Channels, Fall 2016

Towne • Æsop’s Trumpeter, Aristotle’s Orator, and the Technical Communicator Page 94 modern communicators may not enter into the direct feedback loops classical orators and their audiences shared, they must revive their audiences—a group of “actual living, breathing [figures] in the discourse production” (Johnson 2004, 93). Although their audiences may not be able to hold them directly responsible for successful or unsuccessful rhetoric, technical communicators must hold themselves responsible to their audiences. When they persuade their audiences, technical communicators must remember that their audiences will react in some way. The Audience’s Responsibility As technical communicators write with real audiences in mind, they will use their own newfound power to empower others. The audience will become a real rather than imaginary group who will react to rhetoric. Just as Aristotle delegates power to the orator and the hearer (Kennedy 1991), so the communicator and the audience will also share responsibility in their feedback loop. Ideally, technical communicators will accommodate their audience’s real needs. Likewise, ideally, audiences will hold technical communicators responsible for how and for whom they employ rhetoric. As technical communicators revive an Aristotelian feedback loop, they will prepare themselves to engage in political discourse. Pursuing Politics If technical communicators learn to envision themselves as authors and take ethical responsibility for their rhetoric, they will be equipped to engage in discourses outside of science and technology. Aristotle suggests that rhetoric operates in any discourse where individuals may deliberate (Kennedy 1991). Communicators who understand how to use rhetoric ethically should also operate in any discourse where individuals may deliberate as Aristotle suggests. Since technical communicators are trained rhetoricians, they should not fear the political realm—or any field of discourse for that matter. Technical communicators who revive an Aristotelian concept of the ethical communicator are well suited to engage the political realm because they are wise rhetoricians. Auerbach (2015) writes that rhetoric communicates a point while political rhetoric communicates a point to advance the goals of a political entity. Thus, without rhetoric, a politician would not succeed. With rhetoric, technical communicators can succeed in the political realm. Yack (2006) suggests that ideally public deliberation should be a means of “shaping individual judgments about the proper collective action to take” (420). However, current political discourse does not mirror the political discourse of Aristotle’s time. Often, political rhetoric in democracy seems to pit opposing views and serve the false dichotomy of bipartisanship. However, if technical communicators are true rhetoricians, they will understand the nature of compromise. If they understand the power and responsibility of rhetoric, they will be willing to argue both sides of an issue. Moreover, they will be more willing to serve their audiences rather than their discourses. If technical communicators engage political discourse, they could have a profound positive impact on society.