In “The Rhetorical Situation,” Lloyd Bitzer describes what a rhetorical situation is and explains the components or elements of one. He states “it functions ultimately to produce action or change in the world; it performs’ some task” (Bitzer 3-4).  Bitzer’s definition of rhetorical revolves around three elements exigence, audience, and constraints. An exigence is essentially an issue in the world that must be responded to, Bitzer writes “Any exigence is an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be” (Bitzer 6). An audience is a group of people that can be persuaded or motivated to take action, and constraints which can be used to influence an audience. According to Bitzer “its made up of persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because they have the power to constrain decision and action needed to modify the exigence.

One idea that intrigued me was the first characteristic. Bitzer states”  Rhetorical discourse is called into existence by situation;
the situation which the rlietor perceives amounts to an. invitation to create and present discourse” (Bitzer 9). I interpreted this as Bitzer saying that you cannot fix a problem and provoke change if the issue doesn’t exist. I found this to be relatable to our world and real-life issues such as gun laws and immigration. Major protests only occur when recent school shootings happen, or in the case of immigration when info came to light about the cold-hearted treatment of migrant children in shelters.

In Lloyd Bitzer’s article, “The Rhetorical Situation”, illustrates the circumstances in which a rhetorical situation is created. He states, “In other
words, there are circumstances of this or that kind of structure which are recognized as ethical, dangerous, or embarrassing” (1). These are some examples that he mentions that create such rhetorical situations. In addition, another main point he states is, “Let us regard rhetorical situation as a natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which I strongly invites utterance; this invited utterance participates naturally in the situation, is in many instances necessary to the completion of situational activity, and by means of its participation with situation obtains its meaning and its rhetorical character” (5). This means that these circumstances create these situations where people create an audience.

One thing I found interesting was that ”Normally, the inauguration of a President of the United States demands an address which speaks to the nation’s purposes, the central national and international problems, the unity of contesting parties; it demands speech style marked by dignity. What is evidenced on this occasion is the power of situation to constrain a fitting response. One might say metaphorically that every situation prescribes its
fitting response; the rhetor may or may not read the prescription accurately” (11). There needs to be a situation that invites a fitting response to make it rhetorical. In addition Bitzer states, “Rhetorical discourse is called into existence by situation; the situation which the rhetor perceives amounts to an. invitation to create and present discourse. The clearest instances of rhetorical speaking and writing are strongly invited” (9).

In “The Rhetorical Situation” by Lloyd F. Bitzer , he states that a “rhetoric is a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thought and action”(Bitzer 4). This is showing that a rhetoric situation is a situation where one can bring change not through physical means per say but for instance, through speeches.  Bitzer further goes on to mention the three key elements of a rhetorical situation. They are exigence, audience, and constraints. Exigence is an issue that it is given importance and has the ability to change. Audience is the people who that author is targeting. Specifically people who have the power to change the issue. Constraints is made “of persons, events, objects, and relations”(Bitzer 8). They have the ability to regulate or control action needed to make the change. One idea that intrigued is when Bitzer said “it is true, of course, that scientists and poets present their works to audiences, but their audiences are not necessarily rhetorical”(Bitzer 8). On one hand when a scientist conducts research and gets results they eager to share it. They are not only showing people their discovery  but showing scientist how to repeat the experiment and build on it. On the other hand when scientist share their work they are trying to persuade people that what they did it correct and should be published. As well as trying to get funding for their field of research by showing that there are important and new finding in their field of research. Similarly for poets some can be writing poems to entertain people and have fun. While others are trying to a point across through the poems. 

