Pub Date : 2023-03-22DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2023.2187746
Jay P. Childers, Lisa Corrigan
ABSTRACT Abolitionist John Brown remains a cultural touchstone over 160 years after his execution for leading the Harpers Ferry Raid in October 1859, largely because that event and Brown’s behavior after it played a part in leading the nation into civil war. To understand that legacy and his role in sparking the Civil War, this article examines the discursive field that animated around Brown within the context of the racial sensorium of his time. We argue Brown still attracts interest because he was a distinctive antebellum racial figure who catalyzed major shifts in the country’s racial sensory landscape by offering a mode of radical whiteness grounded in white mobility, the use of violence, electrifying words and deeds, and shockingly bold intimacies with Black people. Ultimately, by examining the discursive field that surrounded Brown from his time in Kansas to after his execution, we demonstrate how his radical sensibilities shifted the somatic politics of racial confrontation in the antebellum period and show that John Brown became an amplifying cultural force through which both Northerners and Southerners felt the question of slavery in new ways.
{"title":"The racial shock of abolitionist John Brown","authors":"Jay P. Childers, Lisa Corrigan","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2023.2187746","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2023.2187746","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Abolitionist John Brown remains a cultural touchstone over 160 years after his execution for leading the Harpers Ferry Raid in October 1859, largely because that event and Brown’s behavior after it played a part in leading the nation into civil war. To understand that legacy and his role in sparking the Civil War, this article examines the discursive field that animated around Brown within the context of the racial sensorium of his time. We argue Brown still attracts interest because he was a distinctive antebellum racial figure who catalyzed major shifts in the country’s racial sensory landscape by offering a mode of radical whiteness grounded in white mobility, the use of violence, electrifying words and deeds, and shockingly bold intimacies with Black people. Ultimately, by examining the discursive field that surrounded Brown from his time in Kansas to after his execution, we demonstrate how his radical sensibilities shifted the somatic politics of racial confrontation in the antebellum period and show that John Brown became an amplifying cultural force through which both Northerners and Southerners felt the question of slavery in new ways.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85383360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2023.2165233
Lisa A. Flores
ABSTRACT Reflecting upon the words of Professors De Genova, Lozano, and Yam, this essay suggests that rhetorical scholars attend to the intersections between rhetorical violence and rhetorical temporalities. The varied projects that emerge in this forum together suggest that the racialized temporalities of violence rely upon temporalities of relentless and repetition. Together, relentlessness and repetition make race. They do so, within white supremacy and antiblackness, by demanding a particular racist recognition, a seeing and sensing of race premised in antiblackness.
{"title":"Racialized temporalities and rhetorical violence","authors":"Lisa A. Flores","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2023.2165233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2023.2165233","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Reflecting upon the words of Professors De Genova, Lozano, and Yam, this essay suggests that rhetorical scholars attend to the intersections between rhetorical violence and rhetorical temporalities. The varied projects that emerge in this forum together suggest that the racialized temporalities of violence rely upon temporalities of relentless and repetition. Together, relentlessness and repetition make race. They do so, within white supremacy and antiblackness, by demanding a particular racist recognition, a seeing and sensing of race premised in antiblackness.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74667530","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2023.2165235
N. M. Lozano
Lisa Flores ’ book, Deportable and Disposable: Public Rhetoric and the Making of the “ Illegal ” Immigrant is a tour de force of Mexican/American history, rhetoricity, and racialization. Flores argues that racialization is rhetorical, which is to say performative, inter-sectional, and crafted in public discourse. Flores argues that racialization creates shared perceptions of Mexicans that take the form of body logics of race and mobility logics of borders (13). Body logics are the sightlines of race that tie racial categories to assumptions of inferiority and superiority. Mobility logics “ trace the varied racialized associations that prompt the sensing of race ” (13). The mobility logics connect the perceptions of bodies to the lived mobilities of everyday life
{"title":"A tour de force of Mexican rhetoricity and racialization","authors":"N. M. Lozano","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2023.2165235","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2023.2165235","url":null,"abstract":"Lisa Flores ’ book, Deportable and Disposable: Public Rhetoric and the Making of the “ Illegal ” Immigrant is a tour de force of Mexican/American history, rhetoricity, and racialization. Flores argues that racialization is rhetorical, which is to say performative, inter-sectional, and crafted in public discourse. Flores argues that racialization creates shared perceptions of Mexicans that take the form of body logics of race and mobility logics of borders (13). Body logics are the sightlines of race that tie racial categories to assumptions of inferiority and superiority. Mobility logics “ trace the varied racialized associations that prompt the sensing of race ” (13). The mobility logics connect the perceptions of bodies to the lived mobilities of everyday life","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73792958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2023.2165234
N. Genova
ABSTRACT There is a sociopolitical and juridical regime that I have designated in terms of “the legal production of Mexican/migrant ‘illegality’,” which is never separable from a larger discursive formation of migrant “illegality,” which has always also been constitutive to the (re-)racialization of “Mexican”-ness in the United States. As a scholar of rhetoric, Lisa Flores amplifies and illuminates these multiple dimensions of the rhetoricity of race, national identity, and citizenship. By examining this succession over the first half of the twentieth century of “moments of rhetorical crisis” surrounding the mass-mediated and highly politicized spectacles that produced “Mexicans” as “problem,” Flores critically demonstrates how U.S. public discourse has named “Mexicans” and called upon the public to see “Mexicans” — variously, as “illegal aliens,” “zootsuiters,” braceros, and “wetbacks” — such that the law and law enforcement, politics and policing, as well as mass-mediated public discourse have been indispensable for the ensnaring of “Mexicanness" within deportability and disposability and confining “Mexicans,” both migrants and U.S.-born ostensible citizens, within a regime of racial subordination.
