Writing Help 129 | - Freelance Writer
Mar 29, 2013 | #1
Using Advanced Rhetorical Devices to Surprise and Delight
In order to begin this discussion of one of my favorite rhetorical terms, I will start with an example like those you have heard and will likely hear again in the arena of politics: "Although my opponent has once more stooped to name calling and character assassination, I will not sink to his level; I could bring up his drinking problem, gambling addiction, spousal abuse charges, and criminal record, but I will not because that would make me as despicable as him." Read this through again once or twice and try to formulate in words what it is you have noticed. Do you see a contradiction here? Did you find this humorous? If so, it is because of the cunning nature of paralipsis.
Paralipsis is the mention or even the discussion of a given topic at the same time it is supposedly being removed from consideration. In other words, you claim that you will not mention something, but in saying that, you have actually mentioned it explicitly! Turning to the above example, we can see that paralipsis is operating in full force. The politician who is speaking the sentence frames the entire statement by claiming he is better than his opponent, because his opponent has apparently been badmouthing him during the campaign. So, the speaker states that he refuses to sink so low as to badmouth his opponent, which is thus far completely consistent, but then he moves into a witty reversal which is where the paralipsis is born. When he states that he will not mention his opponent's diverse and incriminating social and legal problems, he actually lists all of these problems to whoever is listening, whether they be the voting public, the media or (most likely) both together. So, even as the speaker claims he will not stoop to his opponent's level by badmouthing him, he does this through the mere mention of his opponent's previous crimes and problems. This (intentional) contradiction creates a witty, humorous, memorable effect, meaning that those who hear it are even more likely to remember it than statements (like those his opponent likely made) made in a more direct manner.
Although large obvious examples like the kind explained above are the most entertaining sort of paralipsis, there is also a weaker manifestation of the device which is so common in our daily speech that its rhetorical effects have been muted considerably. Take, for example, the following sentences:
"You were completely incompetent, not to mention rude and unbelievably loud!"
"It goes without saying that you will have to come alone, without any family or friends for company or support."
In the first example, we see the common phrase not to mention, which has become a stock way to include extra considerations beyond the first which are not as important but still have some bearing on the situation. Here, the person is accusing someone of being incompetent primarily, and then rude and loud, although she claims she will not mention the rudeness or loudness. In the second example the popular goes without saying is employed, but of course any statement which follows this will be an example of paralipsis because you are obviously going to go on to say the very thing you have just claimed will go without saying. This stock phrase has little of its rhetorical power left, and is now just another way of amplifying the importance of what follows, and could be replaced with obviously without any real loss of meaning.
Paralipsis
In order to begin this discussion of one of my favorite rhetorical terms, I will start with an example like those you have heard and will likely hear again in the arena of politics: "Although my opponent has once more stooped to name calling and character assassination, I will not sink to his level; I could bring up his drinking problem, gambling addiction, spousal abuse charges, and criminal record, but I will not because that would make me as despicable as him." Read this through again once or twice and try to formulate in words what it is you have noticed. Do you see a contradiction here? Did you find this humorous? If so, it is because of the cunning nature of paralipsis.
Paralipsis is the mention or even the discussion of a given topic at the same time it is supposedly being removed from consideration. In other words, you claim that you will not mention something, but in saying that, you have actually mentioned it explicitly! Turning to the above example, we can see that paralipsis is operating in full force. The politician who is speaking the sentence frames the entire statement by claiming he is better than his opponent, because his opponent has apparently been badmouthing him during the campaign. So, the speaker states that he refuses to sink so low as to badmouth his opponent, which is thus far completely consistent, but then he moves into a witty reversal which is where the paralipsis is born. When he states that he will not mention his opponent's diverse and incriminating social and legal problems, he actually lists all of these problems to whoever is listening, whether they be the voting public, the media or (most likely) both together. So, even as the speaker claims he will not stoop to his opponent's level by badmouthing him, he does this through the mere mention of his opponent's previous crimes and problems. This (intentional) contradiction creates a witty, humorous, memorable effect, meaning that those who hear it are even more likely to remember it than statements (like those his opponent likely made) made in a more direct manner.Although large obvious examples like the kind explained above are the most entertaining sort of paralipsis, there is also a weaker manifestation of the device which is so common in our daily speech that its rhetorical effects have been muted considerably. Take, for example, the following sentences:
"You were completely incompetent, not to mention rude and unbelievably loud!"
"It goes without saying that you will have to come alone, without any family or friends for company or support."
In the first example, we see the common phrase not to mention, which has become a stock way to include extra considerations beyond the first which are not as important but still have some bearing on the situation. Here, the person is accusing someone of being incompetent primarily, and then rude and loud, although she claims she will not mention the rudeness or loudness. In the second example the popular goes without saying is employed, but of course any statement which follows this will be an example of paralipsis because you are obviously going to go on to say the very thing you have just claimed will go without saying. This stock phrase has little of its rhetorical power left, and is now just another way of amplifying the importance of what follows, and could be replaced with obviously without any real loss of meaning.