At the 2015 RSA Summer Institute, several authors of this White Paper convened at the Whither “So... more At the 2015 RSA Summer Institute, several authors of this White Paper convened at the Whither “Social Movement” in Rhetorical Studies? Workshop (organized and co-lead by Christina R. Foust, University of Denver and Charles E. Morris, III, Syracuse University). This white paper, collectively authored by The RSA 15, asks relevant questions to the study of social movements: What is at stake in the loss of “social movement” in rhetorical studies? For rhetorical critics who see the value of “social movement” (in interdisciplinary connections and public relevance, for instance), what must be done to rehabilitate the term? More particularly, what is the relationship between social movement as a phenomenon, noun, or “thing” and others’ treatments of social movement as a verb, process, or indicative of meaning change? How might reclaiming “social movement” for rhetorical studies invigorate work across different disciplinary domains, and the public?
The RSA 15: Suzanne Berg, Newman University Betsy Brunner, University of Utah Josue David Cisneros, University of Illinois Doug Cloud, Colorado State University Michael Eisenstadt, University of Kansas Kelly Jakes, Wayne State University Michelle Kearl, IUPU-FW Dominic Manthey, Pennsylvania State University Jade Olson, University of Maryland Milene Ortega, Georgia State University Erin J. Rand, Syracuse University Alyssa Samek, California State University Fullerton Jessica Shumake, University of Arizona Ian Summers, University of Utah Justine Wells, University of South Carolina
To cite this paper in APA: RSA 15 (2016). Whither Social Movement in Rhetorical Studies? A White Paper. Presented at the Rhetoric Society of America conference, Atlanta, GA, May 26-29, 2016. For inquiries, please contact Christina Foust (cfoust@du.edu)
At the 2015 RSA Summer Institute, several authors of the proposed White Paper convened at the Whi... more At the 2015 RSA Summer Institute, several authors of the proposed White Paper convened at the Whither “Social Movement” in Rhetorical Studies? Workshop (organized and co-lead by Christina R. Foust, University of Denver and Charles E. Morris, III, Syracuse University). The two and a half days proved inspiring and productive, as participants considered the loss of the term “social movement(s)” from the scholarly conversation in rhetoric, particularly following McGee’s polemic against the traditions of resource mobilization, functionalism, and the basic reduction of social movement to a “thing” awaiting classification by rhetorical critics (McGee, 1980; DeLuca, 1999; Enck-Wanzer, 2006). Participants considered the relocation of “social movement” into activist work (Cloud, 2009; Aseynas, McCann, Feyh, & Cloud, 2012) and rhetorical field methods (McHendry, Middleton, Endres, Senda-Cook, & O’Byrne, 2014), as well as tactics of resistance related to affect (Bruce, 2015), neoliberal capitalism (Pezzullo, 2011), and digital ubiquity (Ganesh & Stohl, 2013).
Though we can read “social movement” into the record of rhetorical studies, participants raised a number of questions: What is at stake in the loss of “social movement” in rhetorical studies? For rhetorical critics who see the value of “social movement” (in interdisciplinary connections and public relevance, for instance), what must be done to rehabilitate the term? More particularly, what is the relationship between social movement as a phenomenon, noun, or “thing” and others’ treatments of social movement as a verb, process, or indicative of meaning change? How might reclaiming “social movement” for rhetorical studies invigorate work across different disciplinary domains, and the public? This white paper is the product of conversations provoked by these questions.
At the 2015 RSA Summer Institute, several authors of this White Paper convened at the Whither “So... more At the 2015 RSA Summer Institute, several authors of this White Paper convened at the Whither “Social Movement” in Rhetorical Studies? Workshop (organized and co-lead by Christina R. Foust, University of Denver and Charles E. Morris, III, Syracuse University). This white paper, collectively authored by The RSA 15, asks relevant questions to the study of social movements: What is at stake in the loss of “social movement” in rhetorical studies? For rhetorical critics who see the value of “social movement” (in interdisciplinary connections and public relevance, for instance), what must be done to rehabilitate the term? More particularly, what is the relationship between social movement as a phenomenon, noun, or “thing” and others’ treatments of social movement as a verb, process, or indicative of meaning change? How might reclaiming “social movement” for rhetorical studies invigorate work across different disciplinary domains, and the public?
