Lloyd Bitzer defines exigence as “an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be.” Simply, exigence is something that happens which gives rise to a need for communication. Exigence can be something as basic as someone being late for a meeting or as complex as a dispute between election results.
Let’s say you are attending a group meeting to complete a presentation for class the following day. One of the group members fails to appear and the group is unprepared. Communication and persuasion now becomes a necessity. The group member must be contacted to resolve the situation. Communication is urgent for the group to succeed. The exigence is not only that the member failed to attend the meeting but also any circumstances which gave rise to the member’s absence. Perhaps the member had car trouble or thought the meeting was at another time or place. Regardless, a need for communication and attempted resolution has been invoked. One could argue that part of the exigence is that the group needed to meet because something was assigned in the first place.
Lloyd Bitzer provides further theory:
“In
almost any sort of context, there will be numerous exigences, but not
all are
elements of a rhetorical situation -- not all are rhetorical exigences.
An
exigence which cannot be modified is not rhetorical; thus, whatever
comes about
of necessity and cannot be changed -- death, winter, and some natural
disasters, for instance -- are exigences to be sure, but they are not
rhetorical. Further, an exigence which can be modified only by means
other than
discourse is not rhetorical; thus, an exigence is not rhetorical when
its
modification requires merely one's own action or the application of a
tool, but
neither requires nor invites the assistance of discourse. An exigence
is
rhetorical when it is capable of positive modification and when
positive
modification requires discourse or can be assisted by discourse. For
example,
suppose that a man's acts are injurious to others and that the quality
of his
acts can be changed only if discourse is addressed to him; the exigence
-- his
injurious acts -- is then unmistakably rhetorical. The pollution of our
air is
also a rhetorical exigence because its positive modification --
reduction of
pollution -- strongly invites the assistance of discourse producing
public
awareness, indignation, and action of the right kind. Frequently
rhetors
encounter exigences which defy easy classification because of the
absence of
information enabling precise analysis and certain judgment -- they may
or may
not be rhetorical. An attorney whose client has been convicted may
strongly
believe that a higher court would reject his appeal to have the verdict
overturned, but because the matter is uncertain -- because the exigence
might
be rhetorical -- he elects to appeal. In this and similar instances of
indeterminate exigences the rhetoric's decision to speak is based
mainly upon
the urgency of the exigence and the probability that the exigence is
rhetorical.
In any rhetorical situation there will be
at least one controlling exigence which functions as the organizing
principle:
it specifies the audience to be addressed and the change to be
effected. The
exigence may or may not be perceived clearly by the rhetor or other
persons in
the situation; it may be strong or weak depending upon the clarity of
their
perception and the degree of their interest in it; it may be real or
unreal
depending on the facts of the case; it may be important or trivial; it
may be
such that ' discourse can completely remove it, or it may persist in
spite of
repeated modifications; it may be completely familiar -- one of a type
of
exigences occurring frequently in our experience -- or it may be
totally new,
unique. When it is perceived and when it is strong and important, then
it con
strains the thought and action of the perceiver who may respond
rhetorically if
he is in a position to do so.”