Act 1
Scene 7 Enron & The Septet
In this section varieties of Enron spectacles are analyzed using the dramatistic elements. For Aristotle (350 BCE) spectacle was the least important of six dramatic elements (plot, character, theme, dialog, rhythm, & spectacle). Kenneth Burke (1945: 231) aligns Aristotle’s (350BCE) six Poetics elements with the five dramatistic terms of the Pentad. Burke’s “plot would correspond to act,” “character would correspond to agent,” theme to purpose, dialog and rhythm combine in agency, and spectacle is classed under scene. In short, Burke redesigned Aristotle’s six elements into the now famous Pentad of dramatist elements (act, agent, agency, scene & purpose). I would like to follow a different approach, keeping part of Aristotle and Burke, but putting them into a more postmodern template, I call the “Septet.” In this chapter, I develop a Septet dramatism to decode spectacle theatrics (plots, characters, themes, dialogs, rhythms, spectacles, & frames) of Enron.
Septet - I propose a 7-element model for studying spectacles using dramaturgical methods. The model contextualizes spectacles within the dramatist elements of plots, characterizations, themes, dialogs, rhythms, and frames (but defines them differently than Aristotle or Burke). I restore several Aristotelian elements, such as plot, character, dialog, and rhythm that Burke’s Pentad (act, agent, purpose, agency, and scene) combined or disregarded. I intend a more critical postmodern dramaturgy that can contrast spectacles of corporate theatrics. Besides Burke and Aristotle, I look to Boal and Debord to derive seven elements of dramatist in capitalism, or the Septet. Table 1 summaries the terms of Aristotle, Burke, and my proposal.
Table 1: Poetic, Pentad, and Septet Grammars
Poetic (Aristotle) / Pentad (Burke) / Septet1. Plot / 1. Act / 1. Plots
2. Character / 2. Agent / 2. Characterizations
3. Theme / 3. Purpose / 3. Themes
4. Dialog / 4. Agency / 4. Dialogs
5. Rhythm / 4. Agency / 5. Rhythms
6. Spectacle / 5. Scene / 6. Spectacles
* Frame of Mind of spectator / * Frame / 7. Frames
Key: * = Discussed, but not one of their main dramaturgical elements (Source of Table, Boje, 2002c).
Boal (1979), bends Aristotle's Poetics, but takes it along a much more critical postmodern turn, while integrating Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed with Poetics into a Poetics of the Oppressed. We will look at this turn in subsequent chapters. Boal suggests that spectators can be invited to become actors on the stage, or actors can invade the audience. In Boal’s (1991) terms spectators become actors critically reflecting upon their complicity in situations of oppression as spect-actors.
I add an element that Burke (1972: 23) says; "many times on later occasions” he "regretted" not including Fame to his Pentad. Aristotle (350 BCE: 1356a: 2) in Rhetoric also addresses the concept of Frame (defined differently), but also does not list it as one of the Poetic elements. For Aristotle frame is “putting the audience into a certain frame of mind” (Rhetoric, 1356a: 2). Burke (1937 Attitudes Toward History), on the other hand, views frame as a more macro viewpoint, as dialectic between "Frames of Acceptance"and "Frames of Rejection."