The RSA 15: Suzanne Berg, Newman University Betsy Brunner, University of Utah Josue David Cisneros, University of Illinois Doug Cloud, Colorado State University Michael Eisenstadt, University of Kansas Kelly Jakes, Wayne State University Michelle Kearl, IUPU-FW Dominic Manthey, Pennsylvania State University Jade Olson, University of Maryland Milene Ortega, Georgia State University Erin J. Rand, Syracuse University Alyssa Samek, California State University Fullerton Jessica Shumake, University of Arizona Ian Summers, University of Utah Justine Wells, University of South Carolina
To cite this paper in APA: RSA 15 (2016). Whither Social Movement in Rhetorical Studies? A White Paper. Presented at the Rhetoric Society of America conference, Atlanta, GA, May 26-29, 2016. For inquiries, please contact Christina Foust (cfoust@du.edu)
At the 2015 RSA Summer Institute, several authors of the proposed White Paper convened at the Whi... more At the 2015 RSA Summer Institute, several authors of the proposed White Paper convened at the Whither “Social Movement” in Rhetorical Studies? Workshop (organized and co-lead by Christina R. Foust, University of Denver and Charles E. Morris, III, Syracuse University). The two and a half days proved inspiring and productive, as participants considered the loss of the term “social movement(s)” from the scholarly conversation in rhetoric, particularly following McGee’s polemic against the traditions of resource mobilization, functionalism, and the basic reduction of social movement to a “thing” awaiting classification by rhetorical critics (McGee, 1980; DeLuca, 1999; Enck-Wanzer, 2006). Participants considered the relocation of “social movement” into activist work (Cloud, 2009; Aseynas, McCann, Feyh, & Cloud, 2012) and rhetorical field methods (McHendry, Middleton, Endres, Senda-Cook, & O’Byrne, 2014), as well as tactics of resistance related to affect (Bruce, 2015), neoliberal capitalism (Pezzullo, 2011), and digital ubiquity (Ganesh & Stohl, 2013).
Though we can read “social movement” into the record of rhetorical studies, participants raised a number of questions: What is at stake in the loss of “social movement” in rhetorical studies? For rhetorical critics who see the value of “social movement” (in interdisciplinary connections and public relevance, for instance), what must be done to rehabilitate the term? More particularly, what is the relationship between social movement as a phenomenon, noun, or “thing” and others’ treatments of social movement as a verb, process, or indicative of meaning change? How might reclaiming “social movement” for rhetorical studies invigorate work across different disciplinary domains, and the public? This white paper is the product of conversations provoked by these questions.
Uploads
The RSA 15:
Suzanne Berg, Newman University
Betsy Brunner, University of Utah
Josue David Cisneros, University of Illinois
Doug Cloud, Colorado State University
Michael Eisenstadt, University of Kansas
Kelly Jakes, Wayne State University
Michelle Kearl, IUPU-FW
Dominic Manthey, Pennsylvania State University
Jade Olson, University of Maryland
Milene Ortega, Georgia State University
Erin J. Rand, Syracuse University
Alyssa Samek, California State University Fullerton
Jessica Shumake, University of Arizona
Ian Summers, University of Utah
Justine Wells, University of South Carolina
To cite this paper in APA: RSA 15 (2016). Whither Social Movement in Rhetorical Studies? A White Paper. Presented at the Rhetoric Society of America conference, Atlanta, GA, May 26-29, 2016. For inquiries, please contact Christina Foust (cfoust@du.edu)
Though we can read “social movement” into the record of rhetorical studies, participants raised a number of questions: What is at stake in the loss of “social movement” in rhetorical studies? For rhetorical critics who see the value of “social movement” (in interdisciplinary connections and public relevance, for instance), what must be done to rehabilitate the term? More particularly, what is the relationship between social movement as a phenomenon, noun, or “thing” and others’ treatments of social movement as a verb, process, or indicative of meaning change? How might reclaiming “social movement” for rhetorical studies invigorate work across different disciplinary domains, and the public? This white paper is the product of conversations provoked by these questions.
The RSA 15:
Suzanne Berg, Newman University
Betsy Brunner, University of Utah
Josue David Cisneros, University of Illinois
Doug Cloud, Colorado State University
Michael Eisenstadt, University of Kansas
Kelly Jakes, Wayne State University
Michelle Kearl, IUPU-FW
Dominic Manthey, Pennsylvania State University
Jade Olson, University of Maryland
Milene Ortega, Georgia State University
Erin J. Rand, Syracuse University
Alyssa Samek, California State University Fullerton
Jessica Shumake, University of Arizona
Ian Summers, University of Utah
Justine Wells, University of South Carolina
To cite this paper in APA: RSA 15 (2016). Whither Social Movement in Rhetorical Studies? A White Paper. Presented at the Rhetoric Society of America conference, Atlanta, GA, May 26-29, 2016. For inquiries, please contact Christina Foust (cfoust@du.edu)
Though we can read “social movement” into the record of rhetorical studies, participants raised a number of questions: What is at stake in the loss of “social movement” in rhetorical studies? For rhetorical critics who see the value of “social movement” (in interdisciplinary connections and public relevance, for instance), what must be done to rehabilitate the term? More particularly, what is the relationship between social movement as a phenomenon, noun, or “thing” and others’ treatments of social movement as a verb, process, or indicative of meaning change? How might reclaiming “social movement” for rhetorical studies invigorate work across different disciplinary domains, and the public? This white paper is the product of conversations provoked by these questions.