Readings Intertextuality

While we should conduct the analysis of the whole of the speech on its own terms, we need to be aware that we are linking our observations to the notion of the conceptual framework of Module. Module B is Critical Study of Texts, and involves the idea of close analysis, Readings and Textual Integrity.
Our first port of call in analysing a speech (as opposed to a poem, play or novel) must be through rhetorical analysis, because, if we recall the three provinces of speech-making identified by Aristotle - namely the Judicial, Deliberative, and Epideictic - that is what a speech is primarily designed to do: to persuade. If, having made this analysis, or in the process of making this analysis, we find ourselves gaining a deeper or further insight into the composition of the speech, its aetiology, its contextual factors, its underlying socio-historical paradigms that it unwittingly communicates, any theories of interpretation that would seem apt, or any universal ideas or even Platonic absolutes that it touches upon, then we can proceed to look more deeply at these underlying ideas that are contained within its words and between the lines, and apply that reading to our text. I emphasise to you that this should not be done until a through rhetorical analysis has been made, or is at the very least solidly underway.   Readings need to connect closely to, and now smoothly from, close analysis of the actual text.
Textual Integrity
The final question with regard to textual interpretation is that of defining a piece of jargon that is often cited: textual integrity. Many students ask: "What is textual integrity?" "When does a text have textual integrity, and when not?" The Board's own definition of textual integrity is somewhat arcane, but hints at the idea of a text's ability to exhibit coherence with itself. This is why they stress that the student needs to study the text in its entirety to understand 'questions of textual...