In Table 3 I derive each term in Aristotle, then show how it is revised in Burke, and how it could be resituated for contemporary use in our study of Enron leaders and other characters whose various plots, themes, dialogs, and rhythms interact with the spectacles we will explore. Terms in parentheses (such as Fable, Agent, Thought, Diction & Melody) are alternative terms used by Aristotle. It is important to note that the meaning of terms in Table 1 has changed across the centuries. The Septet terms form, I hope, a grammar of corporate theatre as well as a grammar that can be applied to situations of oppression. Table 2 offers a more detailed derivation and definition of the 7 elements of the Septet. For the first element, I prefer Plots to Burke’s Acts since plot is constituted by the incidents in the story. For Aristotle these incidents arouse pity and fear in spectators, and in contemporary leadership studies, would constitute a form of control. Characters, to me, has more utility than Agents, since characters can change their personages or masks during dramatic performance. Themes and Purposes are used by Burke and Aristotle in similar ways. For me Themes get at cartharsis and theme analysis is worked out by Freire (1970) in ways that are dramaturgical, and useful to the present study. Dialogs and Rhythms are both aspects of Agency for Burke. I prefer to treat them separately. Dialogs can be scripted and used to persuade and to control. Rhythms were too obvious for Aristotle to comment upon, but I propose that there is more going on than just patterned speech or melody. Rather, rhythm is part of self-organizing processes that affect the emergence and demise of spectacles. Spectacles, for me, has more to offer to the present analysis, than Scenes. Spectacles have scenes, but there is more to spectacle than what the costumier does, or the situational backdrop to characters, plots, and other elements. Finally, Frames, is for Aristotle the “frames of mind” of spectators, and for Burke, the worldviews, that constitute the dialectic trajectory of social and dramatic action.Aristotle and Burke have different theories of dialectic. For Aristotle, the dialectic worked toward progress. For Burke, the dialectic is Frames of Acceptance opposed by Frames of Rejection. In sum, I believe that the seven elements in Table 2 provide a way to more fully analyze spectacles.
Table 2: The Septet Grammar
SEPTET
1. Plots – (or Fable) - to “act” says Aristotle is “dran” (1448b: 35).[i][i] Plot is “the incidents of the story” (1450a: 15) and the “construction of a story” (1450a: 36); the “combination of the incidents, or things done in the story” (1450a: 4-4). Plot is the way stories are framed (1449b: 5). In tragedy, included incidents arouse pity and fear in the spectators (1453b: 1), who then purge themselves of tragic flaws viewed in the play (e.g. seeing the suffering by some deed of horror or error of judgment). In comedy, the bitterest enemies walk off good friends at the end of their conflict. Episodic plots are not as tightly wound.2. Characters – (or Agent) - “agents” says Aristotle, are “either good men or bad – the diversities of human character being nearly always derivative from this primary distinction, since the line between virtue and vice is one dividing the whole of mankind” (1448a: 1). Agents are the “personages” [that] act the story” (1448b: 30). Agents are the actors who “act the stories” (1449b: 31). “Character is what makes us ascribe certain moral qualities to the agents” (1450a: 5). “Character in a play is that which reveals the moral purpose of the agents, i.e. the sort of thing they seek or avoid…” (1450b: 8; also 1454a: 18).
3. Themes – (or Thought) – Like purpose for Burke, “Thought is shown in all they [agents] say when proving a particular point” (1450a: 6, bracketed additions mine). “Thought, i.e. the power of saying whatever can be said, or what is appropriate to the occasion” (1450b: 5). A tragic theme is a catharsis of the emotions of pity and fear in the spectators (1449b: 25). Thought (theme) says Aristotle is already developed elsewhere in “Art of Rhetoric” (1456a: 35). Freire (1970) develops thematic analyses of oppression.
4. Dialogs – (or Diction) – Dialog is the “means of their [i.e. stories’] imitation” (1449b: 31, bracketed addition mine). Dialog (and Rhythm) for Burke are agency. Dialog means “merely this, the composition of the verses” (1449b: 34), the “expression of their [agent’s] thoughts in words” (1450b: 14, bracketed additions, mine). Dialog for Aristotle is the Rhetoric of persuasion.
5. Rhythms – (or Melody) is “what is too completely understood to require explanation: (1449b: 35). Rhythm is the “means of their [i.e. stories’] imitation” (1449b: 31, bracketed addition mine); i.e. it is agency. It is the “greatest of pleasurable accessories of Tragedy” (1450b: 15). We know rhythm now as self-organizing, as chaotic perturbations, or repetitive cycles.
6. Spectacles – “stage appearance of the actors” (1449b: 31). It is “an attraction, is the least artistic of all the parts, and has least to do with the art of poetry… the getting-up of the Spectacle is more a matter for the costumier than the poet” (1450b: 16-20). “The tragic fear and pity may be aroused by Spectacle…” (1453b: 1) but producing the effect by Spectacle rather than choice of acts in a plot, “is less artistic, and requires extraneous aid” (1453b: 6). Once the least important, it is now the most important. For Debord (1967) spectacle is the basis of capitalism. Types of spectacle include concentrated, diffuse, integrated and mega (Best & Kellner, 1997, 2001).
