“Tragedy-lite” or “Melodrama”? In Search of a Standard Generic Tag

Abstract

Among critics who work from a dramatic or dramatistic perspective, our field seems to be at odds over what generic label or labels to use for discourse that is other, or mainly other, than comic or burlesque. For quite a long time, the name “tragic” was the stated or implied choice for much, or at least some, of that rhetoric. Some recent scholars are now describing such address as “melodramatic.” Their reasons for doing so carry some weight. This essay, however, argues for retention of “tragic frame” as title of choice for explicitly persuasive speech of the most virulent, victimizing kind.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Editor John C. Meyer, Professor Jim A. Kuypers, and anonymous reviewers for their encouragement and valuable insights and suggestions offered during preparation of this essay.

Notes

See, e.g., Burke, 1931/1968, pp. 153–155, 162, 198–212; 1935/1954, pp. 195–198, 283–294; 1937/1984, pp. 34–105 & n pp. 44–47, 166–175,188–190 n, 313; 1941/1973, pp. 39–66, 191–220; 1945/1969a, pp. 38–41, 59–77, 317–320, 406–408, 514–517; 1950/1969b, pp. 260–267; 1961/1970, pp. v–vi, 1–5, 172–272, 295–316; 1966, pp. 16–22, 81–94, 189–192, 380–409. Burke tends to use generic labels more explicitly in his first four books on literary theory, criticism, and communication. Many of the passages above are implicitly about tragedy or comedy, etc. A careful reader can infer generic references after extensive exposure to Burke's thought. For example, the first chapter in ATH, 1937/1984, especially pp. 5–21 on James, Whitman, and Emerson, is replete with comedic insights not directly labeled as such.

See, e.g., http://www.english.iup.edu/liberalstudies/gay_teen_suicide.htm; http://www.center4research.org/suicide.html; http://www.soulforce.org/article/653#oregonsurvey (accessed April 7, 2008).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Edward C. Appel

Edward C. Appel, Lock Haven University of Pennsylvania.