Burke Primer

Definition of Rhetoric

"It is rooted in an essential function of language itself, afunction that is wholly realistic, and is continually bornanew; the use of language as a symbolic means of inducingcooperation in beings that by nature respond to symbols."(Rhet, p. 43; Burke's italics.)

From Kenneth Burke: An Annotated Glossary of His Terministic Screen and a "Statistical" Survey of His Major Concepts, in RSQ

Ongoing Conversation

Imagine that you enter a parlor. You come late. When you arrive, others have long preceded you, and they are engaged in a heated discussion, a discussion too heated for them to pause and tell you exactly what it is about. In fact, the discussion had already begun long before any of them got there, so that no one present is qualified to retrace for you all the steps that had gone before. You listen for a while, until you decide that you have caught the tenor of the argument; then you put in your oar. Someone answers; you answer him [or her]; another comes to your defense; another aligns himself [or herself] against you, to either the embarrassment or gratification of your opponent, depending upon the quality of your ally's assistance. However, the discussion is interminable. The hour grows late, you must depart. And you do depart, with the discussion still vigorously in progress. It is from this "unending conversation" . . . that the materials of your drama arise.

From (Kenneth Burke, The Philosophy of Literary Form 110-11)

Dramatism

KB distinguishes between philosophies that are concernedwith knowledge and philosophies that are concerned withaction. Frye, for instance, wants to understand literatureas a form of knowledge, but KB wants to find out what peopledo with literature.The five key terms of dramatism are, of course, the Pentad:In a rounded statement about motives, you must havesome word that names the act (names what took place,in thought or deed), and another that names the scene(the background of the act, the situation in which itoccurred); also, you must indicate what person or kindof person (agent) performed the act, what means orinstruments he used (agency), and the purpose. Men mayviolently disagree about the purposes behind a givenact, or about the character of the person who did it,or how he did it, or in what kind of situation heacted; or they may even insist upon totally differentwords to name the act itself. But be that as it may,any complete statement about motives will offer somekind of answers to these five questions: what was done(act), when or where it was done (scene), who did it(agent), how he did it (agency), and why (purpose).(Gram, p. xv)Dramatism will have three concerns: "grammar," the structureof terms; "rhetoric," "the basic stratagems which peopleemploy, in endless variations, consciously or unconsciously,for the outwitting or cajoling of one another"; "symbolic,""modes of expression and appeal in the fine arts . . . andpurely psychological or psychoanalytic matters." (Gram,p. xvii). From Kenneth Burke: An Annotated Glossary of His Terministic Screen and a "Statistical" Survey of His Major Concepts, in RSQ

“

From Brummett, “Representative Anecdote,” CSMC 1984

Terministic Screens –

“One approach to analyzing discursive forms and the attendant attitudes (incipientactions) they foster toward a situation is by examining what Burke has called“terministic screens”6 and media critics—drawing on a sociological perspective—have called “frame analysis.”7 Frame analysis looks to see how a situation or eventis named/defined, and how that naming shapes public opinion. It accomplishesthis analysis by highlighting the inherent biases in all storytelling, namely selectivity(what is included and excluded in the story?), partiality (what is emphasizedand downplayed in the story?), and structure (how does the story formally playout?). One example of framing in the news media is the distinction between“episodic” stories and “thematic” stories. “The episodic frame,” according toShanto Iyengar and Adam Simon, “depicts public issues in terms of concreteinstances or public events . . . [and] makes for ‘good pictures.’ The thematic newsframe, by contrast, places public issues in some general or abstract context . . .[and] takes the form of a ‘takeout’ or ‘backgrounder’ report directed at general outcomes.”8 Though few news reports are exclusively episodic or thematic, the dominance of episodic frames in the news has been established in multiple studies.9How a story is framed in the news affects both how the public assigns responsibilityfor a traumatic event and “how people following the debate think about policyoptions and preferred outcomes.”10 To appreciate fully the political and ideologicalimplications of framing, however, the critic must do more than simply classifya news story as episodic or thematic” – From Ott and Aoki, “THE POLITICS OF NEGOTIATING PUBLIC TRAGEDY: MEDIA FRAMING OF THEMATTHEW SHEPARD MURDER.” P. 485-486

Kenneth Burke, Language as Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), 44–45.

