Identification in rhetoric

Last updated

Identification is a key theme in the works of Kenneth Burke as part of the New Rhetoric movement. Contemporary rhetoric focuses on cultural contexts and general structures of rhetoric structures. [1] Burke was a notable contemporary U.S. rhetorician who made major contributions to the rhetoric of identification. James A. Herrick describes one of Burke's foundational ideas with identification is that “rhetoric makes human unity possible, that language use is symbolic action, and that rhetoric is symbolic inducement.” [2] For Burke, words were Terministic screens through which people see the world and interact with each other. [3] Herrick, further explains that identification in rhetoric is crucial to persuasion, and thus to cooperation, consensus, compromise, and action. Burke believed that the most serious human problem was to be alienated or separated, and rhetoric was to be that problem's only solution. Much of his work was based on bringing people back together. [2] However, Burke argues that “Identification is affirmed with earnestness precisely because there is division; Identification is compensatory to division.” [4] Rhetoric's goal, in regards to identification, is to bring people together of whom have been separated by estrangement or opposition. Those who feel isolated or separate from others may identify joint interests with others or become part of an institution -- "‘Belonging’ in this sense is rhetoric." [4]

Contents

Definition

Kenneth Burke plays an important part in learning and understanding the core values of rhetorical theory in identification. He introduces the notion by taking the Aristotelian approach into a "world of particulars." Burke states that Aristotle treated rhetoric as purely verbal. However, there are also areas of overlap. The flexibility of identification that Burke has created expands into elements beyond language. [5] He wrote that “identification ranges from the politician who, addressing an audience of farmers, says, ‘I was a farm boy myself,’ through the mysteries of social status, to the mystic's devout identification with the source of all being.” [4] This symbolic interaction is possible because it recognizes the hidden sources of identification among human beings as symbol users. From this, Burke understood symbols as constantly present, and believed that choosing to accept and learning to accurately read symbols was crucial. [6]

Burke frequently referred to the philosophical meaning of "substance" when explaining identification and identifying acts. He defined substance as "an act; and a way of life is an acting-together." When people identified with one another, they shared substance, which made them consubstantial. [4]

Theoretical grounding

Burke's theory of identification responded to Sigmund Freud's theory of identification in psychology and Karl Marx's theory of alienation. [3] Burke linked identification to Aristotle's theories of persuasion in Rhetoric. [7] Identification does not reject or oppose persuasion; rather, persuasion involves identification. For example, audiences may be persuaded if they identify with logical appeals or if they identify with the rhetor. [3]

Types of identification

Burke classified three types of identification enactments: [8]

  1. One may emphasize common ground with others to establish a rapport ("identification by sympathy")
  2. One may emphasize a common opposition to an idea or separate group; this identification by common foe may also enable people to avoid conflict within their own group. Rhetoric may frequently be framed as "us" and "them" to strengthen the identification bond ("identification by antithesis")
  3. One may inaccurately identify oneself with the qualities of an associated object or group. For example, one driving a powerful car may mistakenly think they are the source of the car's power; an ordinary person may feel "deceptively aggrandized by thoughts of his citizenship in a powerful nation" ("identification by false assumption") [8]

Application

Burke's theory of identification has been applied and expanded upon in Krista Ratcliffe's Rhetorical Listening framework. Ratcliffe proposes the “blurring of Burke's and [Diana] Fuss's theories of identification," and what becomes visible is multiple places for rhetorical listening. [9] When applying Burke and Fuss's theories, Ratcliffe proposes non-identification in cross-cultural communication and feminist pedagogy. Her critique of Western logic is that it is difficult to simultaneously pay attention to both commonalities and differences, but that is where non-identification exists and thus provides a place for rhetorical listening. [9] Burke's theory is critiqued by Ratcliffe for only focusing on identification; she argues that rhetorical listeners need to be accountable and take into consideration different points of view, which can be done through simultaneous listening to commonalities and differences.

