Skip to main content
Log in

Representing judgment – Judging representation: Rhetoric, judgment and ethos in democratic representation

  • Article
  • Published:
Contemporary Political Theory Aims and scope

Abstract

The ‘constructivist turn’ in political representation literature has clarified that representation is crucial in forging identities – through the creation of ideological and symbolic representations that mobilize and coalesce otherwise scattered and undefined social forces – and thus also why it is essentially an interpretative and performative activity. In this article I argue that, as a consequence of this emphasis on interpretation and performativity, this approach makes clear why the ethos (or the personal qualities) of representatives is important in representation. To prove this, I employ some insights from rhetoric. Rhetorical persuasion and democratic representation, indeed, call for a similar kind of judgment, as they both need to mediate between opposing exigencies: rhetoric between attentiveness to the specificity of the audience and the creation of new beliefs, and representation between being responsive to specific interests and giving them a new articulation. Mediating this tension requires an exercise of judgment that, being directed toward the future, inevitably introduces uncertainty into the relation. This is why both in rhetoric and representation the ethos is an essential element. However, as I argue in the conclusion, the personal qualities that should be considered relevant here are above political qualities, rather than technical or moral ones.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ankersmit, F.R. (1996) Aesthetic Politics: Political Philosophy beyond Fact and Value. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ankersmit, F.R. (2002a) Political Representation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ankersmit, F.R. (2002b) Representational democracy: An aesthetic approach to conflict and compromise. Common Knowledge 8(1): 24–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, H. (1961) What is freedom? In: Between Past and Future. New York: The Viking Press.

  • Arendt, H. (1968) Men in Dark Times. New York: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle (1980) The Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by H.G. Apostle. Dordrecht and Boston: Reidel.

  • Aristotle (1991) On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Translated by G.A. Kennedy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Aristotle (1998) Politics. Translated by C.D.C. Reeve. Indianapolis: Hackett.

  • Arnhart, L. (1981) Aristotle on Political Reasoning: A Commentary on the Rhetoric. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib, S. (1992) Situating the Self: Gender, Community, and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brito Vieira, M. (2015) Founders and re-founders: Struggles of self-authorized representation. Constellations 22(4): 500–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brito Vieira, M. and Runciman, D. (2008) Representation. Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, K. (1969) A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castiglione, D. and Warren, M. (2006) Rethinking democratic representation: Eight theoretical issues. In Rethinking Democratic Representation. Vancouver: Centre for the Study of Democratic Institutions, University of British Columbia.

  • Cicero (1928) De Re Publica (On the Republic). In: De Re Publica (On the Republic) & De Legibus (On the Laws). Translated by C.W. Keyes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Cicero (1942) De Oratore. Translated by E.W. Sutton and H. Rackham. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Diehl, P. (2019, forthcoming) Populist twist: The relationship between the leader and the people in populism. In: D. Castiglione and J. Pollak (eds.) Creating Political Presence: The New Politics of Democratic Representation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Disch, L. (2011) Toward a mobilization conception of democratic representation. American Political Science Review 105(1): 100–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Disch, L. (2012) Democratic representation and the constituency paradox. Perspectives on Politics 10(3): 599–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Disch, L. (2015) The “constructivist turn” in democratic representation: A normative dead-end? Constellations 22(4): 487–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrara, A. (2008) The Force of the Example. Explorations in the Paradigm of Judgment. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson, A. (2012) Rhetoric and the political theory of ideologies. Political Studies 60(4): 751–767.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garsten, B. (2006) Saving Persuasion: A Defense of Rhetoric and Judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garsten, B. (2011) The rhetoric revival in political theory. Annual Review of Political Science 14(1): 159–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garver, E. (1994) Aristotle’s Rhetoric: An Art of Character. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garver, E. (2013) Deliberative rhetoric and ethical deliberation. Polis: The Journal for Ancient Greek Political Thought 30(2): 189–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, J.E. (2009) The Eyes of the People: Democracy in an Age of Spectatorship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, E. (2005) On Populist Reason. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manin, B. (1997) The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J. (2003) Rethinking Representation. The American Political Science Review 97(4): 515–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J. (2009) A “selection model” of political representation. Journal of Political Philosophy 17(4): 369–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. (2014) Politics and Rhetoric: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michel, A. (2003) Les rapports de la rhétorique et de la philosophie dans l’oeuvre de Cicéron. Louvain and Paris: Peeters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Näsström, S. (2015) Democratic representation beyond election. Constellations 22(1): 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panizza, F. (2005) Introduction: Populism and the mirror of democracy. In: F. Panizza (ed.) Populism and the Mirror of Democracy. London and New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1988) Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Bruxelles: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitkin, H.F. (1967) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plotke, D. (1997) Representation is democracy. Constellations 4(1): 19–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quintilian (1920–1922) Institutio Oratoria. Translated by H.E. Butler. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Rehfeld, A. (2009) Representation rethought: On trustees, delegates, and gyroscopes in the study of political representation and democracy. American Political Science Review,103(2), 214–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remer, G. (2010) The classical orator as political representative: Cicero and the modern concept of representation. Journal of Politics 72(4): 1063–1082.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosanvallon, P. (1998) Le peuple introuvable. Histoire de la représentation démocratique en France. Paris: Gallimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runciman, D. (2007) The paradox of political representation. Journal of Political Philosophy 15(1): 93–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saward, M. (2006) The representative claim. Contemporary Political Theory 5(3): 297–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saward, M. (2009) Authorisation and authenticity: Representation and the unelected. The Journal of Political Philosophy 17(1): 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saward, M. (2010) The representative claim. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thucydides (2013) The War of the Peloponnesians and the Athenians. Translated by J. Mynott. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Urbinati, N. (2005) Continuity and rupture: The power of judgment in democratic representation. Constellations 12(2): 194–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urbinati, N. (2006) Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urbinati, N. (2014) Democracy disfigured: Opinion, truth, and the people. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urbinati, N. and Warren, M.E. (2008) The concept of representation in contemporary democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science 11(1): 387–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, M.E. (1999) Democratic theory and trust. In: M.E. Warren (ed.) Democracy and Trust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1968) On Charisma and Institution Building (Selected Papers). Edited by S.N. Eisenstadt. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

  • Young, I.M. (1997) Deferring group representation. In: I. Shapiro and W. Kymlicka (eds.) Ethnicity and Group Rights. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, I.M. (2000) Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yunis, H. (1991) How do the people decide? Thucydides on periclean rhetoric and civic instruction. The American Journal of Philology 112(2): 179–200.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giuseppe Ballacci.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ballacci, G. Representing judgment – Judging representation: Rhetoric, judgment and ethos in democratic representation. Contemp Polit Theory 18, 519–540 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-018-0276-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-018-0276-6

Keywords

Navigation