Burke's Concept Research Articles

Comedy as cure for tragedy: Act up and the rhetoric of aids

The rhetorical strategies of the direct action AIDS organization, ACT UP, are analyzed using Kenneth Burke's concept of the comic frame. Commentators have criticized ACT UP for its rude, angry, irreverent, and indecorous demonstrations. The group's actions reflect the immediate danger of AIDS‐related sickness and death that many ACT UP protesters face; they also reflect the group's reliance on the comic frame as a way of contending with the onus of being named the scapegoats for introducing AIDS to the United States. In contrast to the prevailing tragic frame, comic rhetoric is hopeful and humane because it invites reconciliation and affirms the importance of rationality and community. ACT UP's challenge to the prevailing tragic frame of guilt‐victimage‐redemption‐purification was designed to reposition its members as part of the community and reframe the AIDS crisis in realistic, humane, and pragmatic terms. The study suggests conditions under which other despised and oppressed groups may respond after h...

Consuming Hart: Sublimity and Gay Poetics in "Suddenly Last Summer"

Of all Tennessee Williams's plays, few appear more straightforward in performance than Suddenly Last Summer.' This illusion of dramaturgical forthrightness stems, in large part, from the fact that the play is easily identified as an example of Gothic melodrama. Its very setting-an exotic, tropical garden within a Victorian Gothic mansion (9), looking like a well-groomed jungle (11)-establishes the familiar Gothic dialectics of overrefinement and wildness, fastidious artifice and dangerous nature that are common to the genre. The garden serves as the setting for a Gothic tale, as we are led to ask what did happen to Sebastian Venable in Cabeza de Lobo? and are rewarded with an exotic and sensational answer. The story is revealed to us through a familiar Gothic opposition-the rich, ruthless Violet Venable and her poor, victimized niece, Catharine Holly. Yet Suddenly Last Summer may well be Williams's most deceptive play, for underneath its neat surface oppositions and familiar Gothic conventions, it is as dense and difficult to interpret as any of his more overtly experimental works of the late 1960s and 1970s. For Suddenly Last Summer is not only this dramatist's most extensive exploration of the aesthetics of the Sublime, but also his recasting of Edmund Burke's concept of the Sublime, with all its heterosexual male assumptions, within a gay subjectivity. To accomplish this recasting, Williams superimposes two plot triangles, each manifesting a different treatment of the Sublime. In the first triangle, the play dramatizes the struggle of Violet and Catharine over Sebastian's posthumous reputation. This struggle comes to focus on Dr. Cucrowicz, who is put in the position to judge Catharine's account of Sebastian's last summer and death. In the second triangle, the play narrates as exposition the rivalry of Violet Venable and Catharine Holly for the role of travel companion to Sebastian Venable.

A dramatistic theory of apocalyptic rhetoric

This essay develops a theory of apocalyptic texts and movements by applying Kenneth Burke's conception of the tragic and comic frames of acceptance to the text of the Christian Apocalypse and to the history of its interpretation. Burke's “psychology of form” is used to explain the recurring patterns of apocalyptic argument as functions of rhetor/audience interaction. Viewing the Apocalypse as an epochal rhetoric that structures human experience of temporality through the rhythms of drama leads to insights on the possibilities and limitations of interpretive argument.

Constitutional Odyssey: Can Canadians Become a Sovereign People?

Constitutional Odyssey is an account of the politics of making and changing Canada's constitution from Confederation to the present day. Peter H. Russell frames his analysis around two contrasting constitutional philosophies Edmund Burke's conception of the constitution as a set of laws and practices incrementally adapting to changing needs and societal differences, and John Locke's ideal of a Constitution as a single document expressing the will of a sovereign people as to how they are to be governed.The first and second editions of Constitutional Odyssey, published in 1992 and 1993 respectively, received wide-ranging praise for their ability to inform the public debate. This third edition continues in that tradition. Russell adds a new preface, and a new chapter on constitutional politics since the defeat of the Charlottetown Accord in 1993. He also looks at the 1995 Quebec Referendum and its fallout, the federal Clarity Act, Quebec's Self-Determination Act, the Agreement on Internal Trade, the Social Union Framework Agreement and the Council of the Federation, progress in Aboriginal self-determination such as Nunavut and the Nisga'a Agreement, and the movement to reduce the democratic deficit in parliamentary government.Comprehensive and eminently readable, Constitutional Odyssey is as important as ever.

