<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="ru">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id" xml:lang="ru">Литература двух Америк</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Литература двух Америк</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn publication-format="print">2541-7894</issn>
      <issn publication-format="electronic">2542-243X</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name xml:lang="ru">ИМЛИ РАН</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">https://doi.org/10.22455/2541-7894-2020-9-81-105</article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group subj-group-type="article-type" xml:lang="ru">
          <subject/>
        </subj-group>
        <subj-group subj-group-type="heading" xml:lang="ru">
          <subject>Статьи</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>«Чем я занимаюсь, как не словами?»: Кеннет Берк и «новая критика»</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru">
            <surname>М. Элизабет Вайзер</surname>
          </name>
          <email>editor@litda.ru</email>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date pub-type="collection">
        <year>2020</year>
      </pub-date>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright © 2026, IWL RAS</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2026</copyright-year>
      </permissions>
      <abstract>Большинство специалистов по Кеннету Берку считают этого американского мыслителя основателем сложившейся в послевоенные годы «новой риторики» – школы, выступавшей за то, чтобы в изучении риторики перенести акцент с приемов убеждения, которые исторически занимали центральное место в данной дисциплине, на более многоплановый анализ языка, диалога и коллективно вырабатываемых представлений. Однако на протяжении 1930-х и 1940-х годов Берк считал себя прежде всего литературоведом, хотя и таким, который применял инструменты теории литературы к окружающим его социальным реалиям. Вполне вероятно, что без диалога – нередко переходящего в спор – со школой «новой критики» Берк так и не сформулировал бы свои риторические теории о возможности понять мотивы человеческих поступков через язык. Поэтому «новая критика» и «новая риторика» формировали друг друга в середине столетия в горниле кризиса и войны, которые послужили катализаторами для многих интеллектуальных течений. Пытаясь донести свою позицию до литературоведов и призывая их обратить критический взгляд на мир вокруг себя, Берк выработал свою методологию анализа действий в общественно-политической сфере. В статье анализируются три таких диалога-спора Кеннета Берка: с Алленом Тейтом до Второй мировой войны, с Джоном Кроу Рэнсомом во время войны и с Рене Уэллеком в послевоенные годы. Дискуссии и переклички с ними подтолкнули Берка сформулировать преднамеренно двойственное понимание иерархий и норм, составляющих то, что он называл парламентскими «прениями», риторическая структура которых и сегодня определяет международные отношения.</abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="B1">
        <label>1.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “As I Was Saying.” Michigan Quarterly Review 11 (1972): 9–27. Burke, K. Counter-Statement (1931). 3rd rev. ed. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1968.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B2">
        <label>2.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. A Grammar of Motives, New York: Prentice-Hall (1945); Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B3">
        <label>3.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “On Poetry and Poetics.” Review of The World's Body, by John Crowe Ransom. Poetry 55 (1939): 51–54.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B4">
        <label>4.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. The Philosophy of Literary Form: Studies in Symbolic Action. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press (1941); 3rd rev. ed., Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1973.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B5">
        <label>5.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “The Problem of the Intrinsic (as Reflected in the Neo-Aristotelian School).” Accent 3: 80–94.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B6">
        <label>6.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “Questions for Critics.” Direction 2 (1939): 12–13.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B7">
        <label>7.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “Semantic and Poetic Meaning.” Southern Review 4 (1939): 501–23.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B8">
        <label>8.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “The Study of Symbolic Action.” Chimera 1:1 (1942): 7–16.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B9">
        <label>9.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “Symbolic War.” Rev. of Proletarian Literature in the United States, ed. Granville Hicks. Southern Review 2 (1936): 134–47.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B10">
        <label>10.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “The Tactics of Motivation.” Chimera 2:1 (1943): 37–53.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B11">
        <label>11.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Burke, K. “Tentative Proposal.” Rev. of The Mediterranean, and Other Poems and Reactionary Essays on Poetry and Ideas, by Allen Tate. Poetry 50 (1937): 96–100.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B12">
        <label>12.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Denning, M. The Cultural Front: The Laboring of American Culture in the Twentieth Century. New York: Verso, 1996.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B13">
        <label>13.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Empson, W. Seven Types of Ambiguity (1930). New York: New Directions, 1966.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B14">
        <label>14.</label>
