This is what I gather in the Lindemann chapter:

Outlined in the chapter are the different characterizations of rhetoric – classic/medieval/renaissance/contemporary – were contributed from both historical and modern works from Aristotle’s Rhetoric (circa 335 B. C. E.) to James Kinneavy’s A Theory of Discourse (1971) and how these changes in characterization influenced by language, culture and science/technology has shaped how we as writers and teachers identify and define rhetoric within different forms of reading and writing that existed over the last 2500 years.

My main interest of the chapter deals with style, particularly with using the method of paraphrasing or imitating models as a way of teaching how to speak and write.  At times, I found it useful to engage the text or writing assignment with a familiar voice from movies I’ve seen in the past.  In addition to that, I find that these films – some of which have been based on books – are especially helpful considering that they compartmentalize some of the main ideas and topics in which each respective book covers.  For me, such an approach totally makes it easier in identifying some of the important, yet subtle nuances within a text.  Since I’m a film buff, I often think of specific parts or moments in flicks that resonate with me most.  Unlike others like Plato who believe rhetoric is just eloquent deception to fool an audience, films in my opinion, at least some, do adequately reflect some part of the human condition along with the benefit of showing the effects of stylish persuasion.  And, because language is often sought as a way to account for such reflections, then it is possible for rhetoric to be used positively to communicate the human experience.  For me, films help.