Encountering Iris: Grassi’s Humanistic Alchemy

Encountering Iris: Grassi’s Humanistic Rhetoric of Alchemy

by Gerard Wozek

rnesto Grassi’s incorporation of the legend of Iris as a framework for his rhetorical view helps to elucidate key concepts into his humanistic approach to language and rhetoric. Iris, which means “to speak or announce,” (Foss, Foss and Trapp 156) was the goddess of the rainbow in Greek myth and the feminine counterpart of Hermes, Zeus’ emissary and god of communication. She is often depicted as holding two chalices in her hand, which symbolically demonstrates her ability to mediate between the unconscious and conscious realms. In Grassi’s view, language is a code that helps humans to translate primal, often soundless images, in order to give voice to and shape a more concrete view of the world. In other words, rhetoric is the method that captures these inexplicable source images, a way of observing relationships and making connections, which aids humans in the interpretation of unconscious provocation. Rhetorical language thus creates a structured reality, which can be reformed and reinterpreted—much the same as Iris mixes and alchemizes between the two realms: that of humans and that of the gods.

Grassi’s approach seeks to dissect ways in which human beings respond to a set of demands from the world and through various linguistic choices, reveal the way they view the world around them. Grassi examines the negative judgements on Humanism made by philosophers such as Decartes and Hegel who cautioned that the Humanistic approach did not grasp the essence of man and was too irrational. Grassi views Humanism as a “movement that arrives at re-discovering the inherent values of mankind by way of literature, philology and rhetoric (Grassi in Renaissance Humanism 5).

The Humanist’s broader approach to rhetoric with its emphasis on contextual variation is in direct opposition to the Scientific approach which deals with objectivity and universals. Grassi suggests that there is a need to examine the notion of passion and that Western thought has overemphasized the rational outlook. Kuhn’s outline of a scientific paradigm for example, with its emphasis on conventional standards of measurement, models that can be replicated and pragmatic research would be too limited for Grassi’s discipline, which is inclusive of art, poetry, emotion and subtle distinctions. Grassi suggests that passion is inextricable from logic and that the power of a message often originates in wonder and awe. His view of imagistic language in poetry for example, suggests that “it is with the song of the Muses—not with rational thinking—that something tremendous happens” (Grassi in Renaissance Humanism 11).

Grassi’s form of Humanism derives largely from the work of Italian mediaevalist Giambattista Vico who Grassi believed represented the thought of Italian Humanism most completely. Grassi’s view of Humanism is not centered on the problem of the nature of human existence, but rather with the complexity of words and the way of rhetorically thinking and speaking that were perfected as a way of philosophizing in the 15^th century (147). Vico observed that the rise of human history is what differentiates humans from animals. Grassi’s contention on Humanist rhetoric is based on Vico’s observation that humans are separate from nature inasmuch as humans can choose and aren’t limited to actions of instinct. Humans must reform sensory messages and intellectualize them, and in doing so humans have eventually come to take control over nature. Humans gain control over nature, humanize or historicize it by using a process known as ingenium (151).

Ingenium is defined as “nonrational insight into similarities: it is a practical knowing, an intuition that exists apart form formal reasoning process (151). One view of this ability to make connections through immediate cognition suggests that ingenium “allows us to ‘see’ with the word, to make connections in experience we have not before made and which we need in order to think new thoughts” (Verene qtd. in Foss, Foss and Trapp 151-152). Grassi informs that ingenium manifests on three levels, the first being the imagination, a faculty which serves to help humans to define and order various interpretations and create reality (Foss, Foss and Trapp 152). Work follows as a second manifestation and allows humans to act upon the interpretation fostered by the imagination (153). Finally, language serves to name and assign meanings to objects in the world, and through this process of creating names, humans create a history or a separate reality apart from the world (153).

According to Grassi, the concept of metaphor is central to his theories on rhetoric and becomes a “linguistic manifestation of ingenium” (154). According to Aristotle, metaphor allows the human being “to see the similarity between what is actually the most widely separated” (as qtd. in Foss, Foss and Trapp 154). Like Iris mixing her elixir between realms or cups, the human uses language to transfer insight from nature or the subconscious into a more fully developed consciousness. Language, for Grassi, becomes a way of relating or connecting to human terms, in essence, it is a translation. Poetry which makes notable use of the metaphor, is significant for Grassi as a way of getting back to primary or original revelations, a way of calculating if you will, divine inspiration. Writing in his chapter on “The Problem of the Word” in the book Renaissance Humanism: Studies in Philosophy and Poetics, Grassi examines the difficulties that Humanism has had to face and attempts to explore the rhetoric of poetry as a calling upon of a higher source. He suggests that “through the divine spirit manifesting itself in the language of poetry, all beings—i.e. things men, institutions, the gods of different periods—are disclosed by the rhythmic, regulated and at the same time regulating language of poetry (12). This alchemy or transference of meaning through metaphoric translation is what illuminates the poet and the receiver of the word and allows the participants to make sense of the world, but it is the Humanist’s approach that allows for this insight, something that is missing from more rational approaches.

Gerard Hauser writing in his Introduction to Rhetorical Theory suggests that “in essence the passions are distrusted as basic impulses, desires or feelings of the flesh. Without the control of reason located in the mind, we fear that these base impulses will lead us into acts that are bestial in character or that rest on deception or are primitive at best” (108). Aristotle’s view of rhetoric is a way of persuading the audience to act based on a logical, rational system with some call towards a higher “truth” or grounding. The Humanist tradition with its grounding in the poetical word breaks with the scientific analysis of rhetoric. Grassi’s thesis in his first chapter on Humanism in his book, Heidegger and the Question of Renaissance Humanism: Four Studies, views the condition of mania as the “origin of poetry and art (15) suggesting that it is easily confused, but that it is indeed the calling back to our own origins or some divine source. It is this Humanistic element that seems missing in Aristotle’s model of rhetoric. It is almost as if Grassi provides some sort of link (the Muses, if you will, being the link that creates order through song, arrangement, etc. from rapture and ecstasy) between the speaker, the word, the audience, and the divine.

