Rhetorical Analysis of How to Have a Conversation by John McDermott

How to Have a Conversation by is an article by John McDermott that appeared in the March 10, 2012, edition of the Financial Times. McDermott argues that people communicate too much with the use of non-verbal means that they seem to have forgotten the art of having conversations. Given the prevalence of communication platforms such as email and text messages, not many people are good at talking things over on the phone, face-to-face or via Skype. According to the author, having knowledge of how to conduct a conversation is among the best social skills. This essay presents a rhetorical analysis of John McDermotts article.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

A notable rhetorical device used in the article is allusion, which is a reference to a person, literary event, or an event. The author gives the example of poet Samuel Coleridge as having mastered the art of having a conversation. He quotes a notable figure who once stated that spending an evening in the company of Coleridge could be compared to a great river. Most people know how pleasant it is to talk all night long with a friend or loved one. However, this cannot be compared to the company that Coleridge was capable of providing. He was an eloquent and witty conversationalist with a seemingly unlimited knowledge of cultures. McDermott also cites David Hume as having been adept at having conversations. Hume was so good that he once thrilled guests at a dinner party that Jean-Jacques Rousseau had to cling to a table leg.

Another instance of allusion in the article is seen when McDermott cited the Enlightenment, a period in 18th century Europe, as the era of conversation. During this time, conversations were the order of the day. People in English dining room, salons in France and Scottish pubs could make a name for themselves through eloquence alone. Taking part in conversations was perceived as a way of doing away with melancholic temperaments. The author states that the 19th century was also a time when conversations thrived as a form of communication. However, in the 20th century, it was used by some people as a manipulative way of achieving their selfish ends. McDermott also cites the Cold War period as a time when people always had conversations, although the topics of discussion were different from previous times. While people could happily discuss matters such as politics and American- Russian relations but had a difficult time discussing day-to-day issues such as the weather.

Throughout the article, McDermott quotes various literary works and other authors in a bid to show how to have a great conversation. For instance, he mentions Marcus Tullius Cicero as the earliest scholar to write down the qualities of a good conversationalist. The basics highlighted by Cicero have not changed much over the years. In putting a point across on how technology has had an impact on conversations, the author mentions George Orwell as having complained about homes having a radio set in each room. McDermott also cites a book by Dale Carnegie and an article from the Readers Digest magazine when explaining the way to carry out an excellent conversation.

In How to Have a Conversation, McDermott utilizes similes and metaphors to a great extent. For instance, he says that conversation of more of a game than it is an art. Taking part in one is akin to exchanging gifts as opposed to thrilling an audience on stage or coming up with a work of art. He goes on to say that if it is to be perceived as a game, a conversation should have rules. They include speaking easily and clearly but not too much, being courteous and not interrupting others when they are talking. The author goes on to say that if conversation is seen as a free market, monopolizing it would not be a good idea. Such monopolization would take the form of ignoring what other people are saying, preventing them from speaking, or not taking their contributions seriously.

When discussing how not to have a conversation, McDermott uses similes to highlight the effects of displaying too many emotions. He likes losing ones temper to giving an individual a gift that the person wants them to have as opposed to what they actually want, and the accusing them of having a flaw in character if they decline the gift. However, this does not mean that people should not openly, completely and honestly express their emotions while taking part in conversations. Also, they are not barred from discussing touchy issues. He suggests that a high level of skills is required when discussing topics in which people have divergent and strong feelings. Whats more, sharing personal information is not considered as being wrong. While it may be perceived as rude if done at a dinner table, it is totally acceptable for people who are developing romantic feelings for one another.

Understatement is used throughout the article, whereby ideas are made less important than they actually are. McDermott enrolled in a conversation class at a philosophy school located in London called Alain de Botton; something that made him change his mind about conversing. He does not give credit to the course as having provided him with any insight to do with the subject. It appears as if he found its curriculum and ways of teaching to be somewhat useless. All in all, he went ahead and changed his mind concerning what it actually means to have an excellent conversation. Those that think of it as a form of entertainment have been brainwashed by the cultural ideal fronted by therapy. If someone has undergone several therapy sessions, he or she will have figured out a way of expressing oneself to a listener who does not actually care. While such a skill can help someone become an entertainer, it may not do much in helping them have a conversation.

After completing the course, McDermott does not subscribe to the notion that conversation is a performance art. Rather, he is of the idea that producing human connection is its purpose. As much as it may sound strange, conversations do have psychological merits even if soul-baring is not involved at all. As a matter of fact, a better connection is presented if speaking ones mind is not involved. All in all, if it creates a connection that minimizes isolation and loneliness, then conversation does away with the cause of depression. According to McDermott, people still do not have an idea of how an excellent conversation is conducted. In principle, it is all about establishing a common ground as opposed to competing for space, time and attention.