Rhetorical Criticism Narrative and Dramatic Criticism

Rhetorical Criticism-Narrative and Dramatic Criticism

Forms of Criticism

Narration as a Human Communication Paradigm: The Case of Public Moral Argument

The corrective of the scientific rationalization would seem necessarily to be a rationale of art -- not, however, a performer's art, not a specialist's art for some to produce and many to observe, but an art in its widest aspects, an art of living. Kenneth Burke.

Central Claim: A narrative paradigm is one way that people reason together in certain situations, and it permits resolution of the dualisms of modernism, such as fact v. value, intellect v. imagination, and reason v. emotion. Whereas stories are the manifestation of the entire mind, narratives are moral constructs.

Central Focus or Purpose for Criticism: The narrative paradigm seems to try to cover too much territory and it doesn't really seem to give rise to a viable alternative to the rational world paradigm.

D. Arguments About the Text: Fisher asserts that all communication is narrative, but this claim is so broad that it seems to render his theory not researchable. Further, some communication does not conform to the values most people share. The narrative approach does not seem to have a more democratic frame than the hierarchical structure of the rational world paradigm. Moreover, storytelling in and of itself does not ensure that experts or elites will not dominate despite the narrative paradigm. Essential and continuous storytelling is the essence of the narrative paradigm, as human beings quite naturally use storytelling for meaning-making and communication.

E. Key Terms and Definitions: 1) a narrative that is a theory of symbolic actions, whether deeds or words, that convey meaning to those who create them or interpret them; 2) a framework that directs inquiry and understanding about the nature and functions of the experience.

The Rhetoric of Hitler's "Battle"

A. Citation:

The appearance of Mein Kampf in unexpurgated translation has called forth far too many vandalistic comments. There are other ways of burning books than on the pyre -- and the favorite method of the hasty reviewer is to deprive himself and his readers by inattention. I maintain that it is thoroughly vandalistic for the reviewer to content himself with the mere inflicting of a few symbolic wounds upon this book and its author, of an intensity varying with the resources of the reviewer and the time at his disposal. (Philosophy 191)

B. Central Claim: Burke's analysis provided a correction to the "vandalistic reviews." Burke asserted that people participate in unending conversation through their rhetorical acts was manifest when Burke himself participated in the Third Writers Congress in a manner that illustrated both "critical responsibility and rhetorical criticism."

C. Central Focus or Purpose for Criticism: Burke called for reviews that were more than just denouncements of the book and denigrations of Hitler. Burke asserted that the vandalistic reviewers were most interested in how they appeared as rhetors and did not put forth the effort required to enlighten the public. They were particularly remiss since they did not discuss how Hitler was able to manipulate the social consciousness.