In “The Rhetorical Situation” by Lloyd F. Bitzer, he defines what a rhetorical situation is and the components that make up a rhetorical situation. Bitzer mentions how rhetorical situations is defined by “the context in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse”(Bitzer 1). One of Bitz’s main arguments is that there must be a situation for rhetors to come up with arguments. He provides an example of this by talking about Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, this is consider to be a rhetorical situation in which it influences social actions. Bitz mentions the three main components that make up a rhetorical situation which are exigence, audience, and constraints. He states how “exigence is rhetorical when it is capable of positive modification and when positive modification requires discourse or can be assisted by discourse”(Bitzer 7). This shows how exigence demands a proper response and it can be fixed by using rhetoric. The audience is an important factor because they are the ones who listen, interpret, and hopefully influence to enact a change. They are in between rhetoric and putting things into action. To add on, a rhetorical situation contain constraints which involves people, events, objects, and relations. These constraints have an effect on the audience and rhetor, when the orator enters the situation, the orator can have “ personal character, his logical proofs, and his style”(Bitzer 8), this can create a disconnection with the audience and rhetor.

One idea that stood out to me was when Bitzer said “If it makes sense to say that situation invites a “fitting” response, then situation must somehow prescribe the response which fits”(Bitzer 10). This idea is mainly advocating for the rhetorical response to meet the requirements that is included in the situation. The situation is mainly looking for “purpose, theme, matter, and style of the response”(Bitzer 10). There should be a “fitting response” that can satisfy the audience and answer any worries and concerns they could have. As well as everyone else who is part of the situation. To determine whether or not the response is “fitting”, the audience has the final say and see whether the delivery of it is to be considered as a fitting response. To summarize this, I believe that this idea is important because the audience plays a big role in this and they should be heard. Determining whether or not the situation has a fitting response, it allows for the audience to be heard since they are the ones being affected and the ones bringing a change.       

The article “The Rhetorical Situation” by Lloyd F. Bitzer explored and discussed the definition and different aspects of the concept of a rhetorical situation. Previous to reading this article, I was under the impression that a rhetorical situation was a moment in which the reaction to a situation was an anomaly. For example,  a serious situation such as a loss of a loved one being funny or taken lightly.  However, as I read this article Bitzer stated, “A work of rhetoric is pragmatic; it comes into existence for the sake of something beyond itself; it functions ultimately to produce action or change in the world.” To clarify, a rhetorical situation is a cause and effect; for the sole purpose of causing a positive change. It is composed of three main aspects: audience, constraint beliefs, and exigence. The audience is the person or group who you are trying to reach or get the attention of. Exigence “is rhetorical when it is capable of positive modification and when positive modification requires discourse or can be assisted by discourse”(Bixer 7). Basically, it is something that is capable of a positive change. Lastly, constraint beliefs are basically what affects the audience, it causes the reaction and is what moves the audience to reform or make changes. One idea that I found interesting was that although the rhetoric is meant to have a positive effect or change not every situation can be fixed by rhetoric. Situations such as natural disasters, loss, etc are things that are inevitable and can not be changed. This puts a limitation to what a rhetorical situation refers to as he said it must be a situation with a “fitting response.” From my understanding, his perspective on this conveys that a rhetorical situation has to be present. For example, police brutality is an issue that is present and which needed to be reformed, through informing the audience it caused an outcome of protest and change. It can not be a situation that is sporadic or that something can not be done to resolve or change it. In addition, I found it intriguing the fact that Bitzer used constant repetition of different examples to emphasize the importance and distinction of what a rhetorical situation is. The examples gave a better description and painted a picture of his stance about rhetoric situations.

In “The Rhetorical Situation” by Lloyd F. Bitzer, he starts off by describing to us circumstances that we are able to recognize, such as “ethical, dangerous, or embarrassing”. In putting these labels we give no space to characterize rhetorical situations. Bitzer says “ What characteristics, then, are implied when one refers to ‘the rhetorical situation’ – the context in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse”. In saying this he’s making a claim we give a rhetorical situation, a meaning with too simplicity. A rhetorical situation goes deeper than it just being rhetorical. “Rhetorical situations exhibit structures which are simple or complex, and more or less organized” (Bitzer 11).  In reality what is a rhetorical situation? How can something simple but also complex, or more or less organized? Rhetorical discourse is described as “comes into existence in response to situation, in the same sense that an answer comes into existence in response to a question..” (Bitzer 5). Rhetorical is the outcome to an event. According to Bitzer exigence, audience and constraints are what make a rhetorical situation. Exigence is an issue, in which Bitzer describes as imperfect, audience is who the author or writer is trying to reach and constraints is what persuades the audience.