7. Frames - For Aristotle, the spectators have "frames of mind" that characters and plots seek to persuade through dialog and rhythm. For Burke (1937) Frame is a worldview, what we now call grand narratives. For Burke the Frames of Acceptance and Frames of Rejection are in dialectic interaction.
-Source, Boje, 2002c, d for derivation of the Septet.
Freire and Boal have expanded upon Aristotle in ways that are different from Burke. For example, for Freire and Boal, the (Frames) dialectic is a thesis of oppression opposed by the antithesis of resistance to oppression. In dialog, people can improve their consciousness of material conditions of situations of oppression (Freire, 1970; Boal, 1979). The bureaucratic leader, for example, seeks to change the situation of oppression mechanistically by coming up with rules and procedures. The dialogic leader seeks to raise questions about false consciousness of reality, or the necessity of transformation of dramatic action. Both types of leaders revise and direct scripts of organizational theatre. Boal builds upon Aristotle’s poetics to craft a Poetics of the Oppressed:
In order to understand this poetics of the oppressed one must keep in mind its main objective: to change the people – “spectators,” passive being(s) in the theatrical phenomenon – into subjects, into actors, transformers of the dramatic action (Boal, 1979: 122).
I submit that Enron’s rise and collapse transformed the dramatic action, if not the plot of the NewFree Market Economy. In this section varieties of Enron spectacles are analyzed using the dramatistic elements in Table 2, the Septet. The Septet is a grammar for looking at how elements of plots, characters, themes, dialogs, rhythms, and frames constitute spectacle dynamics. We have already examined how concentrated and diffuse spectacles can emerge into megaspectacles. Here we look at the Septet dramatist elements of that process.
Plots – Spectacle plots are antenarrative and intertextual. Each plot is an arbitrary choice from a spectrum of possible emplotments. Enron has all the plots of an episode of "Dallas" with tragedy, comedy, satire, and occasional romantic triumph. In fact, due to the cultural megaspectacle status of Enron, at least one studio is planning a made-for-TV movie about Enron (Mullen, 2002: 10). They there is Hollywood: “Would-be moviemakers still have their pick of potential plots: Is it a hubris-driven business tragedy, a morality play, a presidential scandal? Or is it a Sept. 11-calibre wake-up call for capitalism itself?” (Williamson, 2002: 20). A key tragedy is the suicide of former Enron vice-chairman J. Clifford Baxter. Enron’s partnerships have been a comedy of errors. Enron is the reversal of fortune plot line. At some point, the market goddess Fortuna, stop letting Enron win every spin of her wheel of fortune. Enron’s alchemy failed, and gold turned into lead. Enron plots range from romantic, tragic, and comedic to satiric and ironic. The plot is expressed in spectacles in the dialog, in the assemblage of characters, and in the acts that constitute the story. The acts of the plot would include creative accounting, insider trading, political influence-buying that reached far into Republican and Democratic parties, shredding documents, and the aftermath of new rules and regulations in an post-Enron era. The plot is also express in the hubris of the characters.
Characters - Rounding up the usual suspects includes such characters as Chairman Kenneth L. Lay, former CEO Jeffrey Skilling, former Chief Financial Officer Andrew Fastow, members of Enron's audit committee, Board of Directors of Enron, and the partners at Arthur Andersen and the Vinson & Elkins law firm. Some emplotments include President George W. Bush, White House Economic Adviser Lawrence B. Lindsey, and Vice-President Dick Cheney. As we saw characters in concentrated and diffuse spectacles are straight out of Star Wars. Enron formed a partnership called Chewco Investments, named after the woolly Star Wars character. In antenarrative fashion, spectacle characters morph. President Bush's description of embattled Enron CEO Kenneth Lay went from "Kenny Boy" to "Mr. Lay" to "a supporter" (Britt, 2002). Skilling once the hero of the New economy is now the villain.
