Low low low

RYAN got these ideas out minutes before!

Several classmates posted about Augustine's high/grand style in this sermon.  Kelly wrote about how the chiasmus and intense words (murderer) put the "sermon somewhere between the middle and grand styles." Adam wrote that Augustine's use of metaphor scripture show that "the entire sermon is entwined with high speech designated at everyone to move them for one single purpose of reminding them of the struggle that it is to forgive and be forgiven."

I read this sermon from a non religious standpoint.  From that exercise, in my mind, the sermon is mainly a low style.  In section one, Augustine teaches how to pray.  In section two, he teaches about what an apostle says in the scriptures.  In section three, he teaches about how to adapt a prayer when you are struggling with the issue of forgiveness.  In section four, he teaches about our relationships between our friends and God, and how to deal with sin in those relationships.  In section five, he teaches about how to deal with forgiveness in a servant-master relationships. In section six, he teaches about the timing of forgiveness.  In section seven, he reminds the reader of what he taught. 

I think this analysis works for reading the sermon as I was reading it from a non-religious perspective, and the above paragraph would be my take-away.  That being said, I don't believe in teaching just to teach, I believe in teaching so that people do.  I hope to always plan my lessons and speeches by first identifying what I want my audience to do.  "Know, feel, do" may sound familiar to anyone who has spent time in the Missionary Training Center.  That is what I really believe in. 

Where Would We Be Without Instructors?

     Due to the fact that the strong majority of the class seems to agree that all three styles were displayed by St. Augustine in the reading, I am going to argue that his style was used for the sole purpose of to simply instruct. Though there may be hints of trying to move the audience, the overall effect was to teach and to instruct as he used the low style. Throughout the entire reading, he would describe and explain specific principles about forgiveness, love, and so forth and then he would continue to back up his teachings with scriptures and biblical references. More than anything, he teaches us to forgive like Christ forgave. I really liked Macey Richardson's post about this principle and how he exploited the kairos to make this point even stronger.

     Kelly's blog post brought up legitimate points about how St. Augustine just seemed a little too intense and memorable to just be part of the low style. However, I would absolutely argue that all of the great teachers and instructors of the world are incredible and memorable. They instruct with passion! Teaching can be fun and exciting and I am sure that if love truly is what is motivating St. Augustine, there is a fire within him to motivate and teach passionately.

     Lastly, in a way, I think I would very much agree with Austin Pena to a certain extent in the fact that if St. Augustine really desired to make something more of his speech and make it a moving, life-changing ordeal he definitely would have bore a personal testimony to conclude. He could have done it in so many better ways if he really wanted to. However, I think it's clear that he uses a very low tone and simply explains things to the audience as he instructs them on biblical history and examples. Overall, I think that St. Augustine was very much capable of making the speech more "moving" if he really want to yet he made it very distinct that his purpose was to instruct.

A good orator is his audience... sort of.

"Confessions" by Augustine contains
a lot of his story, this is mostly what
we read from in my Freshman class.

In a class that I had at the University of Utah my freshman year we studied Augustine briefly, but instead of focusing on rhetoric, we focused on philosophy and the intellectual tradition of western civilization, so we read his memoirs and treatises, but none of his sermons. I remember the memoirs most clearly, because in them it seemed like Augustine was putting more trust in his audience by writing about details of his life; I gained a lot of respect for the man because he went through a lot of repentance and had to experience a lot of forgiveness on his path to becoming a Christian, and it seemed like his conversion was as complete as any other I've heard of, he was a changed man. Augustine's sermon for lent would have been more powerful if he would have shared some of those personal experiences that he had. I'm not saying that he needed to confess any of his specific past transgressions, but sharing that he had personally experienced in a real, tangible way what the scriptures had taught him would have added so much power.

The act of personally relating to an audience through personal testimony of his or her experience seems like it could be a part of all three categories of style (high, low, middle). All of you have done a great job describing how all three categories were present in the sermon, I agree, and it was cool to see the arrangement of the sermon and how it effected flow of the oratory style. One interesting part that stood out to me was when he included himself as the audience, "... do not be ashamed to seek pardon. In the same manner I speak to all, men and women, young and old, lay persons and clerics, and to myself, also. Let us all hearken; let us all fear." He puts us all on the same level! But at the same time utilizes high style to try and inspire action.

Most of us think of a good leader as one who works a long side those he leads. My mind turns to Jesus Christ; a great deal of the love and respect that many have for Him stems from the fact that He, the single greatest being in the Universe has been through everything that we go through, He's descended to our level, so that He can lift us up to His level. Augustine kind of does the same when he uses the pronoun "us", but could have done it to a greater extent by sharing relevant personal experiences, which, when effectively done, is done in all three styles: high, low, and middle.

He's our best friend!

Wronged, Yet Seeking to Forgive

*I could not figure out how to fix my words being split between lines, so sorry in advance.

Reading through St. Augustine's sermon, I noticed that he was mostly addressing (or at least referring to) forgiveness among masters and servants, but also between brother to brother.  In addition, he called out to those in the audience that have not trespassed against another, but have been trespassed against.  These are the people St. Augustine exhorts to not seek forgiveness for a wrong not done, but to ask God to forgive your brother, to be ready to forgive when the time comes, and to prompt your brother to seek forgiveness.  With this last statement in particular, St. Augustine is most definitely using the high/grand style, as I even used the word "exhort," in order to produce a movement in the audience. 

