Kenneth Burke's New Rhetoric Kenneth

Kenneth Burke's New Rhetoric Kenneth Burke: The New Rhetoric Kenneth Burke's theory of the "new rhetoric" - in which he saw culture as a kind of language of contextual symbols, the "symbolic construction of social reality" - is the topic of scholarly debate and discussion even fifty-seven years after the publishing of his groundbreaking book a Rhetoric of Motives.

What Burke meant by "new rhetoric" according to Marie Hochmuth - writing in the Quarterly Journal of Speech (Hochmuth 2003) - applies interestingly and poignantly to a review of many cultural settings, including the American style of weddings. This paper will look at the American institution of a wedding, with all the traditions, myths, spoken ceremonial words and rituals (and social implications), and critique the wedding as a tradition and as a cultural institution, using the new rhetoric interpretations and strategies put forward by Burke.

Meantime, it would be instructive to examine the new rhetoric (or, the new way of examining and defining rhetoric) before delving into the wedding as a focus of new rhetoric. Hochmuth quotes Burke at the outset of her scholarly piece; Burke believed his form of rhetorical analysis "throws light on literary texts and human relations generally." And Hochmuth points out that Burke defined "literature" not necessarily as great fiction, Shakespearian poetry, or books in general. "By literature we mean written or spoken words," Hochmuth quotes Burke as saying.

And so, by that definition the words spoken by the minister or priest or rabbi at a wedding ceremony is literature; and what a bride says to the groom, and what the groom says to the bride, is literature - vis-a-vis the new rhetoric. Rhetoric to Burke was more than a form of persuasion; it was an appeal to one's emotions, spoken or written words designed to offer the identification of a topic or emotion.

The Burke strategy was more along the lines of "identification" as opposed to "persuasion," and Burke knew he was not the originator of this concept, Hochmuth continues. Burke knew full well that Aristotle had commented centuries earlier that one persuades not necessarily by passionate phrasing but by "identifying' one's ways with those of his audience," Hochmuth goes on. Today often journalists and commentators speak of "rhetoric" as the hot air a politician offers to make a point.

But this paper posits that rhetoric is a way of identifying with others, and with others' communication efforts. Words must be thought of as "...acts upon a scene," Burke insisted; and the creation of literature could be any phrase or statement or written account of an event that is "...designed for the express purpose of arousing emotions." Burke's theory of new rhetoric as the communication and identification of meaning becomes immediately relevant and apparent to anyone attending a wedding in America today (Foss, Foss, & Trapp, 1991).

The bride wears white, presumably to signify her purity. But in other cultures, most notably India and Japan, red rather than white is the customary color of first-time brides. Even in our own culture, white was not the customary color for a wedding dress until the 19th century, when Queen Victoria wore white at her wedding.

Also, for a long time, women did not have enough money to have a new dress, so they wore their best dresses, unless they were wealthy, but now that clothing is cheaper, almost everyone wears a special dress for the day. Even if someone defies these norms, such an act is consciously interpreted as defiance. People do not exist outside of the symbolic language of the culture in which they find themselves.

A bride who is on her third marriage, yet insists on wearing white, is looked down upon, even scorned, in American wedding dynamics. Symbols that people take for granted are actually culturally and historically located. Symbols only make sense if the observer is familiar with the rest of the culture's symbols.

Wearing white a wedding day means something very different if the observer is expecting a Japanese wedding as in traditional Japanese culture white is the color of death! This cultural problem, in this case the problem of transition of life stages, is solved through symbolic rhetoric. Rhetoric for Burke was "A strategy for encompassing situations -- an answer to the questions posed by the situation" (Foss, Foss, & Trapp, 1991).

To be sure, an act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose, or what, where, who, how, and why, is present in every communication situation (Simmons, 2001).

To understand and break down this Dramatistic Pentad, or the drama of everyday life to the wedding example, the 'what' would be marriage, the 'where' might be a church or other designated location of significance to the culture and the couple, 'who' would be the bride (or groom, or officiating clergy), 'how' would be determined if the bride wished to conform or not to conform to the cultural symbolic conventions of marriage, and the 'why' would be why culture has dictated a certain symbolic language for marriage.

The why could also be why people are attending this ceremony, or why some may have chosen not to attend this ceremony for any number of reasons. But meanwhile what is said during a wedding speaks perhaps as loudly as all the symbols and ritualized behaviors.

