Burke

Well this Rhetoric thing is interesting. I am suprised to say that I find the "new rhetoricians" more confusing than the Greek/Romans. I was a bit intimidated when I started--I mean you tell someone you are reading Plato and Aristotle and whatnot and immediately they look at you like "oooohh." It was kind of nice, ya know, getting the "ohhh you must be smart" vibe. Then you tell someone you are reading Kenneth Burke and they are like..."who?" What's up with that? Burke is crazier to understand(in my opinion) than all of the old guys.

Anyway, so all of these debates about language and it's use and meaning are pretty interesting. It's kinda pointless to me, and I dont mean that in a disrespectful manner. I should come up with a better adjective, but "crazy" seems to fit the bill. I think some of Burke's ideas are broad and that is why it is so hard to grasp and realize just what he is talking about. Conley states that in relation to "new rhetoricians," "rhetoric is not seen not as a special use of language that could in special circumstances win approbation on asthetic or social grounds, as in the older bellettristic tradition of the 'ancien regime'. It is rather, the study of all approbation."

I am sure that is a broad description of how these rhetoricians thought, but it is said in a way that helps me understand their purpose a little better. This blog thing does work! YAY!