Burke says here that every selection is also a reflection and a deflection

Identification/Division

"Identification is affirmed with earnestness precisely becausethere is division. Identification is compensatory todivision." (Rhet, p. 22)"You persuade a man only insofar as you can talk hislanguage by speech, gesture, tonality, order, image,attitude, idea, identifying your ways with his. . . . Andyou give the 'signs' of such consubstantiality by deferenceto an audience's 'opinions.'" (Rhet, p. 55)Activities are autonomous only when considered in and ofthemselves. "The human agent, qua human agent, is notmotivated solely by the principle of a specializedactivity. . . . Any specialized activity participates in alarger unit of action." (Rhet, p. 27)The tension between hierarchy—which is simply a given in thehuman situation—and identification (or the need to identify)is the very basis of KB's theory of human relations.

From Kenneth Burke: An Annotated Glossary of His Terministic Screen and a "Statistical" Survey of His Major Concepts, in RSQ

The breadth (or "resonance" as Burke would say) of the term"identification" is clearly spelled out in The Philosophy of LiteraryForm: (p.195)By 'identification' I have in mind this sort of thing: one'smaterial and mental ways of placing oneself as a personin groups and movements; one's ways of sharing vicariouslyin the role of leader or spokesman; formation andchange of allegiance; the rituals of suicide, parricide, andprolicide; the vesting and divesting of insignia, the modesof initiation and ptirification that are involved in the responseto allegiance and change of allegiance; . . . clothes,uniforms and their psychological equivalents. . . .!^*'

From Pivotal Terms In the Early Worksof Kenneth BurkeJane Blankenship, Edward Murphy, andMarie Rosenwasser, Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1974

Form

Again and again, KB stresses that the appeal of art as artlies in form. For example: "So the formal aspects of artappeal in that they exercise formal potentialities of thereader. They enable the mind to follow processes amenableto it." (CS, p. 143) "The forms of art, to summarize, arenot exclusively 'aesthetic' They can be said to have priorexistence in the experiences of the person hearing orreading the work of art. They parallel processes whichcharacterize his experiences outside of art." (CS, p. 143)When we respond to form, we are prepared to respond toopinion. (Rhet, p. 58)KB's most widely known statement concerning form is "TheNature of Form" (CS, pp. 124-152). He defines form inliterature as "an arousing and fulfillment of desires. Awork has form in so far as one part of it leads a reader toanticipate another part, to be gratified by the sequence."(P. 124)"Syllogistic progression is the form of the perfectlyconducted argument, advancing step by step. . . . Qualitativeprogression, the other aspect of progressive form, is subtler.Instead of one incident in the plot preparing us for someother possible incident of plot . . . the presence of onequality prepares us for the introduction of another. . . .Repetitive form is the consistent maintaining of a principleunder new guises. . . . Conventional form involves to somedegree the appeal of form as form. . . . Minor or incidentalforms . . . such as metaphor, paradox, disclosure, reversal,contraction, expansion, bathos, apostrophe . . . which canbe discussed as formal events in themselves." (CS, pp. 124-127)

From Kenneth Burke: An Annotated Glossary of His Terministic Screen and a "Statistical" Survey of His Major Concepts, in RSQ “Burke's (1968) definition of form emphasizes that communicators create and thensatisf)' expectations: "A work has form in so far as one part of it leads a reader to anticipateanother part, to be gratified by the sequence" (p. 124). Form is both the creationand satisfaction of appetites in an audience, and a full artistic act includes both. Form isequated with the "psychology of the audience," as it "involves desires and their appeasements"(p. 31).Burke (1962) claimed that form allows an audience to feel as though it were "notmerely receiving, but were itself creatively participating in the poet's or speaker's assertion"(p. 58). This participation occurs because formal patterns "can readily awaken anattitude of collaborative expectancy [italics added]" (p. 58). Burke contended that participationis present (though to a lesser degree) even when the audience resists the propositionbeing advanced, because it invites audiences to collahorate and thus to be moreactive in the completion of the utterance. This collaboration is not necessarily a consciousprocess. Indeed, for Burke, much of persuasion takes place on a semi-consciouslevel (Quigley, 1998). For instance, audiences may identify themselves with speakerswithout fully realizing they are doing so.In an important sense, form is rhetorical—it argues enthymematically and mayenhance identification between speaker and audience (Burks, 1985). As Burke (1968)

