Antonius Prancicus

Dr. Maqbool Aziz

ENG 2D0-E
October 16, 2020

“Aim higher; be better”: A study of Quintillian’s On oration and his use of comparative imagery
and logic to persuade new speakers to be better than previous speakers.

In his On Oration, Book  X, Chapter 2, Quintillian presents a case for modern speakers

imitating earlier ones. Imitation does not, however, entail exact copying but rather advancing

and improving upon previous models. The goal for modern speakers, according to him, is to

imitate earlier speakers with the expressed intention of excelling them. To argue this claim, he

first establishes a general thesis followed by two comparative examples by degree that use

running and natural imagery.

Quintillian uses deliberative rhetoric and running imagery to establish his thesis that

modern speakers must be better than ancient speakers. He concedes that although not all

speakers “aim for excellence” they should nevertheless make it their goal. Good speakers “ought

to press toward the mark rather than be content to follow the tracks of others.” The imperative

“ought” amplifies the dual command of affirming and negating how imitation must be done. To

strengthen this point, Quintillian invokes the images of two runners in a race who represent the

new and old speakers respectively. The “aim” or “mark” represents the end goal of speakers or

the finish line which is constantly before them. Thus Quintillian establishes the purpose of his

opening paragraph by asserting that speakers need to set the pace, lead the pack, and win the race
instead of following existing examples and falling behind in terms of reputation and

performance.

Quintillian then proceeds to use a modus ponens and modus tollens argument to bolster

his case. First, he affirms what happens when a speaker seeks to excel a rival: “if he does not

surpass him, he may hope to equal him.” So, even if the speaker fails to exceed another speaker

he still succeeds in tying him. But, as Quintillian warns in his modus tollens, if a speaker aims to

imitate exactly a rival speaker there is the risk that he will fall behind and fail in the task: “he can

never hope to equal him, if he thinks it his duty merely to tread in his footsteps.” The obvious

shortcoming of imitation as an exact reproduction is that a modern speaker will be deemed less

skillful and artful than the object of study. The only two results are, as Quintillian clearly points

out, to aim higher than an existing model to meet or exceed it or to aim for parity and end up

losing the race by “lagging behind.” Since losing a race never motivates a runner to achieve

excellence, the modern speaker must yearn to be the best.

With the running imagery established firmly, Quintillian next compares the speaker to

nature in terms of its inability to reproduce faithfully to dissuade the audience from seeking

imitation as an exact science and to persuade it to improve upon current examples. Quintillian

maintains that “it is generally easier to make some advance than to repeat what has been done by

others, since there is nothing harder than to produce an exact likeness.” If there are only two

possibilities for imitation, and if producing “an exact likeness” is neither desirable nor tenable

then making new advanced models and refinements should be sought. Quintillian proceeds to

use a comparison by degree with the imitative aspect of nature and speakers to prove his point

further. He states that “nature herself has so far failed in this endeavour that there is always

some difference which enables us to distinguish even the things which seem most like and most
equal to one another.” Quintillian acknowledges that nature is not successful in the process of

adaptation and evolution to produce faithful reproductions of itself. Accordingly, if nature is not

successful, then speakers, a sub-set of nature, will also fail in this regard. Thus, Quintillian

illustrates the folly of speakers who desire to copy nature since nature, being greater than

humanity, cannot reproduce itself faithfully. It follows logically that a speaker must advance and

improve upon prior examples since the other option is ruled out.

The argument presented by Quintillian first outlines a general call to speakers to excel in

terms of skill and craft. Next, he presents a dual enthymeme: either you can imitate by

exceeding or equaling an earlier speaker. By means of running and natural imagery, Quintillian

argues that the latter option fails since the best a speaker can do is either equal or be inferior to a

rival speaker. With this refutation offered, the only other alternative remains for the speaker to

accept the role of speaker as a seeker of advancement and improvement upon earlier speakers.

(755 words of essay)