Conely's quick summary of the different classes of rhetoric proved to be interesting and extremely helpful for me to put my rhetorical understanding in focus. His comparison of each thinker was brief and to the point which was a good way to handle the summary.
What struck me the most was the power assigned to language by all the thinkers. They did not focus on a person's actions but by his words or his delivery of them. Persuasiveness as a force that could be used for the good of the people or for the opposite presents an interesting connection with the behavior of one person or a crowd. Gorgianic rhetoric seems to rely a lot on the mood of an audience and how effectively the speaker manipulates them. This is why I lean towards the thoughts of Aristotle as my preferred school. Aristotle realizes the "wool over the eyes" nature of Gorgianic rhetoric, says it's still relevant, but develops his own method of figuring things out.
To my ultimate dismay the book store still hasn't stocked Readings from Classical Rhetoric...