asserted, "form is the appeal" (p. 138). Moreover, an analysis of form can enlighten usabout argumentative processes between speakers and audiences. It makes sense that bylooking at the formal devices that appear in Senate debate, critics can determine howexpectations are evoked and ultimately if and how these expectations play a role in theviolation of the norm of civility.Burke (1968) identified five aspects of form. Progressive form includes both syllogisticprogression and qualitative progression. Syllogistic progression is "a perfectly conductedargument, advancing step by step" (p. 124). Syllogistic progression argues that "givencertain things, certain things must follow, the premises forcing the conclusion," such asduring Macbeth, where "Macheth's murder of Duncan prepares us for the dying of Macbeth"(p. 124). Qualitative progression, on the other hand, is subtler, occurring notwhen one incident or event prepares the audience for another, but when one quality preparesthe audience for the introduction of another quality. Burke claimed we are "preparedless to demand a certain qualitative progression than to recognize its rightnessafter the event. We are put into a state of mind which another state of mind can appropriatelyfollow" (p. 125). Again referencing Macbeth, Burke argued that the "grotesqueseriousness of the murder scene" prepares audiences for the "grotesque buffoonery ofthe porter scene" (p. 125). The two are not logically connected (as in syllogistic progression),but the underlying quality of one leads the audience to expect a corresponding,perhaps complementary quality in the other.Repetitive form is simply the "restatement of the same thing in different ways" or the"consistent maintaining of a principle under new guises" (Burke, 1968, p. 125). Minorforms include literary devices such as metaphor, paradox, disclosure, and contraction.Minor forms may exhibit characteristics of other forms, such as qualitative progressionor repetitive form, and as such, their effect "partially depends upon their function inthe whole" (p. 127).Finally, conventional form involwes "the appeal of form as form" (Burke, 1968, p. 126).Conventional form involves "categorical expectancy"—Burke stated that although "theanticipations and gratifications of progressive and repetitive form arise during the processof reading [or hearing], the expectations of conventional form may be anterior to thereading" (pp. 126-127). Thus, texts are greeted by audiences with preconceived ideas ofwhat they should or should not include. This idea is particularly important with regardto Senate debate—if civility is indeed the norm, audiences of floor speeches will expectcivility within those speeches. Audiences will anticipate a rhetorical style that includesflowery language and excessive compliments (Loomis, 2000; Matthews, 1959; Uslaner,320 THE SOUTHERN COMMUNICATION JOURNAL

2000). "Categorical expectations" will exist in the minds of auditors before thespeeches begin.”

From Darr, “Civility as Rhetorical Enactment,” SCJ, 2005

Similarly, Burke's definition of literary form in Counter-Statement reflects a process orientation towards language use.For Burke, "form is the creation of an appetite in the mind ofthe auditor, and the adequate satisfying of that appetite." (5)Burke's choices of "creation," "appetite," and "satisfying,"demonstrate the active participation of the auditor in theevolution of literary form. Because form creates and satisfiesan appetite within the auditor's mind, it necessarily dependsupon the auditor's involvement for its realization. Likerhetoric as delineated by Aristotle, literary form as definedby Burke demonstrates a process orientation towards language

use.

From Hershey, RSQ, 1986, “Burke and Aristotle on Form”

