I think that Ratcliffe's rhetorical theory covers an aspect of audience identification that Burke glazed over. Burke's rhetorical theory focused a lot on identification, specifically symbols and signifiers, self identification, and audience identification. However, gender and intersectionality weren't discussed by Burke and this is where Ratcliffe steps in. Burke's audience is ideal, can connect to the rhetor who has then also connected to oneself and what they speak of. But what happens when the connection between what is being said and who it is being said to can't be effectively established? Ratcliffe discusses how the way that audiences listen and interpret what is being said is a huge part of the rhetoric itself, besides what Burke has already studied. Just like Burke said, Ratcliffe speaks about self identification, especially a listeners self identification within what the rhetor is saying. This can lead to moments where an inclusion of a detail of self identity can actually alienate those in the audience just as much as it may bring them in personally. Exclusion can create a disconnect between rhetor and listener, an unavoidable dilemma, especially in moments regarding intersectionality. "Why is it so hard to listen to one another when we feel excluded?" (197), exclusion by omission or by inclusion of targeted details in the rhetoric, something that Burke somewhat covers in his theory, is brought up and expanded upon by Ratcliffe.
No comments:
Post a Comment