Resowing the Seeds of War: Presidential Peace Rhetoric since 1945

IF 1.3 2区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION Quarterly Journal of Speech Pub Date : 2022-07-03 DOI:10.1080/00335630.2022.2087614
J. Edwards
{"title":"Resowing the Seeds of War: Presidential Peace Rhetoric since 1945","authors":"J. Edwards","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2087614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"could look like for our digital experiences of the public screen (275). He argues that engaging in a polyculture of modes requires space and time, which is itself available only differentially along axes of privilege like class and gender. Jenkins suggests some short but evocative proposals, like regular, paid sabbaticals or recognizing the value that users bring to social networks through pay. But more than the specific suggestions, Jenkins argues against the deficiencies of modal monocultures and for a more expansive, ecological understanding of how affect is experienced in digital media. In conclusion, Surfing the Anthropocene offers timely insights into specific digital media cases as well as proof of Jenkins’ overarching claims about digital affect, the Big Tension, and modes. Scholars interested in digital media and affect would benefit from reading a book with such theoretical and methodological care. I would be interested in seeing other scholarship extending modal analysis or diagrams of affective environments into other mediated spaces like TikTok or Instagram, whether or not they operated from the primary spatio-temporal modes in the Big Tension. I wonder, however, if each chapter’s ecological metaphor could be more fully integrated into the modal analysis. Chapter three does not rely upon a metaphor at all, and I found myself asking what would happen if we switched the other metaphors around: can Twitter be atmospheric, or Facebook luminous? What affective resonances do these metaphors offer in our understanding of digital media itself? The richness of the modal analysis and the strength of the writing makes this note only a slight one: the theoretical intervention is welcome and the method is sound. In sum, Surfing the Anthropocene accomplishes what it sets out to do in describing and actually analyzing the Big Tension between digital media and the epoch of the Anthropocene. I felt the tension in my own affective response to the book, and by the conclusion not only did I have a more scholarly understanding of the modes of digital media, but a better understanding of my own actualized experience.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"151 1","pages":"352 - 356"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2087614","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

could look like for our digital experiences of the public screen (275). He argues that engaging in a polyculture of modes requires space and time, which is itself available only differentially along axes of privilege like class and gender. Jenkins suggests some short but evocative proposals, like regular, paid sabbaticals or recognizing the value that users bring to social networks through pay. But more than the specific suggestions, Jenkins argues against the deficiencies of modal monocultures and for a more expansive, ecological understanding of how affect is experienced in digital media. In conclusion, Surfing the Anthropocene offers timely insights into specific digital media cases as well as proof of Jenkins’ overarching claims about digital affect, the Big Tension, and modes. Scholars interested in digital media and affect would benefit from reading a book with such theoretical and methodological care. I would be interested in seeing other scholarship extending modal analysis or diagrams of affective environments into other mediated spaces like TikTok or Instagram, whether or not they operated from the primary spatio-temporal modes in the Big Tension. I wonder, however, if each chapter’s ecological metaphor could be more fully integrated into the modal analysis. Chapter three does not rely upon a metaphor at all, and I found myself asking what would happen if we switched the other metaphors around: can Twitter be atmospheric, or Facebook luminous? What affective resonances do these metaphors offer in our understanding of digital media itself? The richness of the modal analysis and the strength of the writing makes this note only a slight one: the theoretical intervention is welcome and the method is sound. In sum, Surfing the Anthropocene accomplishes what it sets out to do in describing and actually analyzing the Big Tension between digital media and the epoch of the Anthropocene. I felt the tension in my own affective response to the book, and by the conclusion not only did I have a more scholarly understanding of the modes of digital media, but a better understanding of my own actualized experience.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重新播下战争的种子:1945年以来总统的和平言论
就像我们在公共屏幕上的数字体验一样(275)。他认为,参与模式的多元文化需要空间和时间,而空间和时间本身只在阶级和性别等特权轴上有所不同。詹金斯提出了一些简短但令人回味的建议,比如定期带薪休假,或者承认用户通过付费为社交网络带来的价值。但除了具体的建议之外,詹金斯还反对模态单一文化的缺陷,并主张对数字媒体如何体验影响进行更广泛、更生态的理解。总之,《人类世冲浪》提供了对具体数字媒体案例的及时见解,并证明了詹金斯关于数字影响、大张力和模式的总体主张。对数字媒体和情感感兴趣的学者将受益于这样一本理论和方法上谨慎的书。我很有兴趣看到其他学者将情感环境的模态分析或图表扩展到其他中介空间,如TikTok或Instagram,无论它们是否从大张力中的主要时空模式运行。然而,我想知道,如果每一章的生态隐喻可以更充分地融入模态分析。第三章根本不依赖于隐喻,我发现自己在问,如果我们把其他隐喻调换一下会发生什么:Twitter是大气的吗,Facebook是发光的吗?这些隐喻在我们对数字媒体本身的理解中提供了什么样的情感共鸣?模态分析的丰富性和写作的强度使得这只是一个轻微的注意事项:理论干预是受欢迎的,方法是合理的。总之,在描述和实际分析数字媒体与人类世时代之间的巨大张力方面,《人类世冲浪》完成了它的初衷。我在自己对这本书的情感反应中感受到了紧张,通过结论,我不仅对数字媒体的模式有了更学术的理解,而且对自己的实际体验有了更好的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
36.40%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Quarterly Journal of Speech (QJS) publishes articles and book reviews of interest to those who take a rhetorical perspective on the texts, discourses, and cultural practices by which public beliefs and identities are constituted, empowered, and enacted. Rhetorical scholarship now cuts across many different intellectual, disciplinary, and political vectors, and QJS seeks to honor and address the interanimating effects of such differences. No single project, whether modern or postmodern in its orientation, or local, national, or global in its scope, can suffice as the sole locus of rhetorical practice, knowledge and understanding.
期刊最新文献
From “melting pot” to “dumping ground,” or, the rhetoric of bodily incommensurability Framing memories of the dead: the rhetorical work of the memory picture in the deathcare industry Infraconstitutive rhetoric: insurgent abolition and the Black radical imagination On the imperial gaze Nooses and Nazi swastikas on U.S. campuses: an anti-racist call for a rhetorical reframing of hate symbols as violent technologies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1