{"title":"“Look, an Illegal Alien!”: the rhetorics of migrant “Illegality” and the racialization of Mexicanness","authors":"N. Genova","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2023.2165234","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2023.2165234","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There is a sociopolitical and juridical regime that I have designated in terms of “the legal production of Mexican/migrant ‘illegality’,” which is never separable from a larger discursive formation of migrant “illegality,” which has always also been constitutive to the (re-)racialization of “Mexican”-ness in the United States. As a scholar of rhetoric, Lisa Flores amplifies and illuminates these multiple dimensions of the rhetoricity of race, national identity, and citizenship. By examining this succession over the first half of the twentieth century of “moments of rhetorical crisis” surrounding the mass-mediated and highly politicized spectacles that produced “Mexicans” as “problem,” Flores critically demonstrates how U.S. public discourse has named “Mexicans” and called upon the public to see “Mexicans” — variously, as “illegal aliens,” “zootsuiters,” braceros, and “wetbacks” — such that the law and law enforcement, politics and policing, as well as mass-mediated public discourse have been indispensable for the ensnaring of “Mexicanness\" within deportability and disposability and confining “Mexicans,” both migrants and U.S.-born ostensible citizens, within a regime of racial subordination.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81480453","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2023.2165236
S. Yam
ABSTRACT This review of Lisa Flores' Deportable and Disposable connects racialization of Mexican migrants in the US with a similar process in Hong Kong towards mainland Chinese immigrants, and Southeast Asian domestic workers. The essay argues for increased rhetorical attunement towards the transnational interconnectedness of racial hierarchy and neoliberal capitalism.
{"title":"Towards a transnational analysis of racialization, affect, and neoliberal capitalism","authors":"S. Yam","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2023.2165236","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2023.2165236","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This review of Lisa Flores' Deportable and Disposable connects racialization of Mexican migrants in the US with a similar process in Hong Kong towards mainland Chinese immigrants, and Southeast Asian domestic workers. The essay argues for increased rhetorical attunement towards the transnational interconnectedness of racial hierarchy and neoliberal capitalism.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82491241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2160045
Stacey K. Sowards, Toniesha Taylor
Setting a vision for the Quarterly Journal of Speech’s content and direction means addressing the important problems in our discipline related to white supremacy, colorism, misogyny, class standing, ability, U.S.-centered thinking, anti-Islamic sentiment, anti-Semitism, antiBlackness, anthropocentrism, ongoing colonialisms, and many forms of ethnocentrism. Calls for greater representation of marginalized perspectives in our discipline have persisted for decades, but have reached critical junctures in recent years. The controversy over NCA’s Distinguished Scholars is but one instance among numerous others that have left many folks in our field feeling disenfranchised by organizations such as NCA and journals such as QJS. Case in point: recent forums and conversations inQJS, CC/CS, and other disciplinary journals indicate a deep, urgent need and hunger for rhetorical and critical scholarship that address our current contexts and cultural milieu. These discussions represent just a few of the ongoing conversations about experiences of exclusion, marginalization, and microaggressions in rhetorical studies. We envision then, thatQJS will be a scholarly forum where authors address a wide range of social and political issues and how they function within, through, and beyond rhetoric/ language. We face persistent ableism, environmental catastrophes, wars and attempted/successful exterminations of various peoples, globalization/capitalism, the slow violence of climate change/food insecurity/toxins, anti-Black, anti-Indigenous, anti-Latinx, and antiAsian racism, the rise of white supremacy and nationalism, deeply problematic immigration policies and xenophobia, oppression of queer and gender non-conforming folks, erasure of Indigenous peoples and cultures/languages, anti-Islamic and anti-Palestine sentiments and violence, as well as many other social justice issues. While topics that generally focus on rhetoric in method, theory, and/or inclusion continue to be appropriate for this journal, we especially seek submissions that engage matters and contexts that go beyond the traditional scope of this journal, particularly beyond U.S. American understandings of the world, and especially in the form of anti-oppression research frameworks. We hope that QJS as a journal will address the issues listed above, along with nationand identitymaking in the Global South, decoloniality, decolonization, settler colonialism, Indigeneity, critical race studies, #BlackLivesMatter, #MeToo, whiteness, gender troubles, ecocultural rhetoric, ability studies, environmental (in)justices, and related theories and themes are welcomed and encouraged. We also want to encourage forms that challenge hegemonies and oppressions, particularly in academic research and writing.