Ratcliffe draws upon Diana Fuss because Fuss expands Burke's theory of identification to gear toward examining the differences in identification. Fuss defines Identification as related to the issue of connection between opposite entities, such as the interrelation between self and other, subject and object, and insiders and outsiders. [9] For Fuss, identification is difficult to pinpoint, as the distinction between opposite entities is porous, oftentimes “impossibly confused and finally untenable.” [9] Fuss further builds the connection between identification and disidentification. [9] Fuss defines disidentification as contingent on previous identification with another group, no matter how stereotypical the identification is, while at the same time the identification has receded from the subconscious. [9] Ratcliffe argues that previously identification has been configured as a metaphor, which is manifested in Burke's consubstantiality and Fuss's (dis)identification. Ratcliffe notes that metaphor has been used to function as the dominant trope for identification; however, metaphor foregrounds commonalities more than differences. [9] Ratcliff suggests theorizing identification via the use of metonymy to counter the privilege of communality. Intrinsic to the trope of metonymy is an attention to both commonalities and differences. [9]

Practical applications of Burke's “identification” can be seen in the scholarly effort to reframe identifications. Assembling essays from the fifth Biennial Rhetoric Society of America Conference, Michelle Ballif addresses Ratcliffe's call for rethinking Burke's notion of identification “as a place of perpetual reframing that affects who, how, and what can be thought, spoken, written, and imagined.” [10] While some of the essay contributors draw upon Burke's theory to reinterpret social identifications, others turn to specific social actions to reread Burke's “identification.” For instance, following Ratcliffe's critique of Burke's theory for its lack of attention to difference, Dominic J. Ashby destabilizes Burke's relatively fixed and teleological construction of identification with “a fluid and contingent notion of self”—that is, “uchi/soto," [10] or inside/outside in Japanese rhetoric—highlighting a simultaneous exclusion and inclusion of outsiders through an ongoing unfolding of group dynamics. By way of analyzing the Facebook news feed of “We are all Khaled Said,” Katherine Bridgman expands Burkean identification to “embodiment,” [10] or the mutually coordinated experience between speakers and their audiences triggered by specific circumstances. Along a similar vein, critiquing Burke's consubstantiality for being sexually indifferent, Janice Odom draws from Irigaray's feminist theories to reframe identification as a playground of sexual dominance and surrender.

Arabella Lyon warns of "identification as magical thinking" [11] as people might imagine they have more in common with a rhetor or audience. Further, she argues that Burke's concept of identification is an abstract ideal that may not recognize power imbalances or account for marginalized persons and communities.

Douglas Downs compares identification to a rhetor holding up a mirror image to the audience that reflects their core values and beliefs. Identification relies on the identities of both the speaker and listener, it causes the audience to develop a deeper trust for the author which makes it more likely for them to take the same position. [12]

Identification theory has also been applied to the business communication and organizational rhetoric. Rhetoric within an organization becomes a part of its identifying culture. [13] Employees tend to identify with their organization and its best interests, and reinforcing rhetoric within the organization strengthens an employee's sense of belonging to the organization. [14]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetoric</span> Art of persuasion

Rhetoric is the art of persuasion. It is one of the three ancient arts of discourse (trivium) along with grammar and logic/dialectic. As an academic discipline within the humanities, rhetoric aims to study the techniques that speakers or writers use to inform, persuade, and motivate their audiences. Rhetoric also provides heuristics for understanding, discovering, and developing arguments for particular situations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Listening</span> Hearing what others are saying, and trying to understand what it means

Listening is giving attention to a sound. When listening, a person hears what others are saying and tries to understand what it means.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetorical criticism</span>

Rhetorical criticism analyzes the symbolic artifacts of discourse—the words, phrases, images, gestures, performances, texts, films, etc. that people use to communicate. Rhetorical analysis shows how the artifacts work, how well they work, and how the artifacts, as discourse, inform and instruct, entertain and arouse, and convince and persuade the audience; as such, discourse includes the possibility of morally improving the reader, the viewer, and the listener. Rhetorical criticism studies and analyzes the purpose of the words, sights, and sounds that are the symbolic artifacts used for communications among people.

Procatalepsis, also called prolepsis or prebuttal, is a figure of speech in which the speaker raises an objection to their own argument and then immediately answers it. By doing so, the speaker hopes to strengthen the argument by dealing with possible counterarguments before the audience can raise them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Audience</span> People who participate in a show or encounter a work of art, literature, theatre, music or academics

An audience is a group of people who participate in a show or encounter a work of art, literature, theatre, music, video games, or academics in any medium. Audience members participate in different ways in different kinds of art. Some events invite overt audience participation and others allow only modest clapping and criticism and reception.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kenneth Burke</span> American philosopher and literary critic (1897–1993)

Kenneth Duva Burke was an American literary theorist, as well as poet, essayist, and novelist, who wrote on 20th-century philosophy, aesthetics, criticism, and rhetorical theory. As a literary theorist, Burke was best known for his analyses based on the nature of knowledge. Further, he was one of the first individuals to stray from more traditional rhetoric and view literature as "symbolic action."

