Arbitrary Nomenclature & Invented Disparity

             In his "Writing 'Race' and the Difference it Makes," Henry Gates claims that race must be in constant discourse with current events if it is to have any explanatory power. This racialized gaze seems to reflect a popular worldview apparent in my generation. Gates says that, "It was Hippolyte-Adolphe Taine who made the implicit explicit by postulating 'race, moment, and milieu' as positivistic criteria through which any work could be read and which, by definition, any work reflected" (3). Questioning whether or not art, rhetoric, or any other popular statements are patently offensive to a particular group seems to be a distinct worldview popular amongst my generation as well as the generation in their later 20's and even 30's.

Burke and Gates,Jr. Terministic Screen and Race

Once I read Gate's Writing "Race" And The Difference It Makes and Burke's Terministic Screens both theorists intersects race, identification, language, and it became very interesting to see how they each play a different role with terministic screens and how they function. Burke states how terministic screens are, "what we see is dependent on the filter, but terministic screens are not only filters; they become frames that mediate our immediate experiences within a collective consciousness," (45). This helps me have a better understanding to what Burke was trying to explain about how terminstic screens are connected to man or in this case race, "can position differences of degree and those based on differences of kind," (50), so screens can distinguish the way species differ from each other.

Language and Race: Entities of Action

Most individuals, apart from the special scholars of a highly educated discourse, can be accused of taking the term ‘race’ in its most literal sense. This very truth is exactly what hinders a population from progressing towards a more racial equality in society, particularly in the arena of literature. Though a broad and generic statement, what Gates argues for is new approach to racial theory in efforts to combat this ignorance. In a perfect coincidence, I have just completed another reading from Gates called “Talking Black” in my Critical Issues in Literary Studies course where we have been unpacking ethnicity and race theory. I have come to find that this essay provides a fresh perspective on race as an action, just as Burke combines language with action.

We're Breaking Free

Terministic screens are to be understood and why they are so important as it relates to everyday life. What we all see in everyday life is only one view that is guided by many implications based on past experiences and others' experiences as well. How does one break free from this and what does that mean?

Language That Perpetuates and the Different Feminisms

While the substitutions of “feminism” for “race,” “women” for “blacks,” “feminist” for “racial,” and “sex/gender” for “color” do not fit seamlessly into Henry Louis Gates, Jr.’s essay, they do certainly fit well enough to raise some new questions and bring about some new points. (Note: I also replaced “racism” with “sexism.) Many aspects of Gates Jr.’s essay about race are indeed the same aspects that would be part of an essay about feminism through its discussions of the implications of the different types of race/feminism and the way that the language we use can perpetuate racist and sexist ideas.

Race and Language

After reading the claims made by Burke in, “Terministic Screens,” about how language and word choice directly shapes our understanding, I can see how some of these principles can be directly attributed to the claims made by Hum in, “Racialized Gaze as Design,” in regards to racial attribution. I would like to take the time to take some of the practical’s that Hum is arguing she has seen happen in race portrayal and relate them to Burke’s idea of terministic screens. While reflecting on some of the ways that these texts relate, I found myself wondering a larger question. Can the idea of terministic screens relate to images? What are we saying about a situation by what we either choose to highlight or even leave out of our image?

Does "Race" Allow for Transcendence?

What makes the presence and discussion of race in literature and in society so problematic is its arbitrary nature. According to Gates, this is what makes race the “ultimate trope of difference” (6). While we, as a people, may have initially introduced the term as a means of identifying individuals based on their origin or their biological make-up (which I’m not entirely sure is even true), the concepts implementation has reached far beyond. Race is a man made term used to categorize people as the user sees fit. There are no guidelines or determinate characteristics for assigning someone a race. We just do it. We make assumptions and we place people according to how we see them fit within our pre-existing schemas.

Breaking Screens by Making Voices

Kenneth Burke describes what he calls “terministic screens” as being the filters through which humans perceive and know the world. These term/inistic screens are constructed and maintained, as its title suggests, through terms, language, logos. While this may seem straightforward, it’s crucial to understand in order to begin a dismantling of the terministic screen, for if words are the tools that humans use to construct reality, they are the tools needed to deconstruct it.

Race and Terministic Screens

Kenneth Burke clearly defines the distinction between a dramatistic and a scientific approach of looking at language. While a scientific approach looks at the naming or definition of the word, a dramatistic approach views it as symbolic action (language as an aspect of “action”) (Burke 44).  He compares terministic screens to an example of viewing a picture with different color filters.  He makes the observation that there was a notable distinction in form and texture depending on the color filter that was applied. The pictures were taken of the same objects but for the simple fact that they had different color filters they were viewed differently. This is what terministic screens is all about. Dreams, images, ideas, objects are subject to filters which will often bring about differences and distinction depending on the nature of their perception and interpretation.

