Reflective Blog Post 2

            In Krista Ratcliff’s article “Rhetorical Listening,” she directly engages with rhetorical theorist Kenneth Burke’s concept of identification and critiques this “traditional identification” when stating that, “Differences are often glossed over or erased, left outside the circle of consubstantiality” (Ratcliff 208). Burke himself recognized this issue with identification when acknowledging division, its “ironic counterpart” (Burke 1327). However, the Burkean solution to division is unclear, and it is this deficiency that Ratcliff seeks to correct by developing her theory of rhetorical listening.

Burke’s “Definition of Man” can be seen as a part of a project to highlight the ways in which all men are consubstantial and thus provide a means by which we can all identify with one another, thus alleviating Ratcliff’s concern for glossed over differences. However, if one is to rhetorically listen to Burke’s piece, one can hear the echoes of his culture throughout (in his several references to the Cold War) and pinpoint areas where certain peoples are being erased—for example, his inclusion of hierarchy in his definition of man makes those at the bottom of social hierarchies seem almost complicit in their subjugation. The strength of Ratcliff’s rhetorical listening does not only rest in the fact that it fills the gaps of Burkean identification by accounting for and acknowledging the differences lost in this process, but she also provides a way in which we can analyze texts to “hear” the gaps that need to be filled.