{"title":"Editorial Statement","authors":"Stacey K. Sowards, Toniesha Taylor","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2160045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2160045","url":null,"abstract":"Setting a vision for the Quarterly Journal of Speech’s content and direction means addressing the important problems in our discipline related to white supremacy, colorism, misogyny, class standing, ability, U.S.-centered thinking, anti-Islamic sentiment, anti-Semitism, antiBlackness, anthropocentrism, ongoing colonialisms, and many forms of ethnocentrism. Calls for greater representation of marginalized perspectives in our discipline have persisted for decades, but have reached critical junctures in recent years. The controversy over NCA’s Distinguished Scholars is but one instance among numerous others that have left many folks in our field feeling disenfranchised by organizations such as NCA and journals such as QJS. Case in point: recent forums and conversations inQJS, CC/CS, and other disciplinary journals indicate a deep, urgent need and hunger for rhetorical and critical scholarship that address our current contexts and cultural milieu. These discussions represent just a few of the ongoing conversations about experiences of exclusion, marginalization, and microaggressions in rhetorical studies. We envision then, thatQJS will be a scholarly forum where authors address a wide range of social and political issues and how they function within, through, and beyond rhetoric/ language. We face persistent ableism, environmental catastrophes, wars and attempted/successful exterminations of various peoples, globalization/capitalism, the slow violence of climate change/food insecurity/toxins, anti-Black, anti-Indigenous, anti-Latinx, and antiAsian racism, the rise of white supremacy and nationalism, deeply problematic immigration policies and xenophobia, oppression of queer and gender non-conforming folks, erasure of Indigenous peoples and cultures/languages, anti-Islamic and anti-Palestine sentiments and violence, as well as many other social justice issues. While topics that generally focus on rhetoric in method, theory, and/or inclusion continue to be appropriate for this journal, we especially seek submissions that engage matters and contexts that go beyond the traditional scope of this journal, particularly beyond U.S. American understandings of the world, and especially in the form of anti-oppression research frameworks. We hope that QJS as a journal will address the issues listed above, along with nationand identitymaking in the Global South, decoloniality, decolonization, settler colonialism, Indigeneity, critical race studies, #BlackLivesMatter, #MeToo, whiteness, gender troubles, ecocultural rhetoric, ability studies, environmental (in)justices, and related theories and themes are welcomed and encouraged. We also want to encourage forms that challenge hegemonies and oppressions, particularly in academic research and writing.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82052704","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-15DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2149846
J. Izaguirre
ABSTRACT This article presents a racial rhetorical critique of Lyndon B. Johnson’s presidential rhetoric. Drawing from examinations of drafts, memos, and proclamations, I argue that LBJ in particular and the administration more generally utilized the appointment of Vicente T. Ximenes to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and his naming as the chair of the Inter-Agency Committee on Mexican American Affairs (IACMAA) on June 9, 1967 to reinforce the predominance of the white racial frame in U.S. political life. I highlight how LBJ’s administration relocated “Mexican Americans” politically within his Great Society according to the premises of the white racial frame as Chicana/o movement activism turned toward amplifying separatist, racially charged rhetoric(s). This racially tuned revision of prior rhetorical histories of LBJ’s rhetorics demonstrates how his administration participated in sustaining white supremacy, fashioned a whitened image of “Mexican American” communities capable of flourishing in his “Great Society,” and excluded alternative political forms that challenged the assimilationism typically expected of Latinx communities more generally. I conclude that fomenting the political status of the white racial frame was integral to LBJ’s Great Society rhetoric and to evolutions in Chicana/o activism in the late 1960s.
