Sir Philip Sidney : contrasting views on the value and morality of rhetoric and poetry

Sidney's attitude toward rhetoric passes through three rather distinct stages. At first, he is quite positive toward it, treats it with respect, and, what is perhaps even more important, with enthusiasm. His attitude toward it becomes more ambiguous as he begins to doubt its morality; during this middle period he is becoming very distrustful of the amoral nature of rhetoric as opposed to poetry which he sees as distinctly moral. Toward the end of his writing career, he sees rhetoric as more immoral than amoral. The psychology and strategy used by the orator remains the same, but Sidney sees rhetoric increasingly being used for immoral purposes. It is no coincidence that this attitude finds its strongest expression in his Defense of Leicester. Sidney was thoroughly familiar with such terms as Exordium, Narratio, etc., and he followed them in his Defense of Poesy. He was no less familiar with the terms for the parts of rhetoric, terms such as "Invention" and "Disposition." Yet it becomes increasingly obvious to the reader alert to rhetoric in Sidney that these terms will not serve the purpose of the literary critic who hopes to study Sidney's use of rhetoric. As he did with everything else he encountered in the realm of ideas, Sidney assimilated the rhetorical thought of his day, digested it, and made it his own. Sidney has his own categories of rhetoric. They are the strategy of rhetoric, the psychology of rhetoric, and the morality of rhetoric. Strategy is distinguished from psychology in that strategy has to do with techniques, with the practical, business-like, craftsmanship of the orator. Psychology has to do with knowing when to use these strategic weapons, on whom, and how. The morality of rhetoric is a completely different area of concern. It has to do with the moral implications of using either rhetorical strategy of psychology, and also whether the effect or motive is good or evil.