Papers by Maria Kythreotou
Organisation of Conferences/Seminars by Maria Kythreotou
by Jennifer Devereaux, Andreas Serafim, Sophia Papaioannou, Kyriakos Demetriou, Andreas Hetzel, Maria Kythreotou, Georgios Vassiliades, Judith Mossman, kostas apostolakis, Flaminia Beneventano della Corte, Sophia Xenophontos, Roger Brock, T. Davina McClain, and Andreas N . Michalopoulos Organising Department:
-- Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Cyprus
C... more Organising Department:
-- Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Cyprus
Co-sponsors:
-- Department of Classics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
-- Department of Classics and Philosophy, University of Cyprus
Conveners:
-- Kyriakos Demetriou (Cyprus)
-- Sophia Papaioannou (Athens)
-- Andreas Serafim (Cyprus/ OU Cyprus/ Trinity College Dublin)
Keynote speaker:
-- Michael Gagarin (Austin)
Confirmed speakers:
-- Adele Scafuro (Brown)
-- Alessandro Vatri (Oxford)
-- Andreas Hetzel (Hildesheim)
-- Andreas Michalopoulos (Athens)
-- Antonis Petrides (OU Cyprus)
-- Antonis Tsakmakis (Cyprus)
-- Benoit Sans (Brussels)
-- Brenda Griffith-Williams (UCL)
-- Christopher Carey (UCL)
-- Costas Apostolakis (Crete)
-- Dimos Spatharas (Crete)
-- Eleni Volonaki (Peloponnese)
-- Flaminia Beneventano della Corte (Siena)
-- Francesca Scrofani (EHESS/Università degli Studi di Trento)
-- Gabriel Danzig (Bar Ilan University)
-- Georgios Vassiliades (Paris IV-Sorbonne)
-- Jakob Wisse (Newcastle)
-- Jennifer Devereaux (Southern California)
-- Jessica Evans (Middlebury)
-- Jon Hesk (St Andrews)
-- Judith Mossman (Nottingham)
-- Kathryn Tempest (Roehampton)
-- Margot Neger (Salzburg)
-- Maria Kythreotou (Cyprus)
-- Michael Paschalis (Crete)
-- Rebecca van Hove (KCL)
-- Ricardo Gancz (Bar Ilan University)
-- Robert Sing (Cambridge)
-- Roger Brock (Leeds)
-- Sophia Xenophontos (Glasgow)
-- Stephen Todd (Manchester)
-- T. Davina McClain (Northwestern State University)
-- Tazuko Angela van Berkel (Leiden)
-- Thierry Hirsh (Oxford)
-- Tzu-I Liao (UCL)
-- Victoria Pagan (Florida)
Talks by Maria Kythreotou
by Andreas Serafim, Andreas N . Michalopoulos, Flaminia Beneventano della Corte, Alessandro Vatri, Stefano Ferrucci, Ioannis Konstantakos, Maria Kythreotou, Myrto Aloumpi, Noboru SATO, Nick Fisher, Paulo Martins, Vasileios Liotsakis, and Maria Youni This conference aims to shed new light on the capacity of rhetoric, as used in Greek and Roman pr... more This conference aims to shed new light on the capacity of rhetoric, as used in Greek and Roman prose (mainly oratory and historiography) and poetry (mainly in tragedy and comedy), to promote either bonding and affiliation or distancing and division between the speaker and the audience. From the ancient Greco-Roman courts and assemblies to today’s political discourse, rhetoric is inherently divisive. It focuses on appealing to core groups and defining oneself against others.
In his sturdy book, A Rhetoric of Motives, Kenneth Burke argues that a fundamental purpose of rhetoric is identification: a speaker gives signs to the audience, mainly through language, indicating that his “properties” are the same or similar to those of the audience, thereby affirming a community with the audience and forging proximity. This is what Burke calls “consubstantiality” – the sharing of substance between two individuals – a process that ends in persuasion. Rhetoric also has the capacity to generate division or prolong hostility, persuading the audience by setting up people, matters or ideas as antithetical to the listeners. Rhetoric, in other words, creates a community: a conscious, psychological attachment to a group and the belief that this group has shared interests that are, in turn, at odds with those of other groups that may be constructed or implied by the speaker. Psychological and social studies indicate that the activation of group attitudes and identities and inter-group relations – in-group solidarity and out-group hostility – have a huge effect on the behaviours and attitudes in target audiences (e.g. Miller et al. 1981; Conover 1984; Lau 1989; Huddy 2003).
