Expanding the rhetoric field and bringing more lucidity to the design work
What is rhetoric, and in what context did we start to discuss interaction
How can this discussion help designers
Further directions and what other questions we still have
Part 1: from Aristotle to interaction
Rhetoric is mainly connected with persuasion and is defined as the art of constructing effective communication. It is also a way to provide the audience with reasons to act or adopt a new attitude. Rhetoric helps us achieve goals and elicit a response, whether emotional or a course of action. That being said, it is safe to say that rhetoric is present in all kinds of communication.
How is that related to design? Design is a form of communication, and as Gui Bonsieppe said, even when we just try to inform about something, in our message, there is always a small degree of persuasion:
‘Pure’ information exists for the designer only in arid abstraction. As soon as he begins to give it concrete shape, the process of rhetorical infiltration begins.”
How did we begin to monitor the rhetoric field beyond words? Writers such as Barthes, Durand, and Bonsiepe refreshed the field with a new vision: visual argumentation. Rhetoric has followed technological advancement, leading research from textual rhetoric to the study of images and how they persuade, especially when we consider figures of speech that became visual, audiovisual, filmic, musical, and so on. Today, in a digital world, we are dealing with a new branch that is growing strongly from the main body of work: the rhetoric of interaction design.
What differentiates the digital world from traditional communication is interactivity. We become participants by clicking, choosing, adding information, and exploring. Creating interactions is a way to elicit a response or attitude.
Part 2: How can rhetoric help us in design work
Think about this, when you write a speech, an argumentative essay, or something similar, you feel that you have control: you choose the right words, the form you put them in, you rephrase and choose again until you feel that your message is delivered in the way you want, it reaches the audience, and it will have a certain impact. The same goes for design. Nothing is neutral here either.
It helps you articulate your design decisions more clearly, of course, based on solid research into the audience you're reaching, which is not negotiable. Now think about this: sometimes it can be a blur, but what if we reframe our thinking using the three rhetorical principles:
Ethos refers to the credibility and character of the person who transmits the message. For a brand or a product, this means authority, expertise, and position. Who are you, and why should I trust you? Translated to design: if a medical institution uses a silly logo or cartoonish visuals, bad execution, would you go there to make a surgical intervention, probably not. You will choose one that looks and feels established, is transparent in communication, and uses images from the clinic.
Logos - refers to the argument and what sustains the message. Here, I consider typography, images, hierarchy, and shapes that embrace the position you declared. Everything has to move in the same direction, which might be why there is sometimes an uncomfortable tension in a design. You try to look dead serious, but you made a poor choice of a typeface.
Pathos - and this is one of the most difficult. Pathos refers to emotion; everything from before is in service of eliciting it. So, these three principles must work together to elicit a response from the audience. Creating a powerful brand, creating a certain emotional world by using your design knowledge, keeping in mind the research you did, the whys: why would this move my audience or that, why this color would work better, why we won`t use bubblegum and shiny in a serious brand personality, and so on. It's never let's see what happens; we make informed decisions.
What do you need to create empathy, urgency, care, discomfort, attachment, or nostalgia? What is your starting point, and what do you want to receive in response? Of course, emotion is not the scope; it is an instrument to facilitate a decision, an action, or a change of attitude.
https://www.octanemountain.com/
Part 3: Where do we go from here
The ideas stated here are not just about bringing fresh air to rhetoric; they apply to our work, too. Thinking about these principles as we work can keep us focused on the effects of our design choices on the audience. It's moving from academic work to clarity in our decisions, avoiding conflict-prone choices, bringing stronger arguments, and recognizing that every element sends a message. In the digital world, for example, interaction amplifies impact: when users become participants, the designer shapes experiences that can influence behaviours.
References
Emanuel, Barbara, Camila Rodrigues, and Marcos Martins. 2015. “Rhetoric of Interaction: Analysis of Pathos.” In Design, User Experience, and Usability, vol. 1, 417–427. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Presented at HCI International 2015, Los Angeles.
Emanuel, Barbara, and Marcos André Franco Martins. 2014. “Towards a Rhetoric of Interaction: Three Case Studies.” In Interaction South America (ISA 14): 6th Latin American Conference on Interaction Design, Universidad Católica Argentina, Buenos Aires.
Liao, Tjhien. "Storied Design : Narrative Matters in Design Presentation." (2016). https://core.ac.uk/download/301132141.pdf.