Bitzer writes “It is true, of course, that scientists and poets present their works to audiences, but their audiences are not necessarily rhetorical” (page 8). How can their audiences not be rhetorical? If a poet writes about an issue or a scientists shares research, and has an audience to reach out to, and a goal of persuasion, how is it not rhetorical? Bitzer adds all these meanings to rhetorical situation, but how can we label things as rhetorical and not rhetorical if they can be both simple and complex?

In “The Rhetorical Situation,” Lloyd F. Bitzer illustrates the depth of a rhetorical situation and its relation to rhetorical discourse.  A rhetorical situation can be defined as an event that causes an author to respond and seek change. There are three main components of a rhetorical situation.  The first is exigence. According to Bitzer, “Any exigence is an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be” (Bitzer 6).  In simpler terms, exigence is the issue the author is addressing and it must have the ability to develop positive change. The second is the author’s audience. The audience consists only of people who are capable of making change and of people who are influenced by discourse. The final component is the constraints.  The constraints of a rhetorical situation can be categorized into two groups: those that are originated or managed by the rhetor and their method, and those that are operative. They consist of people, events, objects, and relations; all with the power to restrict any decision or action needed to make change. The sources of these constraints include beliefs, attitudes, documents, facts, images, interests, motives, and “the like” (Bitzer 8).

I was most intrigued by the notion of the first general characteristic of a rhetorical situation.  On page 9, Bitzer states “Rhetorical discourse is called into existence by the situation; the situation which the rhetor perceives amounts to an invitation to create and present discourse.”  Through this, he conveys the idea that change cannot come about unless there is an issue present. I found this interesting because not only does this concept apply to rhetorical situations, but to everyday life as well.  If change is necessary, then, at its root is an urgent issue. Whether it be in situations as mere as a broken watch or as pressing as a school shooting, it is necessary for change to come through the words of a “rhetor.” This change can impact the lives of, not only the victims, but of the witnesses as well.  

          Before I began reading “The Rhetorical Situation” by Lloyd F. Bitzer I thought a rhetorical situation was a situation that has not occurred in reality but that society was talking about it or giving a response based on something that only existed within their imagination.  However, after reading the passage I learned that a rhetorical situation is a discourse that inspires change when Bitzer states, “ . . . it functions to produce action or change in the world; it performs some task.” In a rhetorical situation the discourse inspires change surrounding the topic of discussion.  For example, a discourse on basic human rights would cause the public to persuade lobbyist to speak on the enforcement and further respect of people’s rights. He goes on to explain that “ . . . it is the situation which calls the discourse into existence” (Bitzer 2). In other words, a situation is what inspires discourse that will then inspire change and action.  A discourse can not inspire a situation and then inspire change, the situation already needs to be in place for a discourse to be written. Furthermore, I found it interesting when he mentioned that a rhetoric is pragmatic and always persuasive. On page three Bitzer mentions that, “ . . . a work of rhetoric is pragmatic; it comes into existence for the sake of something beyond itself . . .”  A rhetorical situation comes into existence as a way to deal with things sensibly. It is created not only for the sake of writing great discourse but in order to have some kind of impact.  He also mentioned that a rhetoric is always persuasive. I was confused at first as to why a rhetoric would be persuasive but as I continued to read it became more clear. The exigence inspires the utterance based on a issue or problem which will in a sense be used as a means to persuade the public to take action and to speak out in relation to the context of that exigence.  In a rhetorical situation the written piece will lead to a response in which the public will speak out and take action therefore making it persuasive. In whole I found the article repetitive but oddly enough the repetition of the concepts of the essay was what finally made me comprehend a rhetorical situation and how a rhetoric comes into existence.