A Feminist Glance on Rhetoric

1762 Words4 Pages

The notion of a feminine rhetoric is somewhat buried in the male-dominated tradition. That is not to say that a ‘female’ voice does not emerge at certain critical moments within the rhetorical tradition, but a separate feminine tradition is unable to continuously exist throughout the history of rhetoric. By first glancing at the suppression of the voice of Aspasia (and the inability for her voice to be strictly feminine), a comparison between her, Christine Pizan, and Hélène Cixous will be greatly facilitated. As well, the common concerns that emerge in Pizan’s The Book of the City of Ladies and Cixous’ “The Laugh of the Medusa” will be compared with one another, as each woman is representative of a critical moment within the rhetorical tradition. Here I will explore each woman’s role as a female within a patriarchal tradition to reveal that though a feminine voice does emerge at critical moments, a separate feminine rhetorical tradition cannot exist throughout history.
Due to the lack of primary sources compared to the abundant secondary source material on Aspasia, incorporating her into the discussion on “female” rhetoric - questioning the influence she had on it and if her influence is peculiarly female - is problematic. Having said this, a significant amount of feminist scholars offer their opinions and as well, and interesting debate has arisen. Xin Liu Gale, Assistant Professor of Writing and Rhetoric at Syracuse University, has written an article in response to the feminist remodeling of Aspasia’s voice. In her article, “Historical Studies and Postmodernism: Rereading Aspasia of Miletus,” Gale questions the historical arguments of three feminist historians, Susan C. Jarratt, Rory Ong, and Cheryl Glenn. Gale describes that ...

... middle of paper ...

...entieth century. We knew we were not the first, but few would have expected to find the arguments so fully and powerfully stated in fifteenth-century France. Yet here they are again; or rather here they were all the time [my emphasis] (694).
This female ‘voice’ can exist to us now but cannot have existed in the history following Pizan’s lifetime. The notion of a separate feminine tradition as existing continuously throughout the history of rhetoric is near impossible because of this. Though some may argue that the ‘female’ voice existed whether it was widely known or not, my argument lies in the fact that an unheard voice has little influence on a discourse and thus, cannot actually exist. Therefore, a separate feminine rhetorical tradition cannot truly exist throughout history and, when glancing at both Aspasia and now Christine de Pizan, this is even more evident.

Open Document