Political Debates as Televisual Form

Televised candidate debates have become a ubiquitous part of contemporary American politics. Uniquely positioned within a dual context of rational, deliberative decision-making and hoopla of televised games and sporting events (Germond & Witcover, 1979; Graber, 1984; Jamieson & Birdsell, 1986; Kraus & Davis, 1981; Vancil & Pendell, 1984), debates create distinctive problems of perspective for critics. Typically, studies of televised debates have examined them as rational political discourse, searching for their impact on voter's knowledge of candidates and issues and/or choices voters make in privacy of voting booth.(1) In this essay I would like to take an alternate perspective. First, I will suggest that all symbolic acts, including televised debates, are both formal and informational texts, and can be understood fully only critics examine both what Kenneth Burke has called of and of Second, I will argue that televisual discourse is defined by narrative which entails a set of audience expectations which can be fulfilled only through development of a particular kind of candidate persona, one which makes traditional forms of argument and evidence use problematic. Finally, I will illustrate this perspective in a reading of series of debates that took place during 1984 North Carolina Senatorial race between Jesse Helms and James Hunt. My objective is to explain outcome of race or impact that debates had on it.(2) Rather, my goal is to use debates to illustrate implications of an alternative critical perspective. PERSPECTIVE The Psychology of Form More than a half-century ago, Kenneth Burke (1931/1968) noted that symbolic acts are defined by their form, processes through which they arouse, fulfill, and gratify audience appetites.(3) Humans develop expectations (the synonym for appetites that Burke used later in his discussion of form) both through their experiences with world--the rhythms of tides, crescendo and climax of sexual experiences, and so on--and through their experiences with symbolic acts (1931/1968, pp. 45-56, 143). Initially, Burke's conception of form focused on former experiences, but as his thought began to embrace humankind's symbolic ontology, cultural and ideational aspect of form became more important (Heath, 1979, p. 394). But throughout his discussion of Burke differentiated psychology of information and psychology of form. Burke complained that scientific had artificially separated form and subject matter, symbol and (1931/1968, pp. 30-32). The obsession with that characterized science in twentieth century had led the artist also to lay his |sic~ emphasis on giving of information (1931/1968, p. 32). The details of artistic works were offered, not for their bearing upon business of molding and meeting reader's expectations, but because these details are interesting in themselves (1931/1968, p. 144). Surprise and suspense, core emotions of a of information, had begun to replace eloquence, defining emotion of of While former depends on fulfilling requirements of logical latter is achieved through association or juxtaposition of ideas which if logical, is nevertheless emotionally natural (1931/1968, p. 39). Scientific standards of truth, appropriate to a of information, had been misapplied to art: Truth in art is discovery of facts, an addition to human knowledge in scientific sense of word. It is, rather, exercise of human propriety, formulation of symbols which rigidify our sense of poise and rhythm. Artistic truth is externalization of taste. (1931/1968, p. 42) In short, hypertrophy of of has led, and inevitably does lead, to atrophy of of form (1931/1968, pp. …

Edifying Arguments and Perspective by Incongruity: The Perplexing Argumentation Method of Kenneth Burke