Pathos appeals to the emotions and ideals of the audience and elicits feelings that already reside in them. Pathos is a term used most often in rhetoric, as well as in literature, film and other narrative art.

Consubstantiality, a term derived from Latin: consubstantialitas, denotes identity of substance or essence in spite of difference in aspect.

The Rhetoric of Hitler's "Battle" is an influential essay written by Kenneth Burke in 1939 which offered a rhetorical analysis of Adolf Hitler's rise to power in Germany. Much of Burke's analysis focuses on Hitler's Mein Kampf. Burke identified four tropes as specific to Hitler's rhetoric: inborn dignity, projection device, symbolic rebirth, and commercial use. Several other tropes are discussed in the essay, "Persuasion".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Glossary of rhetorical terms</span>

Owing to its origin in ancient Greece and Rome, English rhetorical theory frequently employs Greek and Latin words as terms of art. This page explains commonly used rhetorical terms in alphabetical order. The brief definitions here are intended to serve as a quick reference rather than an in-depth discussion. For more information, click the terms.

For writing communication, Identification is a key term for the discussion of rhetoric in Kenneth Burke′s A Rhetoric of Motives. Burke himself states that "identification" is more important for the work than persuasion, traditionally associated with rhetoric.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dramatism</span> Interpretive communication studies theory

Dramatism, a communication studies theory, was developed by Kenneth Burke as a tool for analyzing human relationships through the use of language. Burke viewed dramatism from the lens of logology, which studies how people's ways of speaking shape their attitudes towards the world. According to this theory, the world is a stage where all the people present are actors and their actions parallel a drama. Burke then correlates dramatism with motivation, saying that people are "motivated" to behave in response to certain situations, similar to how actors in a play are motivated to behave or function. Burke discusses two important ideas – that life is drama, and the ultimate motive of rhetoric is the purging of guilt. Burke recognized guilt as the base of human emotions and motivations for action. As cited in "A Note on Burke on "Motive"", the author recognized the importance of "motive" in Burke's work. In "Kenneth Burke's concept of motives in rhetorical theory", the authors mentioned that Burke believes that guilt, "combined with other constructs, describes the totality of the compelling force within an event which explains why the event took place."

Feminist theory in composition studies examines how gender, language, and cultural studies affect the teaching and practice of writing. It challenges the traditional assumptions and methods of composition studies and proposes alternative approaches that are informed by feminist perspectives. Feminist theory in composition studies covers a range of topics, such as the history and development of women’s writing, the role of gender in rhetorical situations, the representation and identity of writers, and the pedagogical implications of feminist theory for writing instruction. Feminist theory in composition studies also explores how writing can be used as a tool for empowerment, resistance, and social change. Feminist theory in composition studies emerged in the late 1960s and early 1970s as a response to the male-dominated field of composition and rhetoric. It has been influenced by various feminist movements and disciplines, such as second-wave feminism, poststructuralism, psychoanalysis, critical race theory, and queer theory. Feminist theory in composition studies has contributed to the revision of traditional rhetorical concepts, the recognition of diverse voices and genres, the promotion of collaborative and ethical communication, and the integration of personal and political issues in writing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetorical situation</span> Context of a rhetorical event

The rhetorical situation is an event that consists of an issue, an audience, and a set of constraints. A rhetorical situation arises from a given context or exigence. An article by Lloyd Bitzer introduced the model of the rhetorical situation in 1968, which was later challenged and modified by Richard E. Vatz (1973) and Scott Consigny (1974). More recent scholarship has further redefined the model to include more expansive views of rhetorical operations and ecologies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Modern rhetoric</span>

Modern rhetoric has gone through many changes since the age of ancient Rome and Greece to fit the societal demands of the time. Kenneth Burke, who is largely credited for defining the notion of modern rhetoric, described modern rhetoric as

"rooted in an essential function of language itself, a function that is wholly realistic, and is continually born anew; the use of language as a symbolic means of inducing cooperation in beings that by nature respond to symbols."

