In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

103 C hapter 5 De Quincey’s Writing: Dialogic Rhetoric in Action De Quincey’s presentation of his ideas about rhetoric defies expectations for cohesion and consistency that traditionally surround the genre of the rhetorical treatise. Embedded in De Quincey’s notion of rhetoric is the presumption that systematic accounts of how rhetoric should function jeopardize the subjective dialogue that defines the rhetorical enterprise. To devise a rhetorical treatise geared toward prescribing rhetoric’s role in public life would, therefore, undermine De Quincey’s insistence that rhetoric should provide creative individuals with opportunities to explore ideas freely and to allow that exploratory process to infuse society with the intellectual energy that he believed to be endangered by the imposed values of science and industry. Style is an important component in this creative process, as the rhetor develops and demonstrates intellectual vitality through the strategic use of language. Scholars who have attempted to understand De Quincey through comparing his work to the expositions on rhetoric found in traditional treatises are understandably frustrated in their efforts to convert De Quincey’s wideranging discussion into a more systematic and accessible form. A more productive avenue for understanding De Quincey’s thinking about rhetoric is to attempt to appreciate the very features that make it so unique. Lawrence D. Needham argues that many criticisms of De Quincey’s “Rhetoric” come from “critics who have refused to read ‘Rhetoric’ on its own terms, as a bravura performance of verbal display” (49). It is the premise of this book that the project of appreciating De Quincey’s rhetorical theory entails first tracking key themes that emerge through the course of De Quincey’s writings on rhetoric and language, which I have undertaken to do in chapters 3 and 4. The next step in understanding De Quincey’s view of rhetoric involves observing how he enacts his vision of rhetoric through his own writing. The goal of this chapter is to delineate how De Quincey illustrates and illuminates his theory through his own rhetorical practice. 104 thomas de quincey De Quincey’s Rhetorical Practice In Thomas De Quincey, Literary Critic: His Method and Achievement, John E. Jordan refers to De Quincey’s despair over the death of rhetoric but goes on to note that De Quincey was “apparently oblivious of how exquisitely much of his own writing fits his definition of rhetoric” (218). Frederick W. Haberman offers a different interpretation, as he goes so far as to argue that much of what can be found in De Quincey’s rhetoric is intended to describe only his own practices: “De Quincey formulated not just one theory of rhetoric, but two: a theory of rhetoric or of literature as intellectual play for Thomas de Quincey, and a theory of rhetoric as persuasion for the rest of the world. . . . As a practicing author, rhetoric as delight was a branch of literature which De Quincey reserved for himself. Being a stunt pilot, in short, he needed a specially designed plane” (199–200). While I would argue that De Quincey did not intend to reserve his theory for himself, I agree with Haberman’s claim that De Quincey saw his work as intricately connected to the principles he upheld and with his conclusion that “De Quincey was his own best practitioner; his work illustrates in every degree of excellence his own theory” (201). However, if it is indeed the case that much of De Quincey’s way of defining rhetoric can be found in his own writing, defining the precise principles that guide De Quincey’s rhetorical performance is nevertheless a challenging task. De Quincey’s impressive corpus covers a wide range of subjects, genres, and purposes. Early twentieth-century critic Sherwin Cody describes De Quincey’s work as “extremely miscellaneous in character” (116), a characterization supported by the fact that De Quincey wrote over two hundred essays dealing with topics ranging from autobiography to political economy. Although it is not always possible to state with certainty what any writer’s purposes are, the goals of De Quincey’s writing appear to vary and to include entertainment, self-expression, cultural criticism, argument, and, without a doubt, financial remuneration. Given the volume and diversity of De Quincey’s work, it is impossible to make broad generalizations about characteristic rhetorical strategies that appear across the varied time periods, genres, and moods in which De Quincey wrote. However, it is possible to see in De Quincey’s approach a direct enactment of his view that...

Share