In his article, Henry Louis Gates, Jr. writes about “race” and the difference it makes. He quotes Bakhtin’s statement that language becomes “one’s own”, once the speaker “adapts it to his own semantic and expressive intentions” (Gates 1).  The differences found in the term “race” arise from differences in language, ones belief system as well as natural attributes such as fidelity and athletic ability. Race has become a trope of differences between cultures, linguistic groups which often include economic interests of opposing scales but that’s besides the main point I am trying to make here.  We use language as a way to bring about “natural differences” into our everyday existence and race is a perfect example of this.

Hippolyte-Adolphe Taine said race was “the first and richest source of these master faculties from which historical events take their rise” (Gates 3). He focused his ideas on the role of race through the scientific approach in history of literature. Meaning that he took the pure meaning of the word “race” and put that into his own interpretation of what race meant and what it represented at the time.In Abraham Lincoln’s address in the White House in the year 1862 about the natural differences in race and how slaves differed from “us” and should return back to Africa, demonstrate the use of terministic screens in action.

If you take the term “race” and define it in scientific terms it is almost purely biological. It is something that genetically distinguishes us from one group in terms of race. When people think of the term “race” in a “scientific” approach they often likely to categorize themselves into the following categories: Asian, African American, American Indian, Pacific Islander or White.  But when thinking of race with the dramatistic approach one may associate the term “race” based on socio-economic class, education and even education. It all depends on the filter that we use to interpret the definition of race. In essence race truly only has one meaning and is intended for human classification. But taking into consideration Burke’s concept of terministic screens, there will always be various ways to view race and understand the dramatistic and scientific concept behind it.

Burke's Screens and Gate's Defenition of Race

    After reading Henry Gates essay, “Writing “Race” and the Difference It Makes”, the key factors or theory that Gates discusses, I feel, have a strong connection or correlation with Burkes terministic screens. We a individuals of society, have our perception and symbolic action in the world, determined by the language we surround ourselves in. While both essays stress many different things about how language works and is developed, I think that the strongest connection between the two is that language, is developed by where you are and who you are. In this blog I will discuss the key points that I feel best represent each theory, and the connection between them. 

Termanistic - Burke

"Termanistic Screens" are a big part of our world as we know it. This is determining and acknowledging a persons perspective in the world. This is a fancier way for Burke to describe verbal perspectives. I feel like this theory happens to me on a regular basis. The best way to describe it would be looking at something and seeing it as it is one minute, and then looking back at it and seeing it a different way, the next minute. I think it is how all people see things differently. I also think this theory can be applied to all aspects of life. Everyone sees something in their own way and own light. Burke hit this theory right on the head. Everyone questions things as they come across them and everyone wonders why things are the way they are. This theory is hard to explain in depth without sounding repetitive but I will do my best.

Burke mentions that we use the power of language to describe things and I think this is very obvious. I think things are blatantly missed to the human eye and I believe that is why we regularly see things one way and quickly see them differently the next time. This reminds me of a movie. I have watched the movie inception countless amounts of times and every time I realize I have missed something or some detail the previous times I have watched it. This term has me interested and I plan on finding out a lot more about it. I think Burke makes good points and I believe that other theorists may have also touched on this. I think that this theory can also apply to itself. It reminds me of hyperlinking as well. One person may write about something in particular, and another may write something similar but add a hyperlink to add what someone may have missed. I think this term can go a lot deeper than anyone may think.

Terministic Screens + Race

A “terministic screen” from what can be gleaned from Kenneth Burke’s work Terministic Screens could be considered as a lens in which one views the world. It is their filter of perception that guides them in creating or interpreting meaning. Terministic screens can inhibit and/or expand one’s world view, I contest that achieving transcendence is capable through the acknowledgement of the ways in which ones terministic screen can be limiting or expanding. This can be evidenced in action through the Henry Louis Gates Jr.’s introduction to Writing “Race” and the Difference It Makes. 

Laverne Cox takes on Terministic Screens

Burke begins “Terministic Screens,” by distinguishing the differences between two major approaches of terministic screens: “scientific” and “dramatistic” screens. He defends the idea that terministic screens allow us to form our own perception of the reality given the how we interact and create meaning form language. He differentiates scientific from dramatistic by stating, “scientific builds the edifice of language” and dramatistic, “puts primary stress on horatory expressions” (44). I plan on exploring on how the issue of transgender, given the media attention placed on Laverne Cox, can be viewed using these terministic screens.

