowledges many perspectives on Platos’ themes.
A Typical Classroom Lesson Part 1
I would start off the lesson with the question: “What is an argument?”
-Appropriate time allotted for thinking and incorrect answers by the students-
“In classical Greece, an argument consisted of topoi, general argumentative patterns through which specific arguments could be created. In other words, because it is difficult to argue some things, like abstract ideas, you would use topoi to somehow relate your argument to another aspect of the natural world through which an argument could be constructed. For example, the existence of the human soul can’t be proven by any argument, because it isn’t part of the natural world. Therefore, in order to persuade others to your point of view, you would have to relate your argument to something else, such as food.”
-Allow time for students to digest yo
ur metaphor-
There are several types of topoi. Some of them are:
1. Comparison- This is used to compare your idea to something else, which has a
lready been,
or could be, proven.
2. Circumstance- Perhaps something is possible or true at some times, but not at others, or will be so again in the future.
3. Testimony- Use witnesses, writings, authoritative figures, beliefs, etc. to develop your idea.
4. Division- Break things down into parts or part of a larger concept
For example, look at this picture of the Statue of Liberty:
You could say that this picture is part of a whole, in that the Statue of Liberty is part of America, or Manhattan Island is part of New York.
Or, you could say that the Statue of Liberty is a representation of freedom, and is a symbol of hope for refugees coming to America.
-Allow students time to nod and look thoughtful as they begin to understand the lesson-
Now you try. Look at this picture, and tell me what topoi are present:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)