Are internet memes inherently rhetorical? 

This question is a difficult one to answer, and I suppose the easiest way to answer is to say it all depends on how you define rhetoric. Aristotle defines rhetoric through the concept of dialogue, persuasion, and argument (Bizzell, 236). For Aristotle, it is the practiced prose and the logical argument that creates rhetoric, not the words or images. If you considered only argumentative speeches rhetoric, you might conclude internet memes are not rhetorical. However, one quote from Aristotle does give me hope for the recognition of memes as a rhetorical act:

 

"Even now most uneducated people think that poetical language makes the finest discourses. That is not true: the language of prose is distinct from that of poetry. This is shown by the state of things today, when even the language of tragedy has altered its character" (Bizzell, 237). 

​

In Aristotle's writings, he argued for articulate speech and well constructed persuasive arguments, and in this quote he recognizes the qualities of prose that poetry lacks, arguing for the legitimacy of prose. This can be applied to the state of things today: we have been experimenting and altering the written word for thousands of years, and have advanced in technology to the point where Aristotle would be baffled at how "the language of tragedy"-- that is, how we communicate-- "has altered its character" (Bizzell, 237). Considering his perspective on prose as a meaningful rhetorical form, one might argue for the recognition of visual meme-based rhetoric-- that is, an image in which we attach meaning shared throughout a culture--as a valid and useful rhetorical form. 

​

In the case of Pepe the Frog, it is clear to see how the Pepe meme in particular is rhetorical, because there have been multiple examples of discourse on the subject of Pepe and the meaning that we should attribute to his image. Some argue that Pepe is inherently racist, while others, like creator Shots Fired who provides a critical look at Pepe's evolution into a hate symbol in his video Pepe: The Frog that Broke the Internet (Figure 8), argue "Pepe is a mirror, and a mirror is not racist, just because a racist is using it"(ShotsFired). These arguments beg the question: should we as a society agree to follow creator Matt Furie's argument that Pepe's meaning is "light-hearted" and "chilled-out," or do we instead recognize that despite the artists original intent the work has still been appropriated by the Alt-Right and branded as a hate symbol by the Anti Defamation League (Furie, ADL)?

 

Thinking in terms of images, it might be useful to consider this argument in terms of another symbol that was appropriated by hate groups and now carries another meaning which we as a society cannot remove from its perceived meaning-- the swastika. As BBC reporter Mukti Jain Campion writes, in ancient Sanskrit, the swastika means "well being," and was widely used as a good luck charm, even by Coca Cola, as you can see in Figure 9, until Nazi's began to use it in the 1930's (Campion). This comparison is especially apt seeing as how Pepe's meaning is now inherently linked to the same Anti-Semitic and racist rhetorics that plague the once happy meaning behind the swastika. 

​

​