Screening

Burke's idea on terministic screens is an ideal that is practiced in our everyday interactions. We unconsciously place ourselves and others into specific categories that essentially determine how open we will be with them. In the case of Burke, this means that we assign people terms, and based on those terms, appoint specific stereotypes based on what we have heard, seen, or encountered with the group, which ultimately determine if we identify with them or not.

Rhizomic screens?

Burke’s Terministic Screens opens a chasm of exploration in terms of perception and observation. Screens must necessarily presuppose that there is matter to be grappled with, and that these screens direct and affect the end result, according to the preexisting realities or circumstances. Terministic screens direct the attention, based on nomenclature, directing down one channel as opposed to other possibilities seeming form the requisite. (Terministic Screens, 45) Among these, Burke distinguishes from the scientific, as well as dramatistic. The scientific is distinct in that it has a more technical nature by naming and defining what is and is not (Burke, 44).

The opposing idea here is the dramatistic approach, in which there is the vital question of what should and should not be. Already one can identify that there is an objective approach when reflecting on the dramatistic approach. The former technique is empirically-based, simply informing constructions as they are, while the latter dialogues and constructs around some theoretical pillar, whether obscure or visible, thus is logic-based. Beyond this, there is a plurality, in that Burke would implicitly admit the acceptability of multiple conclusions that can be drawn, or more than one logical answer to a linear progression or singular problem. The screen’s primary function is that of direction, which might be equated to media portrayal of events circumstances, and therefore the truth itself.  In law, a witness is prompted to tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”. In advertising, in order to harness the most power over the consumer, one it’s imperative to tell “The truth, and nothing but the truth” while crucially leaving the whole truth out. The critical mass of human perception lies not simply in observing information, but to gather all the pertinent information to make decisions. A voter may vote for a politician based on a single issue they agree with, yet the politician may not be able to have any affect in regards to that issue if they have poor foreign policy planners or economic advisors.

Superficially, in a contrasting way, the rhizome works as an un-attributable matter (Deleuze & Guattari, 5), which is defined in its multiplicity of origin or even lack thereof. “any point of a rhizome can be connected to anything other, and must be.” This is very different from the tree or root, which plot s appoint, fixes an order. (Deleuze & Guattari, 7) To think of it analogously, where Burke’s terministic screen is predicated upon a trunk of prerequisite from which the branches grow, the rhizome, well, it’s been named after its analogy; it’s like a rhizome. To go along with this, it’s important to note what Deleuze & Guattari offer as sort of a condition on the rhizome: “The point is that a rhizome or multiplicity never allows itself to be overcoded, never has available a supplementary dimension over and above its number of lines, that is, over and above the multiplicity of numbers attached to those lines. All multiplicities are flat, in the sense that they fill or occupy all of their dimensions: we will therefore speak of a plane of consistency of multiplicities, even though the dimensions of this plane increase with the number of connections that are made on it.” Therefore, despite this seemingly open principle of multiplicity, there is still an analogous branch, in order for some kind of sense to be made from it.

While the rhizome seemed to be superficially contrasted, upon deeper inspection, it seems that at the most base levels of the rhizome and terministic screens, there is the agreed upon prerequisite that is a scope for understanding. In terministic screens, the nature of terms inherently affects the nature of observation (Burke, 46) while the nature of the connection and relation of one thing to another is what affects the nature of observation. In this way, a rhizome might even be thought of as a terministic screen with its distinguishing feature that the observation is defined by multiplicity.  

            

What does race have to do with Scandal and March Madness?

After reading Henry Louis Gates Jr.’s “Writing Race and the Difference It Makes” and E. Pauline Johnson’s “A Strong Race Opinion: On the Indian Girl in Modern Fiction”, it was evident that even though the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended all state and local laws requiring segregation, race, more specifically its integration into literature, is still very much an issue and a heavily debated subject matter.

This Screen is so Hyper

When I look at my roommate’s messy, next-door bedroom, I visualize a bigger mess, a slob. She’s not a slob, of course, but because my house was always pretty clean growing up, I have high standards for my own living quarters now. This is one tiny sliver of what makes up who I am and what I like, a fraction of my terministic screen. Here, I will compare the Landow’s concept of hypertext and intertextuality to Burke’s terministic screens.

Race as a Terministic Screen

Reading Burke's Terministic Screens, set the pace for Gate's Writing "Race" And The Difference It Makes. The class discussion we had about terministic screens and what it truly stands for made it really easy for me to make the connection between race and terministic screens, and how race functions as a terministic screen. While reading Gate's, I quickly picked up on the functionality of race as a terministic screen that is used by people who exist outside the minority race. I grasp the concept of race as a language that can be continued and discontinued by choice.

Does Hegemony Even Exist? Does Race?