        <mixed-citation>George, A. Kenneth Burke’s Permanence and Change. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2018.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B15">
        <label>15.</label>
        <mixed-citation>George, A., Selzer, J. Kenneth Burke in the 1930s. Columbia, SC: University   of South Carolina Press, 2007.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B16">
        <label>16.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Habermas, J. The Divided West, ed. and trans. Ciaran Cronin. Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2005.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B17">
        <label>17.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Hicks, G. Granville Hicks in The New Masses, ed. Jack Alan Robbins. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat, 1974.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B18">
        <label>18.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Josephson, M. Life among the Surrealists. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B19">
        <label>19.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Knickerbocker, W. "Wam for Maw." Rev. of The Philosophy of Literary Form, by K. Burke, and The New Criticism, by J.C. Ransom. Sewanee Review 44 (1941): 520–36.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B20">
        <label>20.</label>
        <mixed-citation>“New England Meeting.” CEA Critic 11:6 (1949): 6–7.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B21">
        <label>21.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Pells, R. The Liberal Mind in a Conservative Age: American  Intellectuals in  the 1940s and 1950s. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1989.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B22">
        <label>22.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Ransom, J.C. “An Address to Kenneth Burke.” Rev. of The Philosophy of Literary Form, by Kenneth Burke. Kenyon Review 4 (1942): 219–37.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B23">
        <label>23.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Ransom, J.C. Selected Letters of John Crowe Ransom, ed. Thomas Daniel Young and George Core. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1985.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B24">
        <label>24.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Ransom, J.C. The World's Body. New York: Scribner, 1938.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B25">
        <label>25.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Said, E. The World, the Text, and the Critic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B26">
        <label>26.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Shapiro, E.S. “Forward: A Forgotten American Classic.” Who Owns  America? A New Declaration of Independence, ed. Herbert Agar and Allen Tate (1936). Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, 1999.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B27">
        <label>27.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Tate, A. Collected Essays. Denver, CO: Swallow, 1959.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B28">
        <label>28.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Tate, A. “Mr. Burke and the Historical Environment.” Southern Review 3 (1936): 363–72.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B29">
        <label>29.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Tate, A. “Poetry and Politics.” New Republic (2 August 1933): 308–11.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B30">
        <label>30.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Tell, D. “Burke’s Encounter with Ransom: Rhetoric and Epistemology in ‘Four Master Tropes’.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 34:4 (2004): 33–54.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B31">
        <label>31.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Warren, R.P. “Pure and Impure Poetry.” The New Criticism and Contemporary Literary Theory: Connections and Continuities, eds. W. Spurlin and M. Fischer. New York: Garland, 1995: 19–44.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B32">
        <label>32.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Weiser, M.E. “‘As Usual I Fell on the Bias’: Kenneth Burke’s Situated Dialec- tic.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 42:2 (2009): 134–153.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B33">
        <label>33.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Weiser, M.E. Burke, War, Words: Rhetoricizing Dramatism. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2008.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B34">
        <label>34.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Wellek, R. “Kenneth Burke and Literary Criticism.” Sewanee Review 79 (1971): 171–188.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B35">
        <label>35.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Wellek, R. “Literary History.” Literary Scholarship: Its Aims and Methods, ed. Norman Foerster. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1941: 89–130.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B36">
        <label>36.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Wellek, R. “The Main Trends of Twentieth-Century Criticism.” Yale Review 51:1 (1961): 102–18.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B37">
        <label>37.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Wellek, R. “The Mode of Existence of a Literary Work of Art.” Southern Review 7 (1942): 735–54.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B38">
        <label>38.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Wess, R. Kenneth Burke: Rhetoric, Subjectivity, Postmodernism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="B39">
        <label>39.</label>
        <mixed-citation>Wess, R. “Situating Burke’s Thought.”  Conversations.  KB  Journal  1:1 (2005). Online at https://kbjournal.org/node/79</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>