Farm is a way erf imiting motive and symbol, situation and act.It is a term that lets us begin, branch out, and then retum tothe term from which we started at the beginning of the paper.Orientation. In Counter-Statement, Burke defines Form as a"creation of an appetite in the mind of the auditor, and theadequate satisfying of that appetite. . . .""^ It is "an arousingand fulfillment of desires."^ i* Thus, a "work has form insofaras one part of it leads a reader to anticipate another part... ."^''•^Burke continuaUy stresses the receiver-oriented aspect of Formand he goes so far as to say that "fomi would be the psychologyof the audience."^^" For example, he writes:. . . in the case of Antony's speech, the value lies in thefact that his words are shaping the future of the audience'sdesires, not the desires of the Rranan populace, but thedesires of the pit. This is the psychology of form as distinguishedfrom the psychology of information. ^ ^ lA work that has form is clearly preferable to a work that hasinfonnation and Burke wams the artist to be careful lest "form"he overwhehned by "infonnation." "The hypertrophy of the psychologyof infonnation is accompanied by the ccffrespondingatrophy of the psychology erf fonn."i2 2 The arousal and satisfactionof an appetite is, according to Burke, a "natural" processwhich is continually pleasurable. We do not find such pleasurein a continuous stream of new information.It is interesting to note that "natural" is a word which appearsfrequently in Burke's discussion of Form. Although psychologistsand philosophers may argue over whether forms are "innate orresultant," Burke declares that all is settled so far as a work oiart is concemed, 123 They (forms) "simply flre."i24 He says:14 PIVOTAL TEBMS IN XENIOmi BCBKE

". . . when one turns to the production or enjoyment of a workof art, a formal equipment is already present. . . ."125 These"innate forms" are the " 'potentiality for being interested by certainprocesses or arrangements'" or the "'feeling for such arrangementsof subject-matter as produce crescendo, contrast,comparison, balance, repetition, disclosure, reversal, contraction,expansion, magnification, series, and so on.'"^*® He concludes:"So the formal aspects of art appeal in that they exercise formalpotentialities of ihe reader."i2 7 IQ tjjjs use of the term Burkeimplies that Form is both stimulus and response, both a consciousand unconscious process; it is "inherent in the very germplasmof man."^28In his "Lexicon Rhetcaicae" he discusses five aspects of Form:syllogistic progression, qualitative progression,- repetitive iacm,conventional form, and minor or incidental fonn.^^s jjg illustrates:. . . the Unes in Othello beginning, 'Soft you, a ward or twobefore you go,' and ending 'Seized by the throat the undrcumdzeddog and smote him thus (stabs himself/ wellexemplify the vigorous presence of all five aspects ofform, as this suicide is the logical outcome of his predicament(syllogistic progression); it fits the general moodof gloomy forebodings which has fallen upon ns (qualitative

progression); the speech has about it that impetuosityand picturesqueness we have learned to associate withOthello (repetitive form) it is very decidedly a concluaon(conventional form), and in its develc^ment it is a tinyplot in itself (minorThe main function of Form is to allow us to gratify appetites.What are the condUions oi form as appeal? Apparently the reindividuatingof the psychological imiversals. Psychological universalswould appear not just as balance, contrast, and the like,but also as imiversal situations, fundamental attitudes, typicalactions, patterns of experience, and the like. For as Burke comments"any particular cluster of conditions will involve the recurrentemotions . . . and fundamental attitudes. . . ."^^^ Sincethe artist's symbols and the experiences they represent are notprecisely the same as those of the audiences, die reader reinterpretsand perscmalizes the symbol. However, the kind of individuationon which Burke dwells leiers to the artist's particularizationof the crescendo in any of the myriad aspects possibleto human experience, localizing or channeling it accordingJ. BLANKENSHIP, E. MUEtPHT, AKD M. ROSENWASSEB 15

to chance details of his own life and vision, Individuation and reindividuationare possible because of innate formal potentialities.In Counter-Statemera, Binrke maintains that style is a constituentof Form: ", . . those elements of surprise and suspenseare subtilized, carried down into writing of a line or a sentence,until in aU its smallest details the work bristles with disclosures,contrasts, restatements . . . , in short all that complex wealth ofminutiae which in their iine-for-line aspect we call style and intheir broader outlines we call form."!^^He explicitly relates style, "ingratiation" and "inducement" to"identification." As "ingratiation," style is "an attempt to gainfavor by hypnotic or suggestive process of 'saying the rightthing'"!3^ and an "elaborate set of prescriptions and proscriptionsfor 'doing the right thing'. . . ."is* We see the relationshipbetween identification and style when Btirke says that one'hypnotizes" a man by "ringing the bells of his response."! 3 5Fmther, style is the "ritualistic projection or completion ofmanners, . . ."i^^ It has to do with "custom"; with the "meetingof obKgations," with "what goes with what."!^''^ Biu-ke explainsin some detail that when a person cannot "justify" himselfby spontaneously using such "congregational" responses as ingratiationand inducement, he will likely be driven to justifyhimself through "segregational" attitudes and acts. The "loss ofstyle" results not only in "segregational" acts and attitudes butit reinforces completion and violence and fosters superiorityrather than solidarity, i ^ ^ Burke further explains that style canhave its own ldnd of "deterioration." He observes:. . . in societies greatly marked by class prerogatives,style itself tends to become a competitive implement, asa privileged group may cultivate style to advertise itsprivileges and perpetuate them. Style then ceases to bepropitiatory. It becomes boastful. It is no longer a modeof ingratiation, but a device for instilling fear, like theemperor's insignia. {Such fear is generally called respect.)As style asstimes this invidious function, there is a correspondingsocial movement from inducement toward