We all know that society is extremely stereotypical. We also know that society is categorized into what is "dominant" and what is "inferior" based off of what is perceived by society as "reality". This week, my task was to discussion lead the word "hegemony" for lecture in tomorrow's class. As I read and reread through Gates' text about race, I obviously traced it in terms of hegemony. What I found was that yes, although hegemony is defined as what is dominant, I found that what classifies something as dominant, really has no true, solid meaning and therefore, should not exist. A white man is no better or worse than a black man, and a woman is no better or worse than a woman. Hegemony, in my opinion, does not really exist, because to each race, gender ethnicity, whatever it may be, they have their own classification of what is "hegemonic" and therefore, there really cannot be any sort of "top hegemony" unless it is God, but even then, God doesn't exist to atheists, so even then, there is no hegemonic category. 

Terministic Screens and Classifying Discourse

Burke's "Terministic Screens" and Miller's "Genre as Social Action" come together for me on a lot of levels. Burke discusses the transcendental nature of terministic screens and Miller discusses the classification of discourse and how genres help us to respond in certain ways to certain situations. In a way, terministic screens and genres seem to have a lot of similarites.

Human Rights Through Terministic Screens

In Burke’s text, he addresses a concept he coined, named terministic screens. This concept acknowledges a language system that determines how an individual perceives abstract notions such as symbols, meanings, and reality on a multimodal scale. Burke states in his text how there are two different kinds of terministic screens in existence. The first type is the scientistic approach, which “Begins with questions of naming, or definition (language as definition)” (44). Likewise, Burke invented the term scientistic. Secondly, we have the dramatistic approach which reads that it “Stresses language as an aspect of ‘action’ that is, as ‘symbolic action’ (language as act)” (44).

Correlation does not Equal Causation; Writing Race into Humanity

The term "race" forces a division within humanity similar to Burkes metaphorical associations of experience.  Instead of categorizing experiences into frames of meaning, language is used to categorize people into perceived biological and ideological casings, each is like the last and all are alike within their “compartment”. These casings that Gates refers to in terms of race share strong similarities to Burkes terministic screens, which he describes as means for “directing attention into some channels rather than others” (Burke 45).  These channels can be considered similarly to the mental avenues Burke described in previous works- they direct attention in a direction based on previous processing of similar information.  Burke explains his concept of terministic screens as “I have particularly in mind some photographs I once saw. They were different photographs of the same object, the difference being that they were made with different color filters. Here something so “factual as a photograph revealed notable distinctions in texture, even in form, depending upon which color filter was used for the documentary description of the event being recorded” (Burke 45). We can consider race as one of these filters- it imposes no intrinsic change on the photograph itself, it is still the same image and same materiality, yet it has a new implication because of the emotions evoked by the filter.

Canonical Rights In a Racist Society

It is apparent that Western Culture has been encaging "black" people inside of this arbitray concept of "race" by preaching false canonical right and wrong in literature.

TV Screens > Terministic Screens

     "A 'scientistic' approach begins with questions of naming, or definition. Or the power of language to define and describe may be viewed as derivative..." (Burke. 44.). As English majors, or at least for myself, it's hard to understand that there is can be a scientistic approach to language. While yes there are steps we go through to write an essay or present a project, we never think of these steps scientifically. Language for me has just been something we've learned to speak and write and the power of language simply defines the way you feel about a particular piece of work.

     "What I mean by the 'dramatistic,' stressing language as an aspect of 'action,' that is, as 'symbolic action'" (Burke. 44.). Now for me, the word "dramatistic" is not a difficult idea to apply when speaking about language and trying to understand what language is. Language can create action, such with a person telling someone to "go" or "leave" or "run." By using these terms, the speaker is hoping their audience will use these commands to create action, by literally going somewhere, leaving, or running to another place.

Viewing Disability Through Terministic Screens

While reading Kenneth Burke’s “Terministic Screens,” I could not help but think back to Ellen L. Barton’s reading, “Textual Practices of Erasure: Representations of Disability and the Founding of the United Way.” Barton’s reading includes images of posters that advertise charities for children and adults with disabilities. In Burke’s reading, he discusses a concept called terministic screens which acknowledges a language system that determines how a person perceives things such as symbols, meanings, and reality as whole. Burke states that there are two different kinds of terministic screens. First we have the scientistic approach which “Begins with questions of naming, or definition (language as definition)” (44). The dramatistic approach “Stresses language as an aspect of ‘action’ that is, as ‘symbolic action’ (language as act)” (44).  The posters that Barton shows us in her essay essentially lead us to Burke’s concept of terministic screens. When we as viewers look at these posters, we are all prone to different terministic screens that direct our attention to these images and ultimately determine how we perceive these campaign advertisements.