本文对林登·约翰逊的总统言论进行了种族主义修辞批判。根据对草案、备忘录和公告的审查，我认为约翰逊总统和政府更普遍地利用了1967年6月9日任命Vicente T. Ximenes为平等就业机会委员会(EEOC)成员，并任命他为墨西哥裔美国人事务机构间委员会(IACMAA)主席，以加强白人种族框架在美国政治生活中的主导地位。我强调约翰逊政府是如何根据白人种族框架的前提，在他的“伟大社会”中政治地重新安置“墨西哥裔美国人”的，因为墨西哥裔美国人运动的激进主义转向了放大分离主义，种族主义的言论。这一种族主义调整的修正表明了他的政府是如何参与维持白人至上主义的，塑造了一个能够在他的“伟大社会”中蓬勃发展的“墨西哥裔美国人”社区的白人形象，并排除了挑战拉丁裔社区通常期望的同化主义的其他政治形式。我的结论是，煽动白人种族框架的政治地位是约翰逊伟大社会言论和20世纪60年代末墨西哥裔/黑人激进主义演变的组成部分。
{"title":"The whiteness of LBJ’s rhetoric: The appointment of Vicente T. Ximenes to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission","authors":"J. Izaguirre","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2149846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2149846","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article presents a racial rhetorical critique of Lyndon B. Johnson’s presidential rhetoric. Drawing from examinations of drafts, memos, and proclamations, I argue that LBJ in particular and the administration more generally utilized the appointment of Vicente T. Ximenes to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and his naming as the chair of the Inter-Agency Committee on Mexican American Affairs (IACMAA) on June 9, 1967 to reinforce the predominance of the white racial frame in U.S. political life. I highlight how LBJ’s administration relocated “Mexican Americans” politically within his Great Society according to the premises of the white racial frame as Chicana/o movement activism turned toward amplifying separatist, racially charged rhetoric(s). This racially tuned revision of prior rhetorical histories of LBJ’s rhetorics demonstrates how his administration participated in sustaining white supremacy, fashioned a whitened image of “Mexican American” communities capable of flourishing in his “Great Society,” and excluded alternative political forms that challenged the assimilationism typically expected of Latinx communities more generally. I conclude that fomenting the political status of the white racial frame was integral to LBJ’s Great Society rhetoric and to evolutions in Chicana/o activism in the late 1960s.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85239454","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-11DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2143549
Zixuan Zhang, Keshu Li
ABSTRACT This study aims to analyze the affective economies that propel the viral circulations of the “Lying Flat” movement as a form of youth counternarrative in contemporary China with a special focus on the historic specificity and social imaginary revolving around the “Lying Flat” meme on Chinese social media. This study sees affect as social actions and historical constructs, exploring the sociohistorical conditions of the movement and an analysis of the bodily experience in the “Lying Flat” meme. The transduction of such experience further propels the development of the “Lying Flat” movement. We intend, through this study, to offer a detailed understanding of the uptake, circulation, and affect of the recent youth counternarratives in China. Transduction of affect across audio-visual resources in multimodality in this case suggests that objects of emotions can simultaneously take on varied forms, which propels wider circulations of affect that bind collective identities of marginalized groups of individuals.
{"title":"So you choose to “Lie Flat?” “Sang-ness,” affective economies, and the “Lying Flat” movement","authors":"Zixuan Zhang, Keshu Li","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2143549","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2143549","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study aims to analyze the affective economies that propel the viral circulations of the “Lying Flat” movement as a form of youth counternarrative in contemporary China with a special focus on the historic specificity and social imaginary revolving around the “Lying Flat” meme on Chinese social media. This study sees affect as social actions and historical constructs, exploring the sociohistorical conditions of the movement and an analysis of the bodily experience in the “Lying Flat” meme. The transduction of such experience further propels the development of the “Lying Flat” movement. We intend, through this study, to offer a detailed understanding of the uptake, circulation, and affect of the recent youth counternarratives in China. Transduction of affect across audio-visual resources in multimodality in this case suggests that objects of emotions can simultaneously take on varied forms, which propels wider circulations of affect that bind collective identities of marginalized groups of individuals.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76568888","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-24DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2147581
Nisha Shanmugaraj
ABSTRACT This study examines how second-generation Indian American women negotiate the “model minority” stereotype within their everyday rhetorical practices. Conducting a close reading of three extended case studies drawn from a larger qualitative interview study, I argue that though the model minority identity is perpetuated within families as an enactment of social fitness, felt contradictions with normative raced and gendered expectations can create space for Indian American women to disidentify from conditioned identities. Specifically, this study demonstrates how Indian American women can construct counterstories to reimagine reductive racial narratives in ways that channel the privilege of the model minority positionality towards socially transformative ends. These counterstories contain four themes: threats of racial failure, gender slippage, disidentification from internalized identities, and colonial constructions of empowerment. By interrogating the discursive effects of racialization on minoritized individuals, which permeate but do not wholly contain an individual’s lived experience, this study calls for rhetoricians to further explore how marginalized rhetors actively participate in their own race remaking, at once sustaining and disrupting dominant racial meanings.
