David A. Frank

Pairs passages from works of classical rhetoric with contemporary legal rulings to highlight and analyze their deep and abiding connections in matters of persuasionClassical Rhetoric and Contemporary Law: A Critical Reader is a rich work that analyzes the interplay between ancient rhetorical traditions and modern legal practice, reestablishing the lost connections between law and classical rhetoric. From Isocrates’s Panegyricus in 380 BCE to the landmark US Supreme Court case Trump v. Hawaii in 2018, and from Antiphon’s fifth century BCE First Tetralogy to 1995’s O. J. Simpson trial, the volume draws on an array of sources to illuminate how ancient rhetorical insights may even today challenge and enrich our grasp of contemporary legal principles. The collection opens with a brisk review of the historical development of rhetoric. The second part examines a pair of rhetorical theorists whose works frame the period across which classical rhetoric declined as a mode of thought. A contemporary appellate case contrasts with the work of Giambattista Vico, an eighteenth-century professor of rhetoric who warned of the separation of law from rhetoric. The analysis of the work of twentieth-century scholars ChaÏm Perelman and Lucie Olbrects-Tyteca shows that where Cartesian rationality fails, the humanistic tradition of rhetoric allows the law to respond to the needs of justice. In the third part, ten case studies bring together a classical rhetorical theorist with a contemporary court case, demonstrating the abiding relevance of the classical tradition to contemporary jurisprudence. With its cross-disciplinary appeal, Classical Rhetoric and Contemporary Law encompasses the work of legal, rhetorical, English, and communication scholars alike, catalyzing interactive exploration into the profound ways ancient rhetorical insights continue to shape our comprehension of today’s legal landscape.CONTRIBUTORS Vasileios Adamidis / Elizabeth C. Britt / Kirsten K. Davis / David A. Frank / Michael Gagarin / Eugene Garver / Mark A. Hannah / Catherine L. Langford / Brian N. Larson / Craig A. Meyer / Francis J. Mootz III / Susan E. Provenzano / Nick J. Sciullo / Kristen K. Tiscione / Laura A. Webb

American filmmakers appropriate the ""look"" of horror in Holocaust films and often use Nazis and Holocaust imagery to explain evil in the world, say authors Caroline J. S. Picart and David A. Frank. In ""Frames of Evil: The Holocaust as Horror in American Film"", Picart and Frank challenge this classic horror frame - the narrative and visual borders used to demarcate monsters and the monstrous. After examining the way in which directors and producers of the most influential American Holocaust movies default to this Gothic frame, they propose that multiple frames are needed to account for evil and genocide. Using ""Schindler's List"", ""The Silence of the Lambs"", and ""Apt Pupil"" as case studies, the authors provide substantive and critical analyses of these films that transcend the classic horror interpretation. For example, ""Schindler's List"", say Picart and Frank, has the appearance of a historical docudrama but actually employs the visual rhetoric and narrative devices of the Hollywood horror film. The authors argue that evil has a face: Nazism, which is configured as quintessentially innate and supernaturally crafty. ""Frames of Evil"", which is augmented by thirty-six film and publicity stills, also explores the commercial exploitation of suffering in film and offers constructive ways of critically evaluating this exploitation. The authors suggest that audiences will recognize their participation in much larger narrative formulas that place a premium on monstrosity and elide the role of modernity in depriving millions of their lives and dignity, often framing the suffering of others in a manner that allows for merely ""documentary"" enjoyment.