Chinese rhetoric

Much of what is studied about the rhetorical tradition focuses heavily on Western ideas and principles, including teachings of the Aristotles and the Ciceros and the Quintilians. However, Chinese rhetoric has a rich tradition of its own with unique ideas and historical context.

In LuMing Mao’s Searching for the Way: Between the Whats and Wheres
of Chinese Rhetoric, Mao emphasizes the importance of asking “Where is Chinese rhetoric?” and not just “What is Chinese rhetoric?” By asking what Chinese rhetoric is, we run the risk of simplifying ideas and comparing them to Western ideals. Asking where, on the other hand, forces us to recontextualize ideas in texts and writings from history:

I want to complicate and move beyond this apparent divide that such characterizations seem to have created — one that pits Chinese culture against Western culture. In fact, I want to develop a dialogue between the what and the where in ways that can in turn facilitate our search for the appropriate models of rhetorical conduct in the study of Chinese rhetoric here and now. (330)

A common myth is about Chinese rhetoric is that speech was not appreciated, but this idea is false. Speech was highly valued and appreciated, although Confucius disliked “qiao yan,” or clever speech. The emphasis was on trustworthy speech.

Although Mao warned against comparing Chinese and Western rhetoric, Confucius’s distaste for clever speech seems to mirror Aristotle’s feelings for the Sophists. It would be interesting to do a deeper dive on these similarities, while taking each culture’s historical context into account. I wonder what else they have in common!