{"title":"Disidentifying from the “model minority”: How Indian American women rearticulate dominant racial rhetorics","authors":"Nisha Shanmugaraj","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2147581","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2147581","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study examines how second-generation Indian American women negotiate the “model minority” stereotype within their everyday rhetorical practices. Conducting a close reading of three extended case studies drawn from a larger qualitative interview study, I argue that though the model minority identity is perpetuated within families as an enactment of social fitness, felt contradictions with normative raced and gendered expectations can create space for Indian American women to disidentify from conditioned identities. Specifically, this study demonstrates how Indian American women can construct counterstories to reimagine reductive racial narratives in ways that channel the privilege of the model minority positionality towards socially transformative ends. These counterstories contain four themes: threats of racial failure, gender slippage, disidentification from internalized identities, and colonial constructions of empowerment. By interrogating the discursive effects of racialization on minoritized individuals, which permeate but do not wholly contain an individual’s lived experience, this study calls for rhetoricians to further explore how marginalized rhetors actively participate in their own race remaking, at once sustaining and disrupting dominant racial meanings.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90298647","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-23DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2139856
Jonathan S. Carter, C. Alford
ABSTRACT After being criticized for promoting misinformation in the 2016 US presidential election, Facebook announced a “privacy-focused vision of social media.” Purportedly to decrease misinformation on users’ newsfeeds, these technical and rhetorical reforms moved users away from public-facing areas of the site, funneling them into private groups. Significantly, these reforms created groups organized around opinions increasingly disconnected from strangers’ views. Consequently, these changes facilitated publicities that fostered QAnon conspiracies, militia group recruitment, and right-wing violence. To understand this dangerous radicalization, we make explicit that publics are dependent on the opinions—the doxa—that constitute them. In clarifying that publics are rooted in doxa, we reveal how sociotechnical assemblages—particularly private Facebook groups—are creating what we call adoxastic publics, or publics made up of adoxa: asocial and highly sheltered, improbable, and often disreputable opinions. Specifically, we explore how the affordances of Facebook’s infrastructure divorce participants from encountering strange doxa, the heart of publics, instead promoting discursive stagnation and violent orientations towards others. These adoxastic affordances align with and embolden the rhetorical practices of masculine white nationalism and other dangerous ideologies. We conclude by offering the possibility of endoxastic networks as a productive correction to dangerous and anti-democratic adoxastic social media.
{"title":"Adoxastic publics: Facebook and the loss of civic strangeness","authors":"Jonathan S. Carter, C. Alford","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2139856","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2139856","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT After being criticized for promoting misinformation in the 2016 US presidential election, Facebook announced a “privacy-focused vision of social media.” Purportedly to decrease misinformation on users’ newsfeeds, these technical and rhetorical reforms moved users away from public-facing areas of the site, funneling them into private groups. Significantly, these reforms created groups organized around opinions increasingly disconnected from strangers’ views. Consequently, these changes facilitated publicities that fostered QAnon conspiracies, militia group recruitment, and right-wing violence. To understand this dangerous radicalization, we make explicit that publics are dependent on the opinions—the doxa—that constitute them. In clarifying that publics are rooted in doxa, we reveal how sociotechnical assemblages—particularly private Facebook groups—are creating what we call adoxastic publics, or publics made up of adoxa: asocial and highly sheltered, improbable, and often disreputable opinions. Specifically, we explore how the affordances of Facebook’s infrastructure divorce participants from encountering strange doxa, the heart of publics, instead promoting discursive stagnation and violent orientations towards others. These adoxastic affordances align with and embolden the rhetorical practices of masculine white nationalism and other dangerous ideologies. We conclude by offering the possibility of endoxastic networks as a productive correction to dangerous and anti-democratic adoxastic social media.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91211110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：