The techniques of unity and division in respect to rhetoric have been widely studied in classical scholarship, but only in a fragmentary way: there is no single, systematic and comprehensive study of these techniques. This gives scope for further research since there are several open questions: what forms does the rhetoric of identification take in Greek and Roman prose and poetry? What do these forms tell us about the speaker’s purpose, and how does he exploit them to the best rhetorical effect? What sources do we have about the reaction of the audience? How much difference does the nature of the speeches – forensic, deliberative and epideictic – make in the exploitation of the rhetoric of community and division?
Topics may include, but are not limited to considerations of:
a. language;
b. emotions;
c. performance;
d. memory;
e. humour theory;
f. gender-based approaches;
g. religion;
h. narrative, argumentation, ēthopoiia and other techniques that reinforce affiliation/ disaffiliation to groups.
Uploads
Papers by Maria Kythreotou
Organisation of Conferences/Seminars by Maria Kythreotou
-- Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Cyprus
Co-sponsors:
-- Department of Classics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
-- Department of Classics and Philosophy, University of Cyprus
Conveners:
-- Kyriakos Demetriou (Cyprus)
-- Sophia Papaioannou (Athens)
-- Andreas Serafim (Cyprus/ OU Cyprus/ Trinity College Dublin)
Keynote speaker:
-- Michael Gagarin (Austin)
Confirmed speakers:
-- Adele Scafuro (Brown)
-- Alessandro Vatri (Oxford)
-- Andreas Hetzel (Hildesheim)
-- Andreas Michalopoulos (Athens)
-- Antonis Petrides (OU Cyprus)
-- Antonis Tsakmakis (Cyprus)
-- Benoit Sans (Brussels)
-- Brenda Griffith-Williams (UCL)
-- Christopher Carey (UCL)
-- Costas Apostolakis (Crete)
-- Dimos Spatharas (Crete)
-- Eleni Volonaki (Peloponnese)
-- Flaminia Beneventano della Corte (Siena)
-- Francesca Scrofani (EHESS/Università degli Studi di Trento)
-- Gabriel Danzig (Bar Ilan University)
-- Georgios Vassiliades (Paris IV-Sorbonne)
-- Jakob Wisse (Newcastle)
-- Jennifer Devereaux (Southern California)
-- Jessica Evans (Middlebury)
-- Jon Hesk (St Andrews)
-- Judith Mossman (Nottingham)
-- Kathryn Tempest (Roehampton)
-- Margot Neger (Salzburg)
-- Maria Kythreotou (Cyprus)
-- Michael Paschalis (Crete)
-- Rebecca van Hove (KCL)
-- Ricardo Gancz (Bar Ilan University)
-- Robert Sing (Cambridge)
-- Roger Brock (Leeds)
-- Sophia Xenophontos (Glasgow)
-- Stephen Todd (Manchester)
-- T. Davina McClain (Northwestern State University)
-- Tazuko Angela van Berkel (Leiden)
-- Thierry Hirsh (Oxford)
-- Tzu-I Liao (UCL)
-- Victoria Pagan (Florida)
Talks by Maria Kythreotou
In his sturdy book, A Rhetoric of Motives, Kenneth Burke argues that a fundamental purpose of rhetoric is identification: a speaker gives signs to the audience, mainly through language, indicating that his “properties” are the same or similar to those of the audience, thereby affirming a community with the audience and forging proximity. This is what Burke calls “consubstantiality” – the sharing of substance between two individuals – a process that ends in persuasion. Rhetoric also has the capacity to generate division or prolong hostility, persuading the audience by setting up people, matters or ideas as antithetical to the listeners. Rhetoric, in other words, creates a community: a conscious, psychological attachment to a group and the belief that this group has shared interests that are, in turn, at odds with those of other groups that may be constructed or implied by the speaker. Psychological and social studies indicate that the activation of group attitudes and identities and inter-group relations – in-group solidarity and out-group hostility – have a huge effect on the behaviours and attitudes in target audiences (e.g. Miller et al. 1981; Conover 1984; Lau 1989; Huddy 2003).
The techniques of unity and division in respect to rhetoric have been widely studied in classical scholarship, but only in a fragmentary way: there is no single, systematic and comprehensive study of these techniques. This gives scope for further research since there are several open questions: what forms does the rhetoric of identification take in Greek and Roman prose and poetry? What do these forms tell us about the speaker’s purpose, and how does he exploit them to the best rhetorical effect? What sources do we have about the reaction of the audience? How much difference does the nature of the speeches – forensic, deliberative and epideictic – make in the exploitation of the rhetoric of community and division?
