Style and Ornament

Chapter 10 focuses on style and how ancient rhetoricians devoted a whole section of rhetoric to the arrangements of word which they called style. What I found interesting here was the notion that style is able to be changed and added upon more so than the mere inherent ability to compose something. This reading suggests that the ability to rearrange words to form different styles is something to be used as a persuasive tool. Though it isn’t a surprising statement, when I think of style I think of someone’s natural or inherent abilities and ways of writing or delivering. Though it can be changed, does one ever truly stray from the style of rhetoric that they are comfortable with over time? With the advent of text came the ability to edit and review ones words, and printing them allowed for the composition and structure to be truly broken down and analyzed/categorized. This may have been done on personal levels for rhetoricians, however “no one knows for sure when style emerged as the third cannon of rhetoric” (Crowley 250). Additionally, the onset of text in the modern world allowed for people to learn others styles and systematically understand them.

Another aspect of this reading that was very interesting was that of ornament. Though it is the last in a line of other facets of style, ornament is something that is unusual or extraordinary. Though there was and still is a great amount of debate as to what the terms of ornament mean (Figures of thought, speech, and tropes) they are the part of one’s style that seemingly adds the ever so important oomph. It can be seen here as the part of style that isn’t fully understood at least in classical times. Yes it is easy to put terms to the phenomena of style, but at least in my experience and understanding each person has a noticeable style. This style may follow guidelines of structured style, however, each person differs in their style no matter how much structure and revision is done. Again only my opinion, but something to think about.