Rhetoric and Painting

Rhetoric is a field of study in constant motion. Although its core of persuasion, the faculty of discerning, and expression are constant, rhetoric is continually putting on different faces. Like a chameleon, Rhetoric adapts to the social and cultural influences of the environment. Thus, it is not surprising that throughout history, the field of rhetoric has been viewed from numerous perspectives. As these perspectives shed new light, rhetoric’s definition has expanded. Now, visual expression, including painting, has become an accepted branch of rhetorical study.

Whether painting is an independent art or an art of expression within rhetoric remains a difficult question. However, in either case, there are strong ties between rhetoric and painting. The following sources reinforce this connection in multiple ways. They show the rhetorical aspects of painting, the potency of visual images to affect change, the connection between images and metaphysics, and the innately human tendency to communicate through symbol systems.

 

Bibliography

Duke University. “Visual Rhetoric / Visual Literacy: Writing About Painting”. Writing Studio.

21 Feb. 2017. Web.

 

This short article produced by the Duke Writing Studio begins with a quote by George Tooker, a contemporary American painter. He says, “Painting is an attempt to come to terms with life. There are as many solutions as there are human beings.” The idea of coming to terms with life immediately points to the social themes of painting, connecting painting to the social focus of rhetoric. The article goes on to say that “the simplest definition for visual rhetoric is how/why visual images communicate meaning” (1). This statement reveals two rhetorical features in painting. Both arts concern communication and both arts focus of articulating a meaning. In addition, the article claims that painting like rhetoric reflects the culture. It goes on to give the methods of communication used in painting: medium, technique, size, content, and type [landscapes, battles, portraits, etc.]. The Duke article gives helpful insight into the aspects of painting which communicate the loudest, as well as reveals some close ties between rhetoric and visual art.

 

Foss, Sonja K. “Theory of Visual Rhetoric”. Handbook of Visual Communication: Theory,

Methods, and Media. Pg. 141-52. New York, NY. 2011. 22 Feb. 2017. Web.  

 

Chapter 9 of the Handbook of Visual Communication, begins with a definition of visual rhetoric. Foss states that visual rhetoric is the “study of visual imagery within the discipline of rhetoric” (141). She gives a brief note about the birth of traditional rhetoric, and the turns her attention to the origins of visual rhetoric. “Not until 1970 was the first formal call made to include visual images in the study of rhetoric” (141). Foss briefly mentions Kenneth Burke and his promotion of the broader study of human symbol systems, as well as the notable repercussions against the expansion of the traditional boundaries of rhetoric. She also notes the increasing power that visual images hold in impacting our current culture. This helps explain the shift in focus from auditory/written rhetoric to visual rhetoric. The chapter goes on to address visual rhetoric as a system of signs. It also claims that visual rhetoric involves human action, both in its creation and interpretation. Audience and perspective are two additional topics explored. The chapter ends with a conclusion. In this portion, Foss argues that visual rhetoric, in the discipline of rhetoric, has two meanings. It refers to the images themselves and an approach or perspective that rhetorical scholars adopt in their study of visual images (151). Because painting is a form of visual rhetoric, this piece gives helpful insight into painting as a discipline within rhetoric.

 

Gallagher, Victoria & Zagacki, Kenneth S. “Visibility and Rhetoric: The Power of visual Images

in Norman Rockwell’s Depictions of Civil Rights”. Quarterly Journal of Speech. Vol. 9,  

No. 2. May 2005, pp. 175-200. 21 Feb. 2017. Web.

 

“This essay demonstrates how visual works of art may operate rhetorically to articulate public knowledge, to illustrate the moral challenges facing citizens, and to shape communicative practices, through an analysis of Norman Rockwell’s civil rights paintings” (175). From the opening statement, an immediate emphasis is placed on the citizen and his society. These commutatively minded goals of visual art, especially in Rockwell’s paintings, draw a hard connection to rhetoric. The article contends that visual art [painting] can be used to make visible the realities of society to a specific audience, as well as work to “articulate and to shape public knowledge” (178). This expression and shaping process hold close similarities to the persuasion and communicative aspects of rhetoric, showing rhetoric’s place in painting. However, the article’s main focus is on how Norman Rockwell used visual rhetoric to “evoke common humanity” (175). Gallagher and Zagacki say that Rockwell does this in three ways: He disregards established caricatures, creates recognition of others through particularity, and makes abstract concepts knowable” (180). The influence of rhetoric in painting is emphasized repeatedly throughout this article.

 

Gombrich, E. H. “Standards of Truth: The Arrested Image and the Moving Eye.” Critical

Inquiry, vol. 7, no. 2, 1980, pp. 237–273. 21 Feb. 2017. Web.

 

As the title implies, the main concepts found in Gombrich’s article concern a standard of truth. He presents to readers the reality of differing perspectives in the interpretation of images. These perspectives can have a major impact on what is considered truth. In this search for a true, objective standard, Gombrich proposes the “eye-witness principle” (246). It is a principle which demands that the image [could be a painting] offer an actual representation of reality, not withholding or adding to what an eyewitness could see. This mirrors the struggle between rhetoric and truth. This concerns both the motivation of the sophists as well as Plato’s and Aristotle’s desire for truth to drive rhetoric.

 

Richter, Duncan. “Picture Theory”. The A to Z of Wittgenstein’s Philosophy. The A to Z Guide

Series, No. 178. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Lanham, Maryland. 2010. 21 Feb. 2017. Web.

 

In this section, Dr. Richter discusses Wittgenstein’s Picture Theory. It is one of the most important ideas in the Tractus Logico-Philosophicus, and states that sentences or propositions are pictures of states of affairs in the world (145). Consequently, when the picture matches a real state of affairs the sentence is true, otherwise it is wrong (145). This theory points to an interesting possibility for painting and rhetoric. If the Picture Theory is true, or aspects of it are true, sentences are pointers, specifically visual pointers. This would mean rhetoric and painting [visual images] are intimately connected. Both are signposts to reality. Thus, listening to Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and looking at a painting of the battle would have the same effect, the representation of the actual events of the battle. However, Wittgenstein’s theory has some inherent difficulties. Not only does it conclude that anything normative, supernatural or metaphysical lacks sense, but it also has a largely self-contradicting nature. Nonetheless, the Picture Theory is an interesting perspective in which to observe how rhetoric and painting cooperatively interact with metaphysics.