dominance.!^*Another aspect of style appears to be "manner" which inCounter-Statement is defined as "power without monotony" andis described as a "restriction of the means by which formal andSymbolic saliency is obtained."!*" It diffuses rather than restrictsthe means by which the "bells of response" are rung. The notion16 PIVOTAL TERMS IN KENNETH BUBKE

of manner as restrictive is developed in Attitudes Toward History:"Style is the ritualistic pro|eotion or cotnpletion of manners(as when the iieed of 'push' and 'drive' in selling attairis itsstylistic counterpart la the breezy hero)."^*^

From Pivotal Terms In the Early Worksof Kenneth BurkeJane Blankenship, Edward Murphy, andMarie Rosenwasser, Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1974

Four Master Tropes

They are a) metaphor, perspective by incongruity; b) metonymy,a reduction; c) synecdoche, representation; and d) irony,dialectic.The basic strategy of metonymy is "to convey some incorporealor intangible state in terms of the corporeal or tangible.E.g., to speak of 'the heart' rather than 'the emotions.'"(Gram, p. 506) In regard to synecdoche, see "representativeanecdote." As to irony, this cryptic statement: "Ironyarises when one tries, by the interaction of terms upon oneanother, to produce a development which uses all the terms."(Gram, p. 512)

Another word for "symbolic." KB considers synecdoche to bethe basic figure of speech, and, of course, "representativeanecdote" is synecdoche, as are "the fetish," the "scapegoat,""the name." Form may be synecdochic, in that oneepisode may represent all. (PLF, pp. 23-28)

From Kenneth Burke: An Annotated Glossary of His Terministic Screen and a "Statistical" Survey of His Major Concepts, in RSQ

Representative Anecdote

It is the beginning of dramatism. It contains its ownvocabulary and its own assumptions. Insofar as it isrepresentative, it will be adequate to the analysis of asituation. Thus, an anecdote about how animals behave isnot representative for humans because animals don't talk.In fact, KB takes drama to be the representative anecdotefor human motives. (Gram, pp. 59-61)See also "synecdoche."

From Kenneth Burke: An Annotated Glossary of His Terministic Screen and a "Statistical" Survey of His Major Concepts, in RSQ

From Brummett, “Representative Anecdote,” CSMC 1984

Perspective by Incongruity

Further, Burke's early works cannot be underetood without some rrference to the methodology that informs them. In "perspective by incongruity" Burke has a method that extends "the use of a term by taking it from the context in which it [is] habitually used and applying it to another.''^ Such planned incongruityprovides "a method for gauging situations by verbal 'atom cracking.' " i" In it one deliberately wrenches loose a word belonging customarily to a certain category and applies it to a different category. Thus, we come to form new classifications and realignmraits.ii We can "characterize events frcun a myriadshifting points of view. . . ."^^ Wg can see more possibilities, see new rdatiooships, crack old myths, decrease rigidity and increase fluidity. 13 Via this process of conversion and rebirth, of "cutting across the bias," we come to have "a new angle of vision."^*Perspective by inooogniity is so essential to Burke's methodthat he recommends:. . . planned incongruity should be deliberately cultivatedfor the purpose of experimentally wrenching apart allthose molecular combinations of adjective and noun, substantiveand verb, which stiU remain with us. It shouldsubject language to the same 'cracking' process thatchemists now use in their refining of oil.^^Metaphor is essential for the functioning of a Perspective byIncongruity because:. . . the metaphor always has about it precisely this revealingof hitherto unsuspected connectives which wemay note in the progressions erf a dream. It appeals by exemplifyingrelationships between objects which our customaryvocabulary has ignored.^®PhUosophers are urged to seek out the "master metaphors" theyare employing as the cue to organizing their work and to saywhy they chose the metaphors they did choose. ^'^ Of his ovsmwork he observes:We choose the 'man as communicant' metaphor, for instance,because we feel that it brings out the emphasesneeded for handling preseait necessities. We modify itwith the dead, mixed metaphor 'bureaucratization of theimaginative' because we think that pec^le thereby are keptfrom being too sensitively exposed to disillusionment asthey are affironted by the let down' that necessarily occurswhen a tender imaginative-Utopian possibility is implementedby being given its practical embodiment in 'thisimperfect world.'i*4 PIVOTAL TERMS IN KENNETH B13BKE