At present, relatively little has been written on Kenneth Burke's contributions to theory. Scholars who have explored such contributions have generally pursued one of two approaches. First, some scholars have examined how Burke's writings cast light on theory. For example, Williams has explored the troublesome foundational/anti-foundational dichotomy in contemporary theory and he has turned to Burke's disassociation of epistemology and ontology as a possible mechanism for overcoming this dichotomy. Following this same method, Madsen has added Burke's concepts of euphemism, debunking and the polemical to current theory in order to create a perspective on argument. In the second approach, scholars have drawn insights from Burke to help explain empirical examples of arguments that current theory cannot provide. Exemplifying this approach, Klumpp has both developed and utilized several precepts of a dramatistic or contextual approach to arguments in order to explain arguments from the Clarence Thomas hearings. Similarly, Birdsell has drawn from Burke to create a theory of as trope and has applied this theory to the novel arguments of Carrie Chapman Catt. While these two approaches have certainly yielded substantial insights, they both suffer from one inherent problem: both methods involve a problematic reconstructing of theory from writings which show little explicit interest in argumentation. In fact, even scholars who have explored the relationship between Burke and have readily acknowledged this fact. Kneupper has pointed out that argument is not a Burkean term (894), Madsen has claimed that we can only infer a Burkean conception of argumentation (4), and Klumpp has conceded that apart from Permanence and Change Burke has little to say about through the rest of his work (8). Argumentation's absence in Burke's lexicon is particularly noteworthy given his strong theoretical interest in language and rhetoric. After all, has generally held a privileged status in linguistic and rhetorical theories. Consequently, when scholars turn to Burke's writings to draw theoretical conclusions about argumentation, they are ultimately drawing conclusions on a construct that Burke seems to have consciously ignored. In the hope of avoiding such difficulties, this essay will explore the relationship between Burke and from a different starting point. In particular, while it is debatable whether Burke offers a complete theory of argument, it is clear that Burke offers arguments, and any reading of Burke quickly reveals that he has a rather unique, and at times perplexing, method of construction. As Rueckert notes, Burke seldom moves in a straight line in the manner of a philosophical or a regular orderly expository mode; instead, he likes detours and has a very unusual, original, and sometimes baffling way of putting things together (7). This essay will use Burke's baffling method of as its starting point. Specifically, it will begin this essay by reconstructing two of his arguments for the frame in Attitudes Towards History. It will then examine how traditional theory cannot adequately account for the strength and influence of these arguments. Finally, it will suggest Burke's unique argumentative method can lead to an alternative conception of as edifying devices. I. BURKE'S ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE COMIC FRAME In broad terms, an is commonly viewed as a train of reasoning that leads to a specific claim (Toulmin, Rieke and Janik 13). While Burke does not often leave such distinct trains of reasoning, one of his clearer arguments unfolds in Attitudes Toward History. In this work, Burke essentially offers two distinct arguments for the adoption of a comic frame. In the first argument, he showcases comedy as the preferred poetic category amongst a multitude of competitors. …

The sanctuary movement: A study in religious confrontation

This essay examines the clash between the sanctuary movement and the United States government regarding the admission to the United States of Central. American refugees. By using a Burkeian dramatistic approach, the study shows how different scenes operating for the two sides motivate opposing rhetorical agencies. Burke's concept of identification serves as the framework for analyzing the agencies.

The political use of victims: The shaping of thechallengerdisaster

Abstract This essay applies Kenneth Burke's concept of victimage to analyze Ronald Reagan's handling of the space shuttle Challenger explosion. The deaths of the Challenger seven could have served as powerful symbols of failed policy and flawed leadership. Yet Reagan reconciled the failure of the shuttle and renewed U.S. commitment to the space program by sanctifying the crew and offering Americans consolation and purgation through sacrifice of the seven in victimage. Through interpretive textual analysis, the essay makes clear the process by which Reagan enacted the drama. Implications are drawn for the U.S. space program and for understanding the political use of victimage. The essay suggests that political victimage now must be a reflexive process, enacted after the death, after the fact. Often in our times, ordinary people are slaughtered by forces as random as they are terrible. In order for the drama to give meaning and purpose to their passing, victims must be transformed in and by the drama. Purif...

