Abstract

This early letter plainly embodies Burke's conflicting views about the constituents of the aesthetic experience. Is the delight of literature a hysteric result of the work's overlap with an audience's ideology-the nodus of beliefs and judgments in a work? Or is the pleasure the result of a technical response to the formal qualities of art? The answer in the letter to Cowley suggests that the enjoyment is an unproblematic result of both the ideological and the technical, the rhetorical and the formal. But the incipient contradiction contained even in this early and tentative resolution seems to haunt Burke throughout his career, most clearly ghosted in his first book of criticism, Counter-Statement.1 To announce that this wrinkle can be found in many of the pages of Counter-Statement probably trespasses on the platitudinous. From the earliest reviews of the book, such as that of Granville Hicks in the 2 December 1931 issue of The New Republic, to its most contemporary explication, such as Jack Selzer's article in Rhetoric Society Quarterly, the unsettling tension . . . between the aesthetic and the social is given place and sometimes even described as the animating principle of the book (Selzer 37). As Selzer notes, most of the major critics of Granville Hicks, Isidor Schneider, Robert Penn Warren, Armin Paul Frank, Paul Jay, Grieg E. Henderson, William H. Rueckert, and Frank Lentricchia, and even Burke himself note the internally-contradictory character of Counter-Statement, each with his own manner of reconciling, laying bare, or judging the discordant timber (45-46). What is absent in the criti-