It seems critical to examine Grassi’s metaphorical discussion of language, his rhetoric of alchemy, by examining poetic language, since most rhetoricians seem dismissive of the imagistic, non-rational elements. Aristotle’s emphasis on logic or logos as being most critical in the examination of the effectiveness of a rhetorical strategy (and this is carried through in the work of Bitzer and to some extent Foucault) seems to dismiss the nuances encountered in the realm of metaphors and fabulous language. In a compelling statement in his book on Heidegger and the Question of Renaissance Humanism, Grassi says that:

The capacity to construct fables is therefore a ‘gift’ which only a few share. This explains the fact the poets were always rare. The results of this inspiration are sublime, such as the compulsion of the soul to speak. The unconditioned nature of language breaks forth in poetry: the poet cannot call upon it when and as he pleases. Poetry gives voice to an original force, a power that is expressed in the word. It possesses an inventive character, which enables it to make something obvious and open to view (22).

Grassi’s Humanistic view tends to open up on the process of inspiration and imagination

and harkens back to more primordial evocations, something, which tends to be lacking in other modern rhetorical considerations. Again, Grassi’s concern with passion is taken up in Chapter Three on “Passion and Illusion” in his book, The Primordial Metaphor. His thesis examines the validity of modern psychology, as embodied by the theories of Sigmund Freud, and looks again at the fundamental issues of the passionate experience of existence and whether or not they are “purely psychological phenomenon” (31). Grassi seems intent to push the rhetorical envelope by exploring the human confrontation with love and death and what evokes passions. Grassi suggests that humans insist on their passions as a way of “becoming” and examines the tension between institutions that seek to bridle passion as being detrimental. These institutions which are built upon rational thought are defined by “generality, sameness, and abstraction, whereas the appeal of beings can only manifest itself in the realm of circumstance” (34). Grassi suggests that tedium and the sameness brought upon by replicated modes of thinking in fact hold humans back from self-actualizing. He alludes to the Italian philosopher Leopardi when he suggests that “Reason is the enemy of all greatness: Reason is the enemy of nature: Nature is vast, reason is small. I mean to say that the more man is dominated by his reason, the fewer are his chances of achieving greatness . . . “(Leopardi as qtd. in Grassi, The Primordial Metaphor 39).

Grassi’s rhetorical language is a language of alchemy. It is the acknowledgement of the existence of a higher power and it is the transmutation, if you will, of that power through poetic language—or as the Humanists explored the human relationship to the world through literature, art, and poetry. As Grassi asserts, “it is through poetry that the origins speak and reveal themselves, though they also veil themselves in each of the different images (Grassi in Renaissance Humanism 13). It is this exploration or “unveiling” that the receiver encounters in the rhetorical paradigm that Grassi’s rhetoric also seems concerned with. This rhetoric suggests the transference of divine prompting and “unknowable” intuitions into a concrete system of symbols or a language code. Grassi makes significant claims that rhetorical language is superior over rational speech. Grassi offers a reexamination of the rhetorical model by suggesting that rhetorical language adapts various uses of imagery to illuminate historical facts, while rational speech is highly deductive and gives itself over to logos.

Grassi suggests there are consequences for any society that over-values the rational paradigm, primarily that global reliance on technology and scientific proof can be hindrances to moving forward as they promote an attitude of superiority (Foss, Foss and Trapp 161). He also suggests that science can actually limit a human’s capability to fully interpret all things and affects a bond or relationship with cultures that don’t share a more “recognized” or prevailing Western attitude. Grassi draws the conclusion that logical thought is related to the domination of humans and can be detrimental to exploring philosophy or the subtle powers of rhetoric (162). He supports the acknowledgement that all things are concrete but at the same time mutable, and that illusion is ever present, nothing is ever as it seems.

As an engagement of ingenium, folly become the process by which humans move from the nonhuman to the human realm, thus, Iris pours her liquid word and transmutes the divine into the concrete mundane word/world. Grassi approaches folly by exploring literature as the Humanists did and asserts that it is “the appropriate stance in which to approach the world” (164). He looks at the Italian Humanists for insights and to “suggest an alternative to the rational paradigm for contemporary society” (164) or a way of approaching the inexplicable more adequately. Grassi offers a significant consideration of this rhetorical process acknowledging the transformation through language as it works its “magic” upon human life in significant ways.

Work Cited

Foss, Sonja K. and Karen A. Foss and Robert Trapp. “Ernesto Grassi.” Contemporary Perspectives On Rhetoric. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. 1991.

Grassi, Ernesto. “Italian Humanism and Heidegger’s Thesis of the End of Philosophy” Heidegger And the Question of Renaissance Humanism: Four Studies. Binghamton, NY: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies, 1983.

“The Problem of the Word.” Renaissance Humanism: Studies in Philosophy and Poetics. Binghamton, NY: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1988.

“Passion and Illusion.” The Primordial Metaphor. Trans. Laura Pietropaolo and Manuela Scarci. Binghamton, NY: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1994.

Hauser, Gerard. “The Passions.” Introduction to Rhetorical Theory. Prospect Heights, IL:

Waveland Press, Inc. 1991

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

www.gerardwozek.com/Encountering%20Iris.doc

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Academic year 2008/2009

rucris@alumni.uv.es

Universitat de València Press