Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2128205
Emily Winderman, Atilla Hallsby
OnMay 3, 2022, Emily concluded a first-year seminar on Reproductive Justice (hereafter RJ). The class brainstormed rhetorical practices that might enable and preclude meaningful coalition in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s anticipated overturn. The same day, Atilla’s rhetorical theory class reviewed “real” and “manufactured” instances of leaking. That evening, Politico published the leaked Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health draft decision. Although Alito’s leaked draft was a sensitizing moment for some, RJ activists and attorneys had anticipated the decision. Invalidating Constitutionally guaranteed rights to abortion and privacy, the leak staged an attack on stare decisis, confirmed in June with Justice Thomas’s insistence that the Court revisit other Roe-backed decisions like Obergefell v. Hodges. While many claimed the leak was unprecedented, two Roe v. Wade-related leaks occurred in the 1970s. Whereas the June 24, 2022 Dobbs decision officially overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, this essay considers the rhetorical significance of the leak. Leaks signify a dual transgressive fluidity, in the sense that information or bodily contaminants (e.g., blood, saliva) seep – both pleasurably and dangerously – across boundaries that have become porous. The body’s inherent ‘leakiness’ also means that embodied and gendered metaphors are a readily available shorthand for leaks that circumvent institutional bodies, like the Supreme Court. The Dobbs leak stages this situation: a fluid movement of information that transgressed an institutional boundary. However, given the impossibility of metaphorically suturing the institutional body by staunching the flow of information, many pundits channeled the loss of control brought on by the leak into a different bodily register. By prioritizing biologically sexed “women,” these commentors restricted coalitional language that affirmed gender fluidity and denied the personhood of the transgender and non-binary pregnant bodies also affected by Dobbs. As we argue, pundits rhetorically “sutured” the Dobbs v. Jackson leak by elevating “women” as the centralizing term for post-Roe coalitional identifications. By excluding abortion’s relevance to the more gender-fluid coalition of pregnant people, these responses also eschewed a more comprehensive RJ framework needed for future fights toward reproductive freedom. Our forum contribution traces the regressively gendered framings of the Dobbs leak in public discourse. We note especially how gender-suturing responses pre-emptively limited a broader abortion coalition. The RJ framework helps to anticipate future alignments between anti-abortion activists and trans-exclusionary feminists. We close by considering leaky coalitions that highlight the necessity of broader reproductive boundaries.
2022年5月3日，艾米丽结束了生殖正义(以下简称RJ)的第一年研讨会。在罗伊诉韦德案预计将被推翻之后，班级集体讨论了可能促成或阻止有意义的联盟的修辞实践。同一天，阿提拉的修辞学理论课回顾了“真实的”和“捏造的”泄密事件。当晚，《政治》杂志公布了泄露的多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康案裁决草案。虽然阿利托泄露的草案对一些人来说是一个敏感的时刻，但RJ活动家和律师已经预料到了这一决定。这一泄密事件使宪法保障的堕胎权和隐私权无效，对传统决策发起了攻击。今年6月，托马斯大法官坚持要求最高法院重新审议奥贝格费尔诉霍奇斯案(Obergefell v. Hodges)等其他由罗伊支持的判决，证实了这一点。虽然许多人声称这次泄密是前所未有的，但与罗伊诉韦德案有关的两次泄密事件发生在20世纪70年代。鉴于2022年6月24日的多布斯判决正式推翻了罗伊诉韦德案和计划生育联合会诉凯西案，本文考虑了泄密的修辞意义。泄漏意味着一种双重越界的流动性，从某种意义上说，信息或身体污染物(如血液、唾液)渗透——既愉快又危险——越过已经变得多孔的边界。该机构固有的“漏洞”也意味着，具体化和性别化的隐喻是规避最高法院等机构的漏洞的现成捷径。多布斯泄密事件引发了这种情况:一种超越制度边界的信息流动。然而，鉴于不可能通过阻止信息流动来隐喻地缝合机构机构，许多专家将泄密带来的失控归咎于不同的身体登记册。通过优先考虑生理性别的“女性”，这些评论者限制了肯定性别流动性的联合语言，并否认了变性人和非二元怀孕身体的人格，这些身体也受到多布斯的影响。正如我们所争论的那样，专家们在修辞上“缝合”了多布斯诉杰克逊案的漏洞，将“女性”提升为后罗伊案件联盟身份的集中术语。通过排除堕胎与孕妇性别流动性更强的联盟的相关性，这些回应也回避了未来争取生殖自由所需的更全面的RJ框架。我们的论坛贡献追溯了公共话语中多布斯泄密的倒退性别框架。我们特别注意到性别缝合反应如何先发制人地限制了更广泛的堕胎联盟。RJ框架有助于预测未来反堕胎活动家和跨性别排斥女权主义者之间的结盟。最后，我们将讨论一些有漏洞的联盟，这些联盟强调了扩大生殖边界的必要性。