Every perspective. Burke argues, requires a metaphor, explicitor implicit, for its organizational base.^*Perspective by Incongruity is the method of his early work.It is the process by which he invents the dramatistic metaphorthat is fully developed in his later works. The term itseK disappearsin Burke's later work—in large measure precisely becauseit has birthed the metaphor around which Burke centers his work.

From Pivotal Terms In the Early Worksof Kenneth BurkeJane Blankenship, Edward Murphy, andMarie Rosenwasser, Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1974

The Comic and Tragic Frame

The Comic The comic frame "should enable people to^ b£ observers ofthemselves, while acting. Its ultimate would not bepassiveness, but maximum consciousness. One would 'transcend'himself by noting his own foibles." (ATH, p. 171) The comicunifies acceptance and rejection; it is actually anotherword for "humanist." From Kenneth Burke: An Annotated Glossary of His Terministic Screen and a "Statistical" Survey of His Major Concepts, in RSQ

ATH = Burke, Attitudes Toward History

From Christiansen and Hanson, “Comedy as Cure for Tragedy”, QJS 1996

Principle of Perfection

Burke (1966) suggests that the "principle of perfection is central to the nature of language as motive" (p. 16). The mere desire to assign something its "proper name" reflects the principle of perfection in language, but what is most "perfectionist" is the impulse to "define the situation" (Burke, 1966, p. 16). With respect to Packwood's alleged misconduct, the "situation" is defined by his "victims" in such a way that it also develops strength from other primary aspects of symbolicity. For instance, the negative helps to define the situation in terms of the moral and ethical transgressions acted out by the Senator, which attain their perfection in distinctions between choices of "Yes" (shall), and "No" (shall not). As the negative generates ethical distinctions, it also defines victims as those who are violated in the transgression implied by the no-command and with the rejection of the transgressor.

The negative also produces antithesis, which adds clarity to the issue of sexual misconduct in the specific case. Though he claimed to be unaware of his impropriety, the accusers identified Packwood's advances as unwanted and as something they uniformly "opposed." Antithesis also encourages and reinforces unification through victimage, either by scapegoat or through Packwood's own mortification. At this point the Senator's rhetorical subterfuge emerges in the form of what Burke (1984) calls "the intermediate absolutizing step" (p. 292), to "redefine" the material situation in ultimate terms of justice and equality. In doing so, Packwood shifts his act of "self-sacrifice" to one of self-preservation by substituting his victims for his "guilt." But in this strategic reversal there is no catharsis or escape. As a result, the group of terms implicit in Burke's principle of perfection can be used by a critic to piece together the Senator's rhetorical subterfuge as discourse that offers the ultimate motivations of justice and equality to escape self-sacrifice and promote self-preservation. As such the Senator's striving for perfection is more ironic than honorific. He applies the principles of justice and equality to sustain injustice and inequality, and sacrifices those he claimed to serve in order to save himself.