Persuasion, cooperation and diversity of rhetorics1

Persuasive discourse, either as a separate mode of discourse (Kinneavy 1971) or as a distinctive part of argumentative discourse,2 frequendy remains part of the overall writing assignment for our composition students. Although we may disagree as to how to define exactly or teach persuasive discourse in writing classrooms, we have more or less followed the tradition of Western classical rhetoric with respect to our basic understanding of it--although few of us would now restrict ourselves only to discovering in the particular case what are the available means of persuasion (Aristotle 1960: 7). For example, we teach our students different sub-types of persuasive discourse and ask them to apply ethical, emotional (pathetic) and logical proofs to their own persuasive essays; we select political speeches, polemic essays or modern advertising materials as prime examples of how different persuasive strategies and techniques can be most effectively invoked to achieve their respective objectives of winning. To varying degrees, many composition text books have adopted, and thus perpetuated this normal way of doing things with persuasive discourse.3 In so doing, however, we have--perhaps unknowingly--imparted to our students two problematic notions, which underlie much of what has been believed to be persuasive discourse. The first assumes that persuasive discourse is grounded in or predicated on conflict or confrontation, which it aims to overcome or eradicate. The second perceives audience as both external4 and oppositional, whom persuasive discourse is intended to transform or convert. It is these two notions and their probable consequences that I will discuss first in this essay. Following this discussion, I will draw upon, respectively, Grice's cooperative model of conversation (1975; 1989) and Burke's concept of (1962) to propose a new heuristic model5 of persuasive discourse, one that takes cooperation through identification as a core constituent and provides a dynamic setting that is conducive to rhetorical diversities. Finally, I will consider some potentials of this new model in our writing classrooms.

Using apocalyptic discourse to exploit audience commitments through “transfer”

Many persuaders face the rhetorical problem of how to use audience allegiance to a revered text as the basis for urging further commitments and actions. The essay considers the way in which recent religious apocalyptic discourse motivates actions and attitudes toward secular issues by appealing to sacred texts. One strategy of that discourse is transfer, a strategy explained by Kenneth Burke's concepts of form. The strategy is traced through three components of recent religious apocalyptic. Implications for rhetorical strategies which exploit reverence for texts are explored.

Limitations on the comic frame: Some witty American women of the nineteenth century

Kenneth Burke's concept of literary reference “frames” has become important in the study of rhetoric and social change. The tragic frame has been thoroughly examined, but other metaphors for rhetorical movements remain relatively unexplored. The rhetoric of selected woman humorists from 1820 to 1880 exemplifies the operation of various frames related to the comic. The prevailing form of women's humor became less and less truly comic, eventually sliding to the satiric and finally into burlesque. The comic frame could not be maintained, because these writers were unable to foster identification between females and males, and failed to provide a world view that could accommodate social change.

Epistemology and ontology as dialectical modes in the writings of Kenneth Burke

This essay maintains that a major shift has occurred in how Kenneth Burke explains symbol‐using. While previously viewing rhetoric as predominantly epistemic, since 1968 Burke has examined human communication as both ontological and epistemic. It is further posited that Burke's conception of symbol‐using is now dialectical, with both ontological and epistemic perspectives simultaneously cast as governing the symbol‐using process. Implications of this epistemic‐ontological view of symbol‐using are outlined for the functions of rhetoric, understanding of Burke's theory of communication, the long‐term effectiveness of Burke's concepts and methods, the literal functions of symbol‐using, the study of mediated communication, reconceiving the definition of a symbol, and for ideological and postmodern criticism.

Contemporary film and the representative anecdote of ‘unmasking’: Coping strategies for a narcissistic society

Kenneth Burke's concepts of the “representative anecdote” and “equipment for living” are prolific tools for rhetorical and media criticism. As applied to the discourse of contemporary film, these methods reveal an underlying story of “unmasking” which effectively provides equipment for living or coping strategies to an audience struggling to deal with the problems associated with narcissism in today's society.

Epistemology and ontology in Kenneth Burke's dramatism

Kenneth Burke initially established dramatism as a method for understanding the social uses of language. An examination of Burke's major rhetorical concepts—identification, the definition of the human being, the concept of reality, and terms for order—reveals the epistemology of his dramatism as a marriage of paradox and metaphor. However, recently Burke has shifted dramatism towards a philosophy. Three shifts establish a dramatism based upon “act,”; not the tension between “action”; and “motion,”; dramatism that employs language “literally,”; rather than exploiting its ambiguity, and dramatism that is more “reality”; oriented rather than the link that orders and relates “reality”; to our abstract values.