In so doing, however, does this point of discussion not also encompass the low—and even middle—style?  Advice is given to the audience in a manner of teaching, but is not the middle style also present in that St. Augustine seeks in his sermon to find ways to address and connect to everyone he possibly can?  Such effort to make his words touching and applicable to all, while not inherently pleasing, does to some degree please readers.  

I, for one, read St. Augustine's words and saw the merit in them, but it was not until the very end of the sermon when he said, "Say to the Lord in your prayer: 'Lord, You know that I have not sinned against my brother and that he has sinned against me. You know, too, that his having sinned against me is harmful for him if he does not seek pardon from me. With a good intention, then, I beg You to pardon him.'"  Recently having been wronged through no deserving of my own, these words pleased me in that I was personally spoken to, taught me as to how to react in this situation, and moved me to action.

Style and Delivery in Elementary Education

Mrs. Reggiani is a first grade teacher and has the privilege to help children become literate in reading and writing.  She lives in an area in the United States where there are many Spanish speakers and has some students in her class that are struggling because they are learning basic academics in a second language.  Because of this she has to communicate with the parents and guardians of students to help these children progress in their education.  She has attempted multiple times to communicate over the telephone without much success.  Mrs. Reggiani has scheduled to meet with the mother of one Spanish speaking student in her class, Maria who is from Chile.

Teachers should praise the child's
work to show their credibility in helping the child's learning.

She dresses in dress pants and a blouse but nothing too overdone as to appear more personable, but still professional.  Before the meeting she has made a list of words in Spanish that she thinks will apply to their conversation.  Maria comes with her mother to help translate if needed.  Maria and her mother sit down with Mrs. Reggiani and she introduces herself.  She smiles and hugs Maria’s mother as is custom in Chile.  Mrs. Reggiani uses lots of gestures and pays attention to Maria’s mother when she speaks to help her to feel more comfortable.  The style is low as Mrs. Reggiani is trying to communicate Maria’s need in the classroom and show that she truly cares about her education and their family.  The delivery is clear and she enunciates as she speaks and speaks slowly.  Mrs. Reggiani frequently pauses to ask if she has been understood and listens as Maria’s mother explains what she has understood.  Some comparison is used to help her understand better but Mrs. Reggiani mostly avoids figurative language so as to avoid confusion.  She uses cause and effect to explain how the support of Maria’s family will help her in her academics.  They decide to meet regularly to increase Maria’s progression in the classroom.  Mrs. Reggiani was successful through her low and friendly style showing concern for Maria and respect for her family while explaining the situation clearly and with the help of her preparation in understanding better Maria’s cultural background. 

Walking the Line: Clarity and Condescending Tone in English Teaching Style

Ms. Evans might wear an
outfit like this to seem
professional but still
stylish to her students.

About a month and a half into the school year, Ms. Evans carefully reviews her lesson plan for the following day—the basic structure of the essay.  She has spent several weeks working on this particular lesson plan.  She can teach them how to write essays successfully, their entire lives will likely benefit.  When she wakes early the day of her lesson, Ms. Evans carefully dresses in a pencil skirt and floral blouse.  She knows that if she dresses nicely but not exuberantly, she will increase her ethos.  The girls will comment on how they love her style of dress, and the boys in the class will respect her as a clean-cut and authoritative leader who can still be personable and addressable. 

As she lectures with a helpful PowerPoint, she is careful to use both the middle and low style.  Although she relies mostly on the low style to help instruct her students, she understands that teaching is a profession that relies on both instruction and entertainment.  If the class is not at least somewhat entertained, they “zone-out” and fail to learn about how to write a successful essay.  Therefore, at key parts of the lesson, such as the introduction into new sections, she inserts entertaining humor through paronomasia, hyperbole, and even at extremely choice times sarcasm.  Furthermore, she understands that wit will increase her ethos.  She will be seen as intelligent and authoritative, but also personable.

Ms. Evans will use PowerPoint to add
clarity to her lesson.  Clarity is at the
heart of her teaching.  She can make
the PowerPoint interesting and
entertaining, too in order to engage the
students.

Decorum and propriety are incredibly important parts of Ms. Evans lesson.  She cannot seem condescending, rude, or out-of-touch with her students.  Therefore, she speaks with limited ornateness and talks with clarity.  She is careful to mix her lecture with dialogue and discussion between the students.  She uses a few metaphors or similes to help the class understand something when it is compared to something else.  All the figures of speech she uses are geared toward clarity and conciseness.  Knowing that nothing discourages a student from learning like condescending tones and belittlement, Ms. Evans walks the fine line between being extremely specific and clear in her argument without sounding like she thinks her students know nothing.  Homiologia (tedious repetition) and perissologia (superfluity of speech) will not be conducive to teaching so she avoids those at all times.  She uses a method wherein she states something and then adds what it is in an apposition in order to be clear but also maintain faith that she thinks her students are intelligent.  She uses body language that is open and inviting but also authoritative.  Her head is held high, but she smiles and nods often when her students are

explaining concepts to her.

The best English teachers avoid being condescending like this
teacher.  They instead help their students by being clear,
personable, and understanding.

After her lesson, several students walk up to her desk and tell her that they had never had the   Ms. Evans smiles and knows that her lesson went as well as possible.  She knows that her lesson is the most effective when she speaks clearly, uses multimedia presentations, and engages in both lecture and dialogue with her students.  She knows that in this particular lesson, she was extremely effective.

“writing an essay” lesson explained so clearly and well.