Despite the tepid reception of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke in 1978, the Supreme Court has thrice affirmed its holding: universities can use race as an admissions factor to achieve the goal of a diverse student body. This book examines the process of rhetorical invention followed by Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr., his colleagues, and other interlocutors as they sifted through arguments surrounding affirmative action policies to settle on diversity as affirmative action’s best constitutional justification. Here M. Kelly Carr explores the goals, constraints, and argumentative tools of the various parties as they utilized the linguistic resources available to them, including arguments about race, merit, and the role of the public university in civic life. Using public address texts, legal briefs, memoranda, and draft opinions, Carr looks at how public arguments informed the amicus briefs, chambers memos, and legal principles before concluding that Powell’s pragmatic decision making fused the principle of individualism with an appreciation of multiculturalism to accommodate his colleagues’ differing opinions. She argues that Bakke is thus a legal and rhetorical milestone that helped to shift the justificatory grounds of race-conscious policy away from a recognition of historical discrimination and its call for reparative equality, and toward an appreciation of racial diversity.

Rhetorical invention--the discursive art of inquiry and discovery--has great significance in the history of spoken and written communication, dating back to the ancient Greeks and Romans. Yet invention has received relatively little attention in recent discussions of rhetoric, writing, and communication. This collection of essays is the first book in years to focus on current research in rhetorical invention. The contributors include many well-established scholars, as well as new voices in the field. They reflect a variety of approaches and perspectives: theory, history, culture, politics, institutions, pedagogy, and community service. Several of the essays address the relationship between invention and postmodernism--some by refiguring invention, others by challenging postmodernism. Still other essays explore multicultural conceptions of invention, the civic function of invention and rhetoric, and the role of rhetorical invention in institutions and in comunity problem solving. Taken together, these essays provide a much-needed forum for ongoing study of rhetorical invention within the framework of recent developments in both scholarship and the culture at large. "If inventional research is to continue and flourish," notes Janice Lauer in her foreword, "it must remain sensitive to shifts in epistemology, ethics, and politics. The essays in this volume undertake this effort.." The Editors: Janet M. Atwill is associate professor of English at the University of Tennessee. The author of Rhetoric Reclaimed: Aristotle and the Liberal Arts Tradition and coauthor of Four Worlds of Writing: Inquiry and Action in Context and Writing: A College Handbook, she has published articles in Rhetoric Review, Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, and the Journal of Advanced Composition. Janice M. Lauer is Reece McGee Distinguished Professor of English at Purdue University, where she founded, directed, and teaches in the graduate program in Rhetoric and Composition. She is coauthor of Four Worlds of Writing and Composition Research: Empirical Designs and has published numerous articles on rhetoric and composition. Contributors: Frederick J. Antczak, Janet M. Atwill, Julia Deems, Richard Leo Enos, Theresa Enos, Linda Flower, Debra Hawhee, Janice M. Lauer, Donald Lazere, Yameng Liu, Arabella Lyon, Louise Wetherbee Phelps, Jay Satterfield, Haixia Wang, Mark T. Williams.

Peter Wood traces the birth and evolution of diversity, illuminating how it came to sprawl across politics, law, education, business, entertainment, personal aspiration, religion and the arts as an encompassing claim about human identity.

Readings of Aristotle’s and Confucius’ teachings reveal that both philosophers’ rhetorical thinking contain vital similarities which can help us understand cultural differences today. Much has been said about Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric as ‘the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion’ but few studies have focused on his depiction of rhetoric as ‘partly like dialectic, and partly like sophistical reasoning’. Yet, this Aristotelian conception of rhetoric sheds light on a similarity with Confucius’ teaching: both Confucius and Aristotle see the human understanding of the truths of things as necessarily having a dimension that is open-ended and discursive.

Thoroughly embedded in postmodern theory, this book offers a critique of traditional conceptions of the liberal arts, exploring the challenges posed by cultural diversity to the aims and methods of a humanist education. Janet M. Atwill investigates a neglected tradition of rhetoric, exemplified by Protagoras and Isocorates, and preserved in Aristotle's Rhetoric. This tradition was rooted in the ancient sophistic and platonic conceptions of techn , or productive knowledge, that appears both in literary texts from the seventh century B.C.E. and in medical and technical treatises from the fifth century B.C.E. Atwill examines these traditions, together with sophistic and platonic conceptions, and considers the commentaries on Aristotle's Rhetoric by E. M. Cope and William S. J. Grimaldi, where the concepts of techn and productive knowledge disappear in the modern opposition between theory and practice. Since models of knowledge are closely tied to models of subjectivity, Atwill's examination of techn also explores the role of political, economic, and educational institutions in standardizing a specific model for subjectivity. She argues that the liberal arts traditions largely eclipsed the social and political functions of rhetoric, transforming it from an art of disrupting and reinventing lines of power to a discipline of producing a normative subject, defined by virtue but modeled on a specific gender and class type.

Tropologies is the first book-length study to elaborate the medieval and early modern theory of the tropological, or moral, sense of scripture. Ryan McDermott argues that tropology is not only a way to interpret the Bible but also a theory of literary and ethical invention. The “tropological imperative” demands that words be turned into works—books as well as deeds. Beginning with Augustine, Jerome, and Gregory the Great, then treating monuments of exegesis such as the Glossa ordinaria and Nicholas of Lyra, as well as theorists including Thomas Aquinas, Erasmus, Martin Luther, and others, Tropologies reveals the unwritten history of a major hermeneutical theory and inventive practice. Late medieval and early Reformation writers adapted tropological theory to invent new biblical poetry and drama that would invite readers to participate in salvation history by inventing their own new works. Tropologies reinterprets a wide range of medieval and early modern texts and performances—including the Patience-Poet, Piers Plowman, Chaucer, the York and Coventry cycle plays, and the literary circles of the reformist King Edward VI—to argue that “tropological invention” provided a robust alternative to rhetorical theories of literary production. In this groundbreaking revision of literary history, the Bible and biblical hermeneutics, commonly understood as sources of tumultuous discord, turn out to provide principles of continuity and mutuality across the Reformation’s temporal and confessional rifts. Each chapter pursues an argument about poetic and dramatic form, linking questions of style and aesthetics to exegetical theory and theology. Because Tropologies attends to the flux of exegetical theory and practice across a watershed period of intellectual history, it is able to register subtle shifts in literary production, fine-tuning our sense of how literature and religion mutually and dynamically informed and reformed each other.