Burke's representative anecdote as a method in media criticism

This essay argues that Kenneth Burke's concept of “literature as equip‐ment for living” is especially useful for media content criticism. An appropriate dramatistic method, the representative anecdote, is illustrated. Its application to selected fictional and nonfictional discourses of the Nineteen‐Fifties and late Seventies which exhibit public concern regarding automation, cloning, foreign affairs, and social regimentation is discussed. Paradigmatic expressions of the anecdote underlying media content is found in the film and book versions of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

John Lennon and the advisory function of eulogies

This essay uses Burke's concept of guilt, resulting from hierarchy and perfection inherent in language, to explore the symbolic dimensions of the shooting of John Lennon and its public coverage. Implications of this study for a genre of assassination rhetoric are suggested.

Kenneth Burke's concept of entitlement

The paper explores the ways in which Kenneth Burke's concept of entitlement can be applied to the study of theatre. In so doing, it suggests answers to two critical problems that must arise whenever a Burkeian approach to theatre is attempted: (1) the extent to which Burke's critical system can be applied beyond the realm of verbal language and (2) the distinction, often fuzzy in Burke's own writings, between critical and creative applications of his theory. After an introductory section which sets forth the general functions that Burke ascribes to entitlement, the paper considers each of three different kinds of titles that might be connected with a theatrical (and, hence, a nonverbal) artwork. The critical title is a verbal label, provided by a critic and therefore external to the artwork, that describes unity within the artwork and provides a perspective from which the artwork can be discussed. The artistic title is an element within the artwork itself that sums up a range of emotional factors or ident...

Burkean scapegoating, mortification, and transcendence in presidential campaign rhetoric

The essay explains Kenneth Burke's concepts of scapegoating and mortification as symbolic means of redeeming guilt, and transcendence as a symbolic means of avoiding guilt. Presidential campaign rhetoric from 1980 illustrates these three rhetorical strategies well: Jimmy Carter used a strategy of mortification and redemption, Ronald Reagan employed transcendence, and John Anderson used scapegoating. Some implications for theory of political rhetoric are explored.

Kenneth Burke's concept of substance

An exploration of Burke's use of the term “substance” leads to an illumination of his critical theory and practice. Substance as consciousness achieved through verbalization is manifest in three behaviors: naming, forming, and structuring.

Edmund Burke and the Quality of Honor

Whether Burke is placed in the tradition of natural law theorists or the school of historical utilitarians, scholars agree that his conception of liberty was inextricably linked to a belief in the inviolability of landed property, its salutary transmission through the ages, and a correspondingly acute historical consciousness. Perhaps the subsequent universalization of liberty and the gradual respectability of capital as an alternate form of property have obscured the significance of another principle which Burke invariably associated with liberty, but which could neither be universalized nor transformed. That principle was the aristocratic quality of honor, which, for Burke, as for generations of aristocratic spokesmen who succeeded him, remained a condition essential to liberty's preservation and transmission. The theme of honor has received some consideration from scholars in fields of literary criticism and, recently, social anthropology. But it has not attracted the attention it requires, particularly of modern historians, since Burckhardt, who characterized its presence in the Renaissance as “that enigmatic mixture of conscience and egoism.” This essay examines Burke's conception of honor and its affinity with his ideas of liberty.Burke's concern for honor was hardly a novelty. In the eighteenth century, honor was taken seriously. It was a quality extolled by Addison, lauded by Pope. Moreover, honor had been analyzed by adherents of both the “selfish” and “moral sense” schools of thought among the British ethical philosophers, particularly in their disquisitions about self-love and benevolence. Hobbes had considered honor to be “the opinion of power.” It legitimized self-aggrandizement. Mandeville, similarly, conceived of honor as a worldly morality inconsistent with virtue which, after all, required self-denial. The man of honor was impelled by a pagan ethic to seek the rewards of approbation. He cherished posthumous fame rather than salvation. Consequently, he behaved according to a code that was superior to the laws of God and the laws of one's country.