Packwood opened his "rhetorical subterfuge" with an act of mortification that signaled an apparent willingness to sacrifice. His violation appeared to stem from two primary yet conflicting functions of the political hierarchy, solace and control (Burke, 1976). From his exclusive position he offered solace to women in their political struggle for equality and justice. But insofar as they depended on his "exclusiveness" for their success, he could "control" them. Burke admonishes that such conditions carry potential for "hierarchal psychosis" (or, inner contradiction), characterized by a lost or distorted sense of propriety from using the principles of justice and equality to sustain the opposite. Thus, the hierarchal psychosis can be identified as the conditions under which the victims could either accept this control of authority or lose the solace that only authority can provide.

The concept of "hierarchal psychosis" involves the ironic, though natural tendency of people in authority to protect special interests in ways that ultimately impair those interests. With Packwood, the way he "supported" women's causes (a women's rights advocate accused of sexually harassing the women he supported) could weaken the

efforts, harm the integrity, or at least tarnish the image of those causes. In this regard, Burke suggests that the most important yet most difficult aspect of language and social order to explain is the way in which a hierarchy's very existence encourages undue acquiescence among those victims who otherwise could be viewed as its most useful critics. This acquiescence may not result as much from "over-caution" or "obsequiousness" as it does from "the network of 'properties' that spontaneously accumulate about a given order" (Burke, 1984, p. 291). And as each property contributes to the principle of hierarchic order, which is ultimate and therefore "perfect," the hierarchal psychosis that interweaves social order with motives of guilt and victimage inevitably arises.

This essay has examined Bob Packwood's rhetorical subterfuge within the context of a dramatistic process that revealed how the Senator identified with the social order; what his motivation and attitude reflected about his role in the social order; and what he viewed as the problem with, and for himself in, the social order. From this examination three conclusions can be drawn. First, the "principle of perfection" appears to drive both Packwood's sexual misconduct and his fragmented response to the misconduct charges. In his initial statement printed by The Washington Post, Packwood reinforced social attitudes about sexual misconduct by regretting that his behavior appeared as such and transcended allegations by emphasizing his record as a women's rights activist. At his news conference, he admitted in a bolstering strategy that cynicism of public officials was at an all-time high, and therefore officials should be accountable and responsible for their conduct. Through such public statements Packwood identified with the social order, but by saying his behavior was not only unintentional but in fact misinterpreted (motives were pure), he evaded responsibility and accountability for his conduct while shifting the blame onto his accusers.

For a second conclusion, Packwood transcended the charges by constructing a counter drama and substituting it for the original one. Insofar as victimage offers a way to right a wrong, it also implies some logical conclusion, or ultimate reduction, that can perfect vicarious victims, villains and enemies as it interweaves the subtle complexities of hierarchal psychosis with matters of justice. As the dilemmas faced by Packwood's accusers arose from the hierarchal psychosis that Burke identifies, they illustrated how the negativistic principle of guilt combines with hierarchy, perfection, and substitution, to create victimage.[7] After his act of mortification, Packwood shifted to a substitute sacrifice of women with refutation and diversion strategies from his own "social exclusiveness."[8] As an act of substitute victimage, then, Burke's (1976) notion of "vicarious sacrifice" (p. 15) further illuminates the case. The vicarious sacrifice is a fulfillment of victimage through a symbolic or "substitute" scapegoat. Since substitution is fundamental to symbol systems, Burke believes that vicarious sacrifice can be viewed as a way to ultimate rewards. But by substituting his "victims" for his own mortification, the Senator protected his career by sacrificing those he dedicated his career to help. His motivation thus reflected a self-serving public servant driven by what Burke (1966) calls an "ironic 'perfection' "(p. 18).

By appealing to and subverting his accusers, Packwood failed to redeem himself and sent a contradictory message that protected inequality in the name of equality. But is this not one way that hierarchy preserves order? Though he could have served the cause of women's rights through his mortification, he abandoned his own struggle for a "gender neutral" order and instead became a symbol of "hierarchal psychosis." That is, his apology seemed to be so "full of false promises" (Duncan, 1989, p. 132) that it was not only questionable as an apology, but it served as further cause to question the political order as a whole. Over time, the discourse as vicarious sacrifice revealed that he was willing to abandon those upon whom he had based his political reputation to preserve his reputation. Then in an effort to be responsible as well as accountable he held his accusers out to be both.