Themes – Themes in Enron spectacles focus around hubris, greed (even fraud), and reversal of fortunes. Freire proposes a thematic methodology that future studies can adapt to the investigation of Enron spectacles. Each spectacle is a “thematic universe” in what Freire (1970: 86) defines as a complex of “generative themes.” To the participants in Enron Spectacles, the thematic universe is “dense, impenetrable, and enveloping” (Freire, 1970: 94-95). Spectacles are an antenarrative plurality, where themes are generated, transformed, and dissolved (Boje, 2001a). From a critical postmodern view, ‘Reality’ and ‘Spectacle’ co-evolve in dialectic interaction and co-emergence, but they can get out of step. The antenarrative quality of themes is that they are not isolated, but are intertextually connected, dynamic, interpenetrating and rich in dialectic contradiction. The thematic fan of Enron spectacles range from greed, deception, arrogance, cronyism, influence-peddling, insider trading to whistle blowing and current reforms to the game of capitalism. There are tax reforms: Enron paid only $17 million in taxes in 1998, nothing in 1999 or in 2000. There is insider trading: Former PGE executives Ken Harrison and Joseph Hirko cashed in more than $110 million in Enron stock options before the collapse, while hundreds of PGE employees lost their life savings while locked into a 401 (k) plan that consisted of 58 percent Enron stock, now essentially worthless (Bourdieu, 2002). A highly significant theme is Enron 401 (k) pensions: Enron and many State pension employees had a preponderance of Enron stock in their 401(k) retirement plans. At Enron, employees under 50 were unable to sell stock given them at a time when Enron stock plummeted, reducing large retirement funds to nothing. Enron employees “who thought they were millionaires, and that they could get another million by putting 10% of their pay into company stock, quickly were parted from their delusion” (Donlon, 2002: 39. Each limit-situation of spectacle is a socially constructed reality where people fragment into different areas (and sub-areas), and can engage quite opposite themes and tasks without awareness of the contradictions and situation limits of oppression.
Dialog - For Aristotle, dialog was rhetoric, and was the means for expressing themes and plots. Business Week (March 4, 2002: 18) put it this way, “There'll be a flurry of rhetoric about tighter accounting rules and more responsible corporate boards. And then a long silence until the next time.” Dialogic codes (situated language categories) accomplish participants’ state of submersion into Spectacle Sometimes rhetoric and wanton arrogance backfires:
Former Enron chief Kenneth Lay, having cleverly (as he thought) tasked his wife to reform his public image on national television, apparently reached the conclusion that simply declining invitations to appear before congressional committees (and blaming the rough rhetoric of lawmakers appearing on the Sunday talk shows for his having done so) sounded like a fine idea. The resulting subpoenas quickly issued from House and Senate committees indicated it was not such a fine idea after all (Hickey, 2002: 10).
Aristotle includes the use of metaphor, “giving the thing a name that belongs to something else; the transference being either from genus to species, or from species to genus, or from species to species, or on ground of analogy” (1457b: 6) and “a good metaphor implies an intuitive perception of the similarity in dissimilars” (1549a: 5).
The dialog of Enron is also about naming its adventures. Enron financial techie's, for example, had a fondness for Star Wars and Jurassic Park lingo. JEDI, as in Jedi knight, stands for Joint Energy Development Investments. JEDI prospered-the Force must have been with it-as Enron deftly bought and sold energy stocks, power plants and other investments, earning a 23 percent annual return (Sloan, 2002). Like the movie, JEDI had a sequel, JEDI II. The problem for Enron was to keep JEDI I off the balance sheets while it ramped up JEDI II. “Making JEDI I part of Enron would have cut the company's reported profits sharply, and increased its reported debt by more than $500 million” (Sloan, 2002). To solve this problem, Enron ginned up Chewco Investments-as in Chewbacca the Wookiee, a partnership of Enron executives and some undisclosed outsiders. Condor and Raptor are deal names inspired by Jurassic Park. “Enron had booked huge profits from these entities while its stock price soared in 2000, despite the fact that neither Condor nor Raptor had any hard assets” (Duffy, 2002).
Executives may create spectacles that fill passive consciousness with slogans, like “loose-tight.” Jeffrey Skilling, for example, was recruited from McKinsey consulting, and named the world of Enron in the “loose-tight” managerial language expounded by other McKinsey alums, such as Tom Peters and Bob Waterman (London & McNulty, 2001).