Burke Readings

Well, let me start by saying yikes! These readings were really abstract for me and I didn't fully understand any of the information. It was a really heavy content. 

I'll start with the (Nonsymbolic) Motion/(Symbolic) Action reading, with just a few things I did understand. 

Burke talks about the "Self" and "Culture" as being intertwined but separate. This made sense to me because it relates to me. I am a part of the Houghton culture as a college student, but I am different than all other college students in the Houghton area. I am also a part of the American culture, but I am much different than any all other Americans. He then says that intuitive signaling systems used by the cultures such as bees and ants can't be considered symbolic action. I didn't fully understand this part. He says they're not conventional or arbitrary, such as human speech. Human speech, he discussed, is something that has to be learned, which I agree with and disagree with. I understand certain parts of speech must be learned, but certain parts are also intuitive and can be learned without being explicitly taught, like grammar in children. They start to learn the language and speech rules, but you can tell they're not simply mimicking adults because of the grammatical errors they make.

He talks a lot about words, and the origin of words as well. He says corporeal ideas like "hot" and "cold", which are words for physical sensations eventually created "hot-head" and "cold-blooded". This interests me and this is something I can understand - the evolution of words. He also says how Caesar and the man he was inspired words like "Czar" and "Kaiser". This is cool to think about too, that one man can inspire words. The talk about "Self" made sense and it didn't make sense. I understand when Burke says that the sensations felt by the self are immediate, so the only one that feels it is the "Self". That was about all I got out of his "Self" discussion. 

He did talk about motion and action, which makes sense given the title of the reading. He says that motion can be present without action, but that action cannot be present without motion. I partially understood this, I think. He said something about sea creatures; that the sea can thrash about (motion) whether or not there are animals to create action. This made sense, it positions motion as more of a natural phenomena  where as action must be created by some being. The reverse also makes sense, given the previous statement. There can't be action without motion because motion precedes action?

The Psychology and Form reading presented just as much confusion for me as the previous reading, though it was shorter to read. 

Burke begins with a breakdown of a scene from Hamlet. He discusses the difference between psychology and form, though I don't fully understand. He positions psychology to be the audience as well as form to be the positioning of the psychology for the audience? The way the author writes something is form, and when the writing involves the desires of the audience (for whom the writing is written for), it becomes psychology? It seemed like a lot of loops to me that I just couldn't follow. He says psychology has become a body of information, which I can slightly understand because of how we process information. Or at least, I think I can understand? 

Burke talks about music and repetition as well. He says that music can handle repetition where as pure information cannot. This makes sense to me, since he went on to say that music is "least suited to the psychology of information, and is closer to the psychology of form. So, then, form is the way something is conveyed, and music allows for easier conveyance of repetition because one doesn't expect so much pure information in a song. Burke explains that information cannot handle repetition because "the aesthetic value of information is lost once that information is imparted".

The extra definition of form helped to give me a wide spectrum of understanding (at least more than the first part did). The reading described Form, Syllogistic progression, Qualitative progression, Repetitive form, Conventional form, Minor or incidental forms, Interrelation of forms, Conflict of forms, Rhyme and rhythm, and Significant form. These helped when I read in depth a bit more, but overall, these readings really confused me.