It is worthy at this point in the paper to point out that Burke, in his book, Counter-Statement, wrote that new rhetoric was "...the use of language in such a way as to produce a desired impression upon the hearer or reader." This careful use of language is, as was alluded to earlier, a means of identification for those in the audience, with what is being witnessed, as well as what is being said.

Burke in a Rhetoric of Motives, said that rhetoric is "the use of language in such a way as to produce a desired impression upon the hearer or reader" (p. 41). In the American wedding, the groom waits at the alter with the officiating member of the clergy. In the immediate environment surrounding the scene with the clergy and the groom are flowers, sometimes mountains of bright flowers.

This, in terms of Burke's definition of new rhetoric, is an unspoken "symbolic structure of social reality." The symbolism of flowers can be taken two ways; obviously, flowers are always part of a funeral, as a way of sending the deceased off into that better world with a floral theme. In a wedding, they celebrate the unspoken beauty and pageantry of the event. Wherever there is "meaning," Burke wrote, there is also persuasion. The flowers provide poignant persuasion.

And they provide a moral theme for what is being said - people in the audience identify with a beautiful stage where a dramatic event is about to unfold, and that stage has an aroma of fresh flowers and an aspect that is pure and fresh and colorful, like the lives of the two who are about to be joined in matrimony.

The father of the bride (or an appropriate substitute if there is no father present) walks his daughter down the aisle in a symbolic gesture of "giving" his daughter away to the man who will now look after her, love her, keep her safe and warm, and honor her in good times and bad.

In most Christian weddings the clergy begins his ceremony with something along the lines of, "We are gathered here today to celebrate one of life's greatest moments, to give recognition to the worth and beauty of love." And within that context he or she says: "Should there be anyone who has cause why this couple should not be united in marriage, they must speak now or forever hold their piece." This symbolic act is not really intended to persuade anyone in the audience that the clergy is willing to stop the ceremony so a person can stand up and contest the validity of the marriage.

This is, in Burke's new rhetoric, designed for the expressed purpose of "arousing emotions"; in other words, the clergy is saying, we are very serious here about the validity of these two people being joined in legal matrimony. We are so serious that we are announcing it in public that we believe this is a lawful valid event and these people have the right to be here and be joined as husband and wife.

In the typical Christian ceremony, the father then steps forward to offer his daughter, and the clergy says, "Who is it that brings this woman to this man?" The father says, "I do," or "I do on behalf of her mother, her family..." Or something along those lines. The Burke new rhetoric emphasized the "ethical dimension of language," according to Joseph Schwartz (in the journal College Composition and Communication); the person's intent is revealed in this ethical dimension through listeners' value judgments about what is being said.

Put another way, the audience hears the father of the bride saying not only that it is his daughter being united in matrimony, but that in effect, the father is saying through new rhetoric, whether I really deep down like him or not, I accept my daughter's decision to marry this man.

Burke had a "puissant sense of the potency and efficiency of the word," Schwartz goes on (Schwartz 1966), which meant that man reveals his "symbolizing capacity through language." The ceremony continues, with some spiritually appropriate remarks offered by the clergy in charge. Sometimes, the bride and groom write the script from which the clergy will read. And often, the bride and the groom write their own personalized vows.

But in many cases, the clergy asks the groom if he takes this woman to be his wife, and does he promise "...to love, honor, cherish and protect her, forsaking all others and holding only unto her?" The groom of course answers "I do." And then the same litany is repeated by the bride prior to the traditional exchange of rings.

"Wedding rings are an outward and visible sign of an inward spiritual grace and the unbroken circle of love, signifying to all the union of this man and this woman in marriage." The new rhetoric in this instance is also that everyone in the audience knows that when a person is seen in public with a gold ring, that means the person is married, and hence, not available for flirting or mating.

Burke said that the use of language produces "a desired impression upon the hearer or reader," and that rhetoric is used not in persuasion so much as in identification. The audience doesn't need to be persuaded that this couple is serious about their vows; people cry at weddings because they are so sweet, and so romantic.

And sentiment runs high because (especially for women) they identify with the bride and groom; either they were once married and the language therefore takes them back to a brighter, happier day, when idealism and love really meant something. or, the language as the rings are exchanged allows the men and women in the congregation to dream of one day when they too will be exchanging vows.

Every little girl wants to have a lovely wedding, and the language (rhetoric) from a wedding is warm, wonderfully sincere, and gives off a good feeling about the future. Very often scripture is read by the officiating clergy member; a popular passage is from Corinthians; "Love.