Burke’s pentad presents a simple tool for analyzing dramatic situations that can be used to examine texts and other narratives. This framework describes such elements as act, agent, scene, agency, and purpose, as well as their relations. Burke’s pentad can be used to identify an actor’s motivation in a given dramatic scene. On the example of one of Jeff Wall’s photographs, it is illustrated how the motivation of an actor in this paradigm can be described in different ways in terms of the viewer’s focus.
Kenneth Burke’s life stance is based on several leading points, and their analysis contributes to an awareness of the meaning of human behavior. He drew the most significant attention to language as the basis that leads to conscious action rather than involuntary movement. Rhetor holds that acts are related to the neurological aspect of human existence, defined as the body’s ability to master the sign system (Bonanno, 2018).
Since the rhetorician models his description on the principle of drama, it consists of five elements: act, agent, scene, agency, and purpose (Hawhee & Poole, 2019). These are the basic parameters of rhetorical analysis and the foundation of the pentad, which examines human action from five interacting motivational perspectives. In this fivefold approach, the individual is an actor who acts purposefully through specific means, and he serves as the backdrop of a historical place of motion. Jensen (2018) explains that Burke was guided by the fact that every individual can influence his life by his actions, but possibilities always depend on five means. The pentad determines how an individual acts in a certain case and what his motivation is.
In addition, it is essential to prioritize the connections that the rhetorician makes in speech between these five dramatic elements. These connections are called relations, and depending on which structural elements are emphasized, the rhetor’s strategy and identification are determined (Jensen, 2018). In the communication process, there is an exchange of characters and a constant desire to identify the sender’s views and the recipient of speech (Lynch, 2017). Thus, these aspects link the actor and other elements of the dramatic situation.
Analysis using Burke’s pentad also depends on what the viewer is focusing on. For example, this framework can be used to analyze paintings and photographs. In this paper, we will take for this photo taken by Jeff Wall in 1986, which is titled The thinker. Identified elements:
- Agent: an old man;
- Act: sitting and looking into the distance;
- Agency: empty space;
- Scene: early morning in an elevated city;
- Purpose: meditation.
In this situation, when analyzing, the viewer builds a description of the dramatic scene based on the available information. In particular, without paying attention to the title of the photograph, it is impossible to clearly determine the motivation of the actor since it may depend on the perception of the viewer. However, if you have more information and know that Woll reconstructed the famous sculpture of the same name in this photograph, the motivation of the actor and his relations with other elements immediately change. Additionally, the photographer himself can act as the author or rhetor, in which case Burke’s pentad will describe his motivation and connections with other elements of the scene.
Thus Burke’s pentad can be used to identify an actor’s motivation in a particular dramatic situation. However, the interaction of elements has a key influence on what conclusions can be drawn from the application of this framework. Thus Burke’s pentad helps the viewer identify the various components of the scene that ultimately force the action. As illustrated by the analysis of Wall’s photograph, an actor’s motivation can change depending on its constituent elements.
References
Bonanno, J. N. (2018). Capital as the lens that Bourdieu Pierres through: Public relations, social theory, and rhetoric. Public Relations Review, 44(3), 385-392. Web.
Hawhee, D., & Poole, M. (2019). Kenneth Burke at the MoMA: A viewer’s theory. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 105(4), 418-440. Web.
Jensen, K. (2018). Rhetorical counteraction in Kenneth Burke’s a rhetoric of motives and the war of words. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 104(4), 384-399. Web.
Lynch, P. (2017). Rescuing Rhetoric: Kenneth Burke, René Girard, and Forms of Conversion. Contagion: Journal of Violence, Mimesis, and Culture, 24(1), 139-158. Web.
Wall, J. (1986). The thinker. E-Flux. Web.