Last night, for a Lit class, I read
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem titled “Beware!” Here’s an excerpt:
I know a maiden fair
to see,
Take care!
She can both false
and friendly be,
Beware! Beware!
Trust her not,
She is fooling thee!
I
couldn’t help but think of some rhetorician saying this after reading The Exaltation of Inanna by Enheduanna.
In
reading the Octalogs, I definitely got the sense that the old Greek men
influenced modern day rhetoric. I didn’t realize to what extent, though, until
reading this article. It’s so fascinating to me that Mesopotamian rhetoric
influenced Grecian rhetoric but the same values from Western culture are
applied when analyzing Mesopotamian works, thus this self-aware and influential
woman is ignored.
In Feminist Writings, from Ancient Times to the
Modern World edited by Tiffany K. Wayne, Enheduanna’s legacy is explained,
which “The Rhetoric of Origins and the Other: Reading the Ancient Figure of
Endheduanna” didn’t cover as much. “Enheduanna is the first writer, man or
woman, to assert authorship of a work. Until she did so, all work was anonymous”
(4). Not only that, but The Exaltation of
Inanna is 1,500 years older than the Odyssey,
the Iliad, and the Bible.
It’s
clear to me that this is a text which should be given much more attention than
it has by contemporary rhetoricians, simply because of the unique perspective
and the age. Another reason was added when I started researching what about
this text made it rhetorical. Binkley made it very clear that in reading this
text, the audience can explore the Other and I knew it was a poetic piece worshipping
Inanna. I didn’t feel that I was getting the whole picture, especially after,
on page 49, Binkley says “she steps forward in first person to tell her own
interweaving story of political rebellion, and her banishment.” Sure enough,
she provided support for her father Sargon who was uniting city-states into the
first Mesopotamian Empire, which even by Western rhetoric standards, is
significant.
I know
that this blog post was essentially just a rant about the extent that
Enheduanna shouldn’t be ignored, but I think there’s more at stake than my own
feminist anger. Especially in the modern day climate with the Middle East on
center stage, isn’t it important for rhetoricians and historians alike to
consider every aspect of their history (and our own) to look at how things got
this way? On page 59, it says that “Aristotle doubts that they (women) have a
soul.” Longfellow, hundreds of years later, wonders whether they can be
trusted. These stereotypes are still resonating in the modern world. How are
the views of women in ancient Mesopotamia resonating in the Middle East?
I too was frustrated with the absence of Enheduanna in my past rhetoric classes, and I can't help to believe that maybe Enheduanna was ignored purely because of her gender. This does not anger me because sexism has been a part of rhetoric for (obviously) a very very long time but it does cause me to wonder why past professors have never mentioned the name. Although I'm not sure I have had a professor ever dive into "other" rhetoric. This seems to me like it is leaving a massive invisible gap that may not have been filled if it were not for this class. One question may be "why is Enheduanna important?" but I believe the answer to that is "why wouldn't she be?" If she was the first author of rhetoric to take recognition for her work than why wouldn't rhetoricians find her fascinating and necessary in their studies? Diving deeper into the history of rhetoric can only help us better understand contemporary rhetoric as well as our own rhetorical work. So Enheduanna has allowed us to dive deeper and I agree with Emily that ignoring her is futile because eventually she will have to be topic of conversation just like every old white greek rhetorician has been and will be.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it's very strange and upsetting that Enheduanna is so ignored in the study of rhetoric. Emily mentioned that Mesopotamian rhetoric was influential on Greek rhetoric, and yet no one ever seems to go any further back than the Greeks when discussing where rhetoric came from. You would think that it just appeared in the minds of some old, white Greek scholars one day as a fully formed concept, but it didn't. It came from somewhere, it was built upon, and one of those places it emerged from was Mesopotamia, with Enheduanna. It was mentioned in class that western culture is obsessed with firsts- first man on the moon, first person to accomplish this or make that or hold this position of power. Enheduanna is the first person we know of to claim authorship of her work. That is a HUGE first, and yet I had never even heard of her before this text. I agree with Emily that it seems like she is being ignored, and her work should be given a lot more attention and study than it is.