Topics may include, but are not limited to considerations of:
a. language;
b. emotions;
c. performance;
d. memory;
e. humour theory;
f. gender-based approaches;
g. religion;
h. narrative, argumentation, ēthopoiia and other techniques that reinforce affiliation/ disaffiliation to groups.
-- Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Cyprus
Co-sponsors:
-- Department of Classics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
-- Department of Classics and Philosophy, University of Cyprus
Conveners:
-- Kyriakos Demetriou (Cyprus)
-- Sophia Papaioannou (Athens)
-- Andreas Serafim (Cyprus/ OU Cyprus/ Trinity College Dublin)
Keynote speaker:
-- Michael Gagarin (Austin)
Confirmed speakers:
-- Adele Scafuro (Brown)
-- Alessandro Vatri (Oxford)
-- Andreas Hetzel (Hildesheim)
-- Andreas Michalopoulos (Athens)
-- Antonis Petrides (OU Cyprus)
-- Antonis Tsakmakis (Cyprus)
-- Benoit Sans (Brussels)
-- Brenda Griffith-Williams (UCL)
-- Christopher Carey (UCL)
-- Costas Apostolakis (Crete)
-- Dimos Spatharas (Crete)
-- Eleni Volonaki (Peloponnese)
-- Flaminia Beneventano della Corte (Siena)
-- Francesca Scrofani (EHESS/Università degli Studi di Trento)
-- Gabriel Danzig (Bar Ilan University)
-- Georgios Vassiliades (Paris IV-Sorbonne)
-- Jakob Wisse (Newcastle)
-- Jennifer Devereaux (Southern California)
-- Jessica Evans (Middlebury)
-- Jon Hesk (St Andrews)
-- Judith Mossman (Nottingham)
-- Kathryn Tempest (Roehampton)
-- Margot Neger (Salzburg)
-- Maria Kythreotou (Cyprus)
-- Michael Paschalis (Crete)
-- Rebecca van Hove (KCL)
-- Ricardo Gancz (Bar Ilan University)
-- Robert Sing (Cambridge)
-- Roger Brock (Leeds)
-- Sophia Xenophontos (Glasgow)
-- Stephen Todd (Manchester)
-- T. Davina McClain (Northwestern State University)
-- Tazuko Angela van Berkel (Leiden)
-- Thierry Hirsh (Oxford)
-- Tzu-I Liao (UCL)
-- Victoria Pagan (Florida)
In his sturdy book, A Rhetoric of Motives, Kenneth Burke argues that a fundamental purpose of rhetoric is identification: a speaker gives signs to the audience, mainly through language, indicating that his “properties” are the same or similar to those of the audience, thereby affirming a community with the audience and forging proximity. This is what Burke calls “consubstantiality” – the sharing of substance between two individuals – a process that ends in persuasion. Rhetoric also has the capacity to generate division or prolong hostility, persuading the audience by setting up people, matters or ideas as antithetical to the listeners. Rhetoric, in other words, creates a community: a conscious, psychological attachment to a group and the belief that this group has shared interests that are, in turn, at odds with those of other groups that may be constructed or implied by the speaker. Psychological and social studies indicate that the activation of group attitudes and identities and inter-group relations – in-group solidarity and out-group hostility – have a huge effect on the behaviours and attitudes in target audiences (e.g. Miller et al. 1981; Conover 1984; Lau 1989; Huddy 2003).
The techniques of unity and division in respect to rhetoric have been widely studied in classical scholarship, but only in a fragmentary way: there is no single, systematic and comprehensive study of these techniques. This gives scope for further research since there are several open questions: what forms does the rhetoric of identification take in Greek and Roman prose and poetry? What do these forms tell us about the speaker’s purpose, and how does he exploit them to the best rhetorical effect? What sources do we have about the reaction of the audience? How much difference does the nature of the speeches – forensic, deliberative and epideictic – make in the exploitation of the rhetoric of community and division?
Topics may include, but are not limited to considerations of:
a. language;
b. emotions;
c. performance;
d. memory;
e. humour theory;
f. gender-based approaches;
g. religion;
h. narrative, argumentation, ēthopoiia and other techniques that reinforce affiliation/ disaffiliation to groups.