Drifting on a Read, Dramatism, Burke and Jazz

I initially found "Drifting on a Read" by Michael Jarrett to be a little confusing.  Or perhaps a bit simplistic and sort of indulgent.  It made much more sense when I read the Elements of Dramatism by David Blakesley.  I understood finally just how the Burkean Pentad was being applied to element of a Jazz theory.  Jarrett takes a simple quote from Louis Armstrong, a jazz great and provides rhetorical application in a variety of contexts.  Jarrett explores in these possible  explications, the idea of scene and purpose and agency/agent.  There is a nice synthesis between the two texts.  Blakesley elucidates the Burkean ideas of contextualization and dialectic, he explains dramatism and the pentad through the lens of the Columbine massacre.  Jarrett uses the example of many possible meanings from a single quote.  

The most interesting thing I was able to glean from Jarrett was the idea that in writing and composition we often emphasize what is known, what is explicated and that we don't allow the space for speculation.  He allows speculation its place within the rhetorical structure and he ties it to ideas of jazz improvisation.  

He improvises through speculation and explores how the many possible layers of meaning that could come from a single utterance might further open possibilities for creativity and rhetoric.    Jarrett approaches the idea of jazz studies in composition in a variety of ways.  He does it in historical context with quote and also in theoretical context when he discusses his own purpose in writing the book and ties his work to the work of the writers that have come before.  He examines his own ambition in doing something different than others have perhaps done in their writing about jazz.  

Blakesley on the other hand stays within a theoretical and rhetorical tradition, his work is to contextualize, provide historical understanding and break down the work of Kenneth Burke in manageable chunks that are interpreted and discussed in depth.  I found both his theoretical discussions of the theory and also his examples of the pentad at use to be helpful.  When the terms are being discussed they always feel a little abstract and vague to me, but here, they seem to have an actual use and purpose.  

I felt his affinity with Burke's larger context and purpose to be tender and sweet.  I got the feeling that so much of what Burke was trying to do was to reason with the time he was living in.  He wanted to come to grips with the things that motivate people, especially when they are committing atrocious acts.  Burke wanted to see how we could do it through rhetoric.  How we could, as humans, create dialogue with our own actions as a collective and as individuals.  How do we really understand what happens with language and action?  It is a noble attempt and worthwhile.

Perhaps jazz studies can do similar things for composition, perhaps it could break us out of our comfortable frameworks and plummet us into a land of play and free form improvisational creation.