ARCS Ch 9; RT 761-772, 581-627

Arrangement and its importance with kairos. We have talked about kairos before, and its importance in the timing of when to introduce an argument, or the best way/time to reveal it. But this is also true with arrangement. Arrangement needs kairos in order to determine which parts of an argument to arrange in the right way - the right timing.
Salons, invented in a way by Madeleine de Scudery, are a way of using kairos in the real world, when meeting people in a certain time and at a salon, gave people the means of expressing themselves and 'selling' themselves to others in that kairos.
Strong rhetoric relies on the very important concept of arrangement, for even a strong argument may be arranged in a weak way and lose value to an audience. Paying attention to kairos in arrangement allows for an argument to present itself in the most powerful and impactful way possible.

ARCS CH 8, RT 748-760, 698-735

Reading about Margaret Fell was refreshing and interesting in this section. I found it interesting how women were being particularly restricted at this time period (1614-1702) but despite the challenges they faced from the oppression of men many found "courage to express themselves", particularly Margaret Fell. It makes me wonder how in a time where women were experiencing more restrictions that many women felt this ability, why wouldn't the result be the opposite, women voicing less at the risk of prosecution. Margaret's piece titled, "Women's Speaking Justified, Proved, and Allowed by the Scriptures" was interesting for two main reasons. I thought about her title, and decision to use the word "allowed". To me this is an interesting and powerful choice, defining the current state of womens' rights at the time particularly related to speaking, but I found that this word validates the notion at the time that women do not have the allowance to speak credibly or publicly. I do not agree with her decision to use this nomenclature in her title...Secondly, I found it fitting and interesting that she speaks about the right of women to speak and have opinions publicly through examples in scripture that support the notion of equality for women. In the context of her writing and the time it was published, I can see the relevance of her topic, and the credibility that the church held in the time. Now in today's age, I would strive to find a source (similar to the Bible) that everyone may be able to agree is credible, true, fact, etc. But I find that now there are less "commonplaces" such as this. I feel that it was easier for Margaret Fell to accomplish what she wanted to say about the equality of women because she found the way to relater topic to a trustworthy and universally reliable source. People didn't argue with the Bible, especially because of the union between church and state. Now in writing, a rhetor would find it much harder to justify their ideas by citing one universally  uncontested source.

Renaissance Rhetoric Intro pp. 553-580

What I liked while reading this chapter on the Renaissance rhetoric was the mention of humanism as the first intellectual movement of the Renaissance - one that I had not thought of before. People beginning to think of themselves and others as one whole connected by humanity, is endearing and powerful. Although this movement was largely in the northern Italian area, where Petrarch spent many times. Petrarch's style was inspired by Cicero, and developed after his discovery of much of Cicero's old work (letters) - it is in this inspiration that humanitias  was born and later became the humanism movement (pp. 558). This shift introduces a ore personal style to rhetoric. While reading this I related this movement as one that may have been comparable to the development of voice in writing. The distinction of writers/orators/speakers from one another. Although I am sure that scholars could be distinguished before this development of a "more personal and literary style", this movement may have brought more value to this aspect of an author's presence as a result of the humanism aspect being introduced (pp. 558).
Another section I found valuable and relevant to myself was "Italian Women Humanists", one of the first introductions of female contenders in the readings. I read, learning what I should have expected, about the effects of culture on the female scholars. Many did not continue after marriage - customary but disheartening for the development of women academics, although appropriate to the time. It is enlightening to see the treatment of women is routinely constant throughout history in sectors, not exempt from ancient rhetoricians. It leaves me questioning when women will be seen in the same light as the dominant group...leading into social inequalities and away from rhetoric, I digress.