Foster's Study of CybeRhetorics

Foster starts his article by defining rhetoric as an eloquent form of persuasion, both used by ancient Greek philosophers and modern speakers today. Even as time passed, the three main roles have not changed; practitioners, theorists, and critics work together to present a valid point in a dialogue of checks and balances. In this relationship, the theorists guide the practitioners, and the critics examine the speech. Kenneth Burke states that Rhetoric is human nature to people and humans are simultaneously practitioners as well as critics. Burke also states that because humans practice it naturally, it is all around them and it is what makes them human beings. Indeed, he argued that acting and speaking rhetorically are the defining characteristics of human beings. Only when it becomes formal does one turn to the theorists and critics for feedback. Critics also play a big role, though their focus is different. They focus on what the speech could influence people to do, how persuasive it is in influencing them, and figure out what the writer was thinking. Also, a main job of a critic is to criticize (naturally!) the ideologies that are being put forth, as well as what is hidden between the lines. When one thinks about what a speaker really means, then one turns from a practitioner to a critic. Reviewing rhetoric helps all sides of the process.

When one posts some piece of persuasive writing online, it is not simply rhetoric anymore. It is cybeRhetoric because of the different medium that is utilized. Even a rhetorical document that was originally in print or some other form of media can become “cyberized” by being available online. Cyberspace texts are special because they utilize a language called “hypertextuality” and change the whole notion of author/text/audience by linking to many various interior references. Hypertextuality is like a more modern way of a bibliography, a series of references linked to other sources found online. This form of referencing links the original text to the exterior references in many ways. The first is “linear”, much like a book page. However, it is more “restrictive” because page one only links to page two, and so on and so forth. Unlike a book, there is no way that one can go to a random page. The reader must follow what the author has set out for him or her, with very little reader input or exploration. The second involves the author constructing his text like a “tree” of sorts, with each part linking to many other parts. There is no longer one text. The reader has the freedom to read however he or she chooses and thus changes how the text written is perceived. However, there is no “external material”, so the reading is self contained. In this third instance, the original text may be linked to an outside text that explains or embellishes on a point the author is trying to make. The two texts are woven together. The fourth requires no original text at all, merely a linking of pre-existing text in a way that is more “coherent”. The HTML format of “frames” can be used in this way, allowing two separate webpages to load in one window. Unfortunately, with this fourth instance, there is little to no authorial control, where the new linkage can alter the reader’s opinion on the work, giving the original work a new spin or perspective. The final instance involves “networked hypertext”, which is hypertext employed by many different people. There is no concrete writer for this format at all, as it all gives off a “Writerless” property. Now, there are multiple visions on what an individual author can be or in some cases, can’t be. Hyperlinks are not only used to enhance a text and give the reader a sense of cooperation and freedom, but the “hypertext author” has put that code in that specific place for a reason—to influence one more.

The way we perceive texts has changed through the years as the medium grew and developed. Foster compares Hyperlinked text to “channel surfing”. Some authors, like Tuman, fear that the traditional way to view books will be lost. Gregory Ulmer puts in his ideas by saying that hyperrhetoric is not just merely communicating, but rather a connective force. Ulmer asserts that the reader will soon be able to make their own connections regarding different texts that are presented to the reader through hypertext referencing. He hopes that one day, the reader will be able to explore the rhetoric themselves instead of relying on a strict logic.