ReplyDeleteI think that the focus on Enheduanna is too great. Yes, she could very much be a possible first female to conduct something rhetorical based for the time of which she could possibly be writing. However, “the Sumerian language has no grammatical gender” shows that women being apart of the rhetorical debates as we would see today could have been considered normal (56). Along, with the fact that when completing the reading for today -"The Birth of Rhetoric"- produces a contradicting fact of understanding Sumerian culture because they are analyzing the subject in a very Aristotelian- traditional way. So, even though that Enhenduanna may seemed ingored, she should be added into a larger study of understanding the culture aspects, before we can understand the rhetorical style and use that her society had because things such as rhetoric do change over time. I feel that the change over time and the strong sole focus on her as the only "good" thing to come from this society is neglecting a larger image that few have yet to understand.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI have learned about Enheduanna in my past history classes, but never in the context of rhetoric. In some ways I feel cheated, because I have believed that it all started with the Greeks, when in fact it did not. Mesopotamian rhetoric has influenced the Greek; but still the Greek are known as the “first”. I agree with Emily, and the other comments, in that she is being left out and that she should get more attention. I find it disturbing that gender still plays a role in todays history and society, and that it affects what we are being taught or not. Lastly I think that Emily asks an important question at the end of this post (that I would love to figure out) : How are the views of women in ancient Mesopotamia resonating in the Middle East?
ReplyDeleteI agree with the previous three comments and their point that it is important that we are studying more than just Aristotelian rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading Bickley's text on Enheduanna she hit on a few important points about feminism in rhetoric that resonated with me. While reading the Octallogs I was still very new to rhetoric and had difficulty grasping many of the points the writers made, or rather I understood the points the authors were making but not how they worked in relation to rhetoric. One of these points was about the lack of feministic influence on rhetoric. I think that Binkley does a really great job of summing this idea up.
I had never heard of Enheduanna before, and neither of Mesopotamian rhetoric. I can certainly appreciate learning about earlier types of rhetoric that have inspired the predominant Greek rhetoric, but I fail to see the importance of Enheduanne in the big picture. I might sound like an armchair rhetorician her, which I have learned is a very close minded view of rhetoric, or maybe it’s simply because I am so used to the traditional style of rhetoric. I can see the argument for Enheduanna being ignored because she is a woman, because that is probably the biggest factor why I have never heard of her or the Mesopotamian rhetoric before. Feminism seems to be much bigger here in America, because it seems to be a much bigger and more seriously discussed topic here. It is quite apparent from just having lived here for a few months that there is a need for feminism in America, unlike in Norway. I guess I fail to become engaged by the topic because it simply is not that relevant where I come from, and feminism is usually associated with extreme views of women who only want to talk about how oppressed they are and how men are the scum of the earth. It is also foreign to me that rhetoric is divided into different themes and topics like feminism, politics and so forth. I feel like I might be missing the whole point of the article and that this comment is just rabble, but oh well.
ReplyDeleteI had never heard of Enheduanna before, and neither of Mesopotamian rhetoric. I can certainly appreciate learning about earlier types of rhetoric that have inspired the predominant Greek rhetoric, but I fail to see the importance of Enheduanne in the big picture. I might sound like an armchair rhetorician her, which I have learned is a very close minded view of rhetoric, or maybe it’s simply because I am so used to the traditional style of rhetoric. I can see the argument for Enheduanna being ignored because she is a woman, because that is probably the biggest factor why I have never heard of her or the Mesopotamian rhetoric before. Feminism seems to be much bigger here in America, because it seems to be a much bigger and more seriously discussed topic here. It is quite apparent from just having lived here for a few months that there is a need for feminism in America, unlike in Norway. I guess I fail to become engaged by the topic because it simply is not that relevant where I come from, and feminism is usually associated with extreme views of women who only want to talk about how oppressed they are and how men are the scum of the earth. It is also foreign to me that rhetoric is divided into different themes and topics like feminism, politics and so forth. I feel like I might be missing the whole point of the article and that this comment is just rabble, but oh well.
ReplyDelete