In Frank J. D’Angelo’s 1974 College Composition and Communication article, “A Generative Rhetoric of the Essay,” he writes the following:

“But if we conceive of delivery in written discourse as the way in which a writer attempts to present his text in the most effective manner, clearly the relationship between delivery and arrangement takes on a new meaning. The orator could use modulations and inflections of the voice, gestures, and other mannerisms to present his text. The writer must use spelling, punctuation, in dentations, and all of those devices that we usually associate with format to present his ideas. If this approach to delivery in writing seems too artificial, we should recall how effectively poets such as e. e. cummings have used these techniques in their own writing to please, to instruct, to move, or to persuade their readers” (D’Angelo, 1974, p. 396).

In the Prior et al. webtext published in Kairos, the twelve co-authors tell us that “the canon of delivery does not focus attention on the possible rhetorical configurations of distribution, mode, and other mediations. It does not alert us to take a broader view of the rhetorical landscape, to the possibility of rhetorical campaigns” (p. 8). Nor, they hold, does this canon (they reframe it as mediation) “feed back easily into a recognition of the arrays and chains of distribution, mode, and mediation in rhetorical processes” (p. 8). In thinking about more classical definitions or conceptions of delivery, the stress very much seems to be placed on “individual production rather than on fields of cultural-historical practice. Given these multiple limits, we argue that it makes more sense to begin remapping rhetorical activity, to trace distribution and mediation, than to attempt to retrofit this ancient tool to do varieties of work it was never designed to address” (p. 8). Stephen Keoni Holmes writes in his 2010 Enculturation review of Lingua Fracta that “Brooke recognizes that delivery is often uncritically examined, as it presupposes a transitive object (i.e. an object that can be said to be given through an material act of delivery) in the classical sense” ((Holmes, 2010, n.p.). As Brooke writes in his chapter on deliver, “it is rare to speak of delivering without an object being delivered Our pizzas and newspapers are delivered to us, and we even speak of delivering conference presentations” (Brooke, 2009, p. 170). “Instead,” continues Holmes, “Brooke suggests replacing either a transitive or transactional approach with performance” (Holmes, 2010, n.p.). (Here many academics I’m sure would be tempted to point out that conference presentations do have a performative dimension to them.)

In thinking of delivery as performance, I was reminded of the strange (and often unintentionally humorous) phenomenon of “influencers in the wild” videos on YouTube. I say “unintentionally,” because many times influencers are trying to strike a serious or edgy pose. Sometimes they are walking around their neighborhoods or in parks with their cellphones on sticks, discussing real estate market trends or live action remakes of Disney movies. Here you have voyeuristic videos of videos being made of exhibitionistic influencers, complete with commentary about how silly these people look dancing (for example) in the middle of crowded boardwalks and in other very public places/spaces. Their delivery does indeed look ridiculous . . . when viewed from the quizzical spectator’s perspective. However, when one views the finished, polished product of the dancers themselves, or views the economic/cultural commentary that turns out to be surprisingly insightful, then those same silly people look pretty impressive.

Brooke makes the important point that “[a]lthough we understand at some level the idea of performing a role or particular identity . . . the notion that discourse is performed is largely foreign, except in certain contexts (e.g., dramatic or cinematic scripts)” (p. 192). As Eyman (2015) phrases it, these days delivery does not just mean an oral presentation in front of a live audience, but rather the need of “understanding and using systems of distribution (including the technical frameworks that support varying protocols and networks)” (Eyman, 2015, p. 65).