A final conclusion is that Burke's theory allows a critic to pull together fragmented discourse into a unified rhetorical effort. The application of Burke's theory to Packwood's rhetoric reveals that the cluster of terms implicit in the principle of perfection can contribute to the critical understanding of fragmented texts in contemporary culture. Thus, even in a world of contingencies, ultimate motivations can be identified that both compel and shape human discourse. However, with the ironic sense of "striving for perfection" that the Senator depicted, the ultimate principles of justice and equality seem instead to promote their opposites. In this way, a condition of hierarchal psychosis arises wherein the Senator inevitably hurts the ones whom he loves. This became the prevailing irony in the Packwood case, to be perfected by "the way" in which he loved the ones he loved. One limitation of this perspective is that it views the condition of hierarchal psychosis in real life as inevitably tragic, for only in Burke's ideal sense of irony, one that is based on a fundamental kinship with the enemy, can the deranged sense of hierarchal psychosis be controlled (1969a).

This study not only shows how Senator Packwood "suffered" from hierarchal psychosis, it suggests that he can be saved by it as well. After nearly three years the Senator continued to evade the charges and divert public attention toward his accusers with threats.[9] In 1995, after a woman said he grabbed and kissed her when she was a seventeen-year-old intern, he responded: "I have so far avoided public confrontation with the accusers. It's not in my nature to lob personal attacks, and I'm doing my best to keep a lid on my powder" (.Lane & O'Connor, p. D1). To Senator Barbara Boxer, such a statement was merely another "attempt to intimidate her [ex-intern] and other potential victims who may come forward" (Lane & O'Connor, p. D1). Again this is one way that a hierarchy's very existence can encourage undue acquiescence among those who might otherwise be its most capable critics. The Senator hoped to end all criticism in September of 1995, by deciding to resign with honor. In doing so, he identified with hierarchy and even reflected its tendency toward derangement. Further study of his resignation as another subterfuge may show that after responding to the misconduct charges he continued to deny responsibility by portraying himself as a victim of those he honored and served.

From Rhetorical subterfuge and `the principle of perfection': Bob Packwood's response to sexual... By: Moore, Mark P., Western Journal of Communication, 10570314, Winter1996, Vol. 60, Issue 1

Database: Communication & Mass Media Complete

Scapegoatting— Kenneth Burke, A Grammar of Motives (New York: Prentice Hall, 1945), 406.

“In A Grammar of Motives, Burke contends that, “Criminals either actual or imaginarymay . . . serve as [curative] scapegoats in a society that ‘purifies itself ’ by ‘moralindignation’ in condemning them.”44 This is not to suggest, however, that thoseseeking to “ritualistically cleanse themselves” of guilt can simply blame a chosenparty. The “scapegoat mechanism” is a complex process that entails three distinctivestages: “(1) an original state of merger, in that the iniquities are shared by both theiniquitous and their chosen vessel; (2) a principle of division, in that elementsshared in common are being ritualistically alienated; (3) a new principle of merger,this time in the unification of those whose purified identity is defined in dialecticalopposition to the sacrificial offering.”45 For a “sacrificial vessel” to perform the roleof “vicarious atonement,” it must be, at first, “profoundly consubstantial with . . .those who would be cured by attacking it.”46 It must represent their iniquities,because symbolic forms that manage guilt can only be “successful if the audience isguilty of the sins portrayed in the discourse.”47 Though the very earliest newsreports about the hatred and violence directed at Shepard had identified AaronMcKinney and Russell Henderson as the main perpetrators, those same newsreports cast the two as representative of both their local and national communities.”

From Ott and Aoki, “THE POLITICS OF NEGOTIATING PUBLIC TRAGEDY: MEDIA FRAMING OF THE MATTHEW SHEPARD MURDER.” P. 490

When one forms a role, this involves rejection or sloughingoff of another role, which is why we get the scapegoat, the

vessel for unwanted evil. He can be made "worthy" ofsacrifice (a) legalistically (as an offender against legalor moral justice); (b) fatalistically (as in the case ofa plot which makes a character a marked man); (c) by poeticjustice (as when the scapegoat is "too good for this world").(PLF, p. 35)From Kenneth Burke: An Annotated Glossary of His Terministic Screen and a "Statistical" Survey of His Major Concepts, in RSQ