{"title":"The Dobbs Leak and Reproductive Justice","authors":"Emily Winderman, Atilla Hallsby","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2128205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2128205","url":null,"abstract":"OnMay 3, 2022, Emily concluded a first-year seminar on Reproductive Justice (hereafter RJ). The class brainstormed rhetorical practices that might enable and preclude meaningful coalition in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s anticipated overturn. The same day, Atilla’s rhetorical theory class reviewed “real” and “manufactured” instances of leaking. That evening, Politico published the leaked Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health draft decision. Although Alito’s leaked draft was a sensitizing moment for some, RJ activists and attorneys had anticipated the decision. Invalidating Constitutionally guaranteed rights to abortion and privacy, the leak staged an attack on stare decisis, confirmed in June with Justice Thomas’s insistence that the Court revisit other Roe-backed decisions like Obergefell v. Hodges. While many claimed the leak was unprecedented, two Roe v. Wade-related leaks occurred in the 1970s. Whereas the June 24, 2022 Dobbs decision officially overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, this essay considers the rhetorical significance of the leak. Leaks signify a dual transgressive fluidity, in the sense that information or bodily contaminants (e.g., blood, saliva) seep – both pleasurably and dangerously – across boundaries that have become porous. The body’s inherent ‘leakiness’ also means that embodied and gendered metaphors are a readily available shorthand for leaks that circumvent institutional bodies, like the Supreme Court. The Dobbs leak stages this situation: a fluid movement of information that transgressed an institutional boundary. However, given the impossibility of metaphorically suturing the institutional body by staunching the flow of information, many pundits channeled the loss of control brought on by the leak into a different bodily register. By prioritizing biologically sexed “women,” these commentors restricted coalitional language that affirmed gender fluidity and denied the personhood of the transgender and non-binary pregnant bodies also affected by Dobbs. As we argue, pundits rhetorically “sutured” the Dobbs v. Jackson leak by elevating “women” as the centralizing term for post-Roe coalitional identifications. By excluding abortion’s relevance to the more gender-fluid coalition of pregnant people, these responses also eschewed a more comprehensive RJ framework needed for future fights toward reproductive freedom. Our forum contribution traces the regressively gendered framings of the Dobbs leak in public discourse. We note especially how gender-suturing responses pre-emptively limited a broader abortion coalition. The RJ framework helps to anticipate future alignments between anti-abortion activists and trans-exclusionary feminists. We close by considering leaky coalitions that highlight the necessity of broader reproductive boundaries.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"64 1","pages":"421 - 425"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87576537","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 : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2128203
C. Condit
ABSTRACT This essay contrasts the reform rhetorics that were used to legalize abortion in the US with current anger-driven rhetorics surrounding abortion rights. Applying a materialist both/and feminist perspective it argues for the ethics and efficacy of the both/and rhetorical strategies used in the reform era. It suggests replacing the radical/reform dichotomy with a spectrum that prefers relatively broadening over more narrowing rhetorics. Current narrowing rhetorics envision large segments of the populace as enemies rather than as co-citizens who have legitimate interests that should be encompassed in the rhetorical frames that one offers.
{"title":"Rhetorical strategies for retrieving abortion rights","authors":"C. Condit","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2128203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2128203","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay contrasts the reform rhetorics that were used to legalize abortion in the US with current anger-driven rhetorics surrounding abortion rights. Applying a materialist both/and feminist perspective it argues for the ethics and efficacy of the both/and rhetorical strategies used in the reform era. It suggests replacing the radical/reform dichotomy with a spectrum that prefers relatively broadening over more narrowing rