[KB] [Fwd: Re: FW: Where did Burke say this?]

G. Henderson ghenders at chass.utoronto.ca
Fri Mar 6 11:53:32 EST 2009


Hi Clarke,

I can think of one thing that might be worth checking out.  I  seem to remember a response that Burke made in Critical Inquiry, a response to Fredric Jameson's "The Symbolic Inference," which was published in the same journal if memory serves.  That might explain Burke's use of the word "materiality."

It's a long shot, to be sure, and I can't find my copy of the journal.

Cheers,
Greig
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: rountrj at uah.edu 
  To: kb at purdue.edu 
  Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 12:33 PM
  Subject: [KB] [Fwd: Re: FW: Where did Burke say this?]


  Thanks everyone for the help. It looks like she's barking up the wrong tree on this one.

  Clarke

  ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- 
  Subject: Re: [KB] FW: Where did Burke say this? 
  From: "Stan Lindsay" <slindsa at yahoo.com> 
  Date: Thu, March 5, 2009 11:01 am 
  To: "\"" <blakesle at purdue.edu> 
  "Kenneth Burke Discussion List" <kb at purdue.edu> 
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

  I searched my expanded concordance and couldn't find any use of the terms "delineate," "materiality," or "symbolization."  That doesn't mean he never used them, but it adds to the developing conclusion. 
   Stan A. Lindsay, Ph.D. 
  Department of Communication 
  Florida State University 
  slindsa at yahoo.com 
  http://www.stanlindsay.com 




  ________________________________ 
  From: David Blakesley <blakesle at purdue.edu> 
  To: Kenneth Burke Discussion List <kb at purdue.edu> 
  Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 6:15:01 AM 
  Subject: Re: [KB] FW: Where did Burke say this? 

  The closest I could find to the passage Clarke mentioned is in "What Are the Signs of What" in Language as Symbolic Action where Burke talks about how an infant "receives through its senses the impressions of nonverbal things" (see p. 362). It's an idea that he repeats in the Chapin documentary also. Burke mentions there that infant means "speechless." Burke's discussion actually does sound a lot like this Schopenhauer idea (nice find Drew!) 

  Dave 


  On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Drew Kopp <kopp at email.arizona.edu> wrote: 

  "If anyone standing before a beautiful landscape could for a moment be deprived of all understanding, then for him nothing of the whole view would be left but the sensation of a very manifold affection of his retina, resembling the many blobs of different colors on an artist's palette. These are, so to speak, the raw material from which just a moment previously his understanding created that intuitive perception. In the first weeks of life the infant feels with all its senses; it does not intuitively perceive, does not apprehend; it therefore stares stupidly at the world" (Schopenhauer _On Vision and Colors_ Payne translation 12). 
    
  The use of the word "infant" reminded me of this passage from Schopenhauer's early text (1818). In any case, the "Burkean" passage is very Kantian, that is, transcendental, which invokes a priori conditions (rooted in faculties such as the "understanding," or "reason," AKA symbolization) for the possibility of experience (and of any cognition of that experience). Schopenhauer certainly tried to extend this line of thinking in his own way, and I imagine Burke was familiar with his work (though he only makes a passing reference to Schopenhauer in P&C, and a not so generous one at that), and so in some ways had to contend with the seductive powers of transcendental reasoning. 
   Drew 
    
    
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jim Moore 
  To: kb at purdue.edu 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 8:08 PM 
  Subject: [KB] FW: Where did Burke say this? 

  kb folks: 

  Is the quotation Clarke is trying to locate actually Burke?  It's hard to 
  know out of context but, as is, it sounds more categorical than I would 
  expect when I read "the sole means by which humans come to know 
  that materiality."  I think Burke had enough of a sense of humor to 
  use an example like a baseball bat to the head to refute that bit of 
  piffle.  The final sentence sounds very Burkean but maybe isn't Burke. 
  I'm curious anyway. 

  Jim 





  ________________________________ 
  Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:05:04 -0600 
  From: rountrj at uah.edu 
  To: kb at purdue.edu 
  Subject: [KB] Where did Burke say this? 

  Fellow Burkelers-- 

  I got a request from a fellow scholar trying to locate the following quotation in Burke (if it's his): 

  > 
  > "believe that symbolization is the sole means by which humans come to know 
  > that materiality. . . . . Prior to symbolization, the material world looks 
  > much like the hazy outlines an infant might see. It is symbolization . . 
  > . which enables humans to discern, delineate, order, and value reality." 
  > 
  Is sounds like P&C to me, but I'm away from my office and unable to check. Anyone know? 

  Clarke Rountree 
  ________________________________ 
  Messenger has tons of new features that make chatting more fun. Click here to learn more. 
  ________________________________ 
  Tell the whole story with photos, right from your Messenger window. Learn how! 
  ________________________________ 

  _______________________________________________ 
  KB Discussion List 
  KB at lists.purdue.edu 
  https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/kb 

  _______________________________________________ 
  KB Discussion List 
  KB at lists.purdue.edu 
  https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/kb_______________________________________________ 
  KB Discussion List 
  KB at lists.purdue.edu 
  https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/kb 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  KB Discussion List
  KB at lists.purdue.edu
  https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/kb
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed


More information about the KB mailing list