In Introduction: The Five Key Terms of
Dramatism, Kenneth Burke outlines the purpose of his book. The five terms
are act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose, and they are used to explain why
people act the way they do. In other words, Burke wants to establish a way to
discuss the motivations of different people in different situations.
Even though many
people complain about Burke, there are some positive aspects to his work. For
one, his work is more modern and relevant to the times we are living in today than
previous works we have read this semester. One particular aspect of this
introduction that I appreciated was his awareness and recognition of many
different backgrounds that exist among people. He explains how people will
interpret situations differently because no one is exactly the same. His view
is that there is no one right way to respond to a situation; there are many
different right ways. Because of this understanding of the world, Burke makes
rhetoric more about discussion between people and less about convincing others
to discover the ultimate truth. This is a modern interpretation that differs
from ancient rhetoricians, such as Plato, who believed in one ideal truth.
Burke defines Grammar
as a set of principles that can be adapted to any situation. Instead of saying
his Grammar is universal and general to all situations, he says it is a set of
rules that can be applied to different situations after you take into account
the different philosophies that are at work in the situation. He explains, “Theological,
metaphysical, and juridical doctrines offer the best illustration of the
concerns we place under the heading of Grammar” (xviii). I think these are
important doctrines to consider when analyzing rhetorical situations today
because many disagreements occur on the basis of different religious beliefs
and moral upbringings. For example, legalizing gay marriage is a hot topic of
disagreement today, largely because of various understandings of God’s
intentions for humankind.
Instead of
saying that his key terms of Grammar will be crystal clear at all times, Burke
says that they carry ambiguity. Yet he states, “what we want is not terms that
avoid ambiguity, but terms that clearly reveal the strategic spots at which
ambiguities necessarily arise” (xviii). Because of these ambiguities,
transformation is possible. My understanding is that transformation is what
occurs when people are persuaded one way or another after an original
disagreement. In this understanding, transformation is what happens when rhetoric
succeeds; when one person transforms their point of view. Establishing common
ground is one effective way that allows transformation to occur. By pinpointing
where places of disagreement occur, rhetoricians can more easily reach
transformation as well. Many politicians attempt to do this by explaining one
specific point that differs between an opposing candidate’s views and their own
views, then establishing common ground between the points, and then making a
case for their own specific view. Their goal in these situations is to convince
voters to switch their votes to their favor (transformation).
Questions for discussion:
1. Besides politicians attempting to reach
transformation of voters, what other situations can you think of that have a
goal of transformation as well?
2. Which of the five key terms of dramatism
has the most effect of a rhetorician’s success in reaching the goal of
transformation?
No comments:
Post a Comment