Diane Davis is a post-structuralist rhetorician and professor of Rhetoric and Writing, English, and Communication Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. She was the Director of the Digital Writing and Research Lab at UT from 2009 to 2017, and is now the chair of the Department of Rhetoric and Writing. She holds the Kenneth Burke Chair of Rhetoric and Philosophy at the European Graduate School in Saas-Fee, Switzerland, where she teaches intensive summer seminars on Jacques Derrida and Emmanuel Levinas.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theories of rhetoric and composition pedagogy</span>

Theories of rhetoric and composition pedagogy encompass a wide range of interdisciplinary fields centered on the instruction of writing. Noteworthy to the discipline is the influence of classical Ancient Greece and its treatment of rhetoric as a persuasive tool. Derived from the Greek work for public speaking, rhetoric's original concern dealt primarily with the spoken word. In the treatise Rhetoric, Aristotle identifies five Canons of the field of rhetoric: invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. Since its inception in the spoken word, theories of rhetoric and composition have focused primarily on writing

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitutive rhetoric</span>

Constitutive rhetoric is a theory of discourse devised by James Boyd White about the capacity of language or symbols to create a collective identity for an audience, especially by means of condensation symbols, literature, and narratives. Such discourse often demands that action be taken to reinforce the identity and the beliefs of that identity. White explains that it denotes "the art of constituting character, community and culture in language."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Invitational rhetoric</span>

Invitational rhetoric is a theory of rhetoric developed by Sonja K. Foss and Cindy L. Griffin in 1995.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Feminist rhetoric</span> Practice of rhetoric

Feminist rhetoric emphasizes the narratives of all demographics, including women and other marginalized groups, into the consideration or practice of rhetoric. Feminist rhetoric does not focus exclusively on the rhetoric of women or feminists, but instead prioritizes the feminist principles of inclusivity, community, and equality over the classic, patriarchal model of persuasion that ultimately separates people from their own experience. Seen as the act of producing or the study of feminist discourses, feminist rhetoric emphasizes and supports the lived experiences and histories of all human beings in all manner of experiences. It also redefines traditional delivery sites to include non-traditional locations such as demonstrations, letter writing, and digital processes, and alternative practices such as rhetorical listening and productive silence. According to author and rhetorical feminist Cheryl Glenn in her book Rhetorical Feminism and This Thing Called Hope (2018), "rhetorical feminism is a set of tactics that multiplies rhetorical opportunities in terms of who counts as a rhetor, who can inhabit an audience, and what those audiences can do." Rhetorical feminism is a strategy that counters traditional forms of rhetoric, favoring dialogue over monologue and seeking to redefine the way audiences view rhetorical appeals.

References

  1. ↑ Aylesworth, Gary (2015), "Postmodernism", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2015 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2021-10-20
  2. 1 2 Herrick, James A. (2018). The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction. New York: Routledge. pp. 10, 240–241. ISBN   978-1315404134.
  3. 1 2 3 Heath, Robert L. (2001). "Identification". In Sloane, Thomas O. (ed.). Encyclopedia of rhetoric. Oxford. ISBN   0-19-512595-9. OCLC   45282993.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  4. 1 2 3 4 Burke, Kenneth (1969). A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. p. xiv, 18–29.
  5. ↑ Gibson, Keith (2006). "Burke, Frazer, and Ritual: Attitudes toward Attitudes". KB Journal. 3.
  6. ↑ Rutton, Kris; Soetaert, Ronald (2014). "A Rhetoric of Turns: Signs and Symbols in Education". Journal of Philosophy of Education. 48 (4): 604–620. doi:10.1111/1467-9752.12081.
  7. ↑ Burke, Kenneth (1969). A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. p. xiv.
  8. 1 2 Burke, Kenneth (1974). "The Rhetorical Situation". In Thayer, Lee (ed.). Communication: Ethical and Moral Issues. Routledge. pp. 263–75. ISBN   9781138959644.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ratcliffe, Krista (2005). Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, Whiteness. Southern Illinois University Press. pp. 69, 75. ISBN   978-0-8093-2669-3.
  10. 1 2 3 Ballif, Michelle (2014). Re/Framing Identification . Long Grove: Waveland. pp.  1, 200, 309. ISBN   9781478606710.
  11. ↑ Lyon, Arabella (2013). Deliberative acts : democracy, rhetoric, and rights. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN   978-0-271-06222-8. OCLC   842262067.
  12. ↑ Downs, Douglas (2016). Rhetoric: Making Sense of Human Interaction and Meaning-Making. Macmillan Higher Education. pp. 458–481.
  13. ↑ Heath, Robert L.; Cheney, George; Ihlen, Øyvind (2018). "Identification". In Ihlen, Øyvind; Heath, Robert L. (eds.). The Handbook of Organizational Rhetoric and Communication. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. doi:10.1002/9781119265771. ISBN   978-1-119-26577-1. S2CID   151268288.
  14. ↑ Cheney, George (May 1983). "The rhetoric of identification and the study of organizational communication". Quarterly Journal of Speech. 69 (2): 143–158. doi:10.1080/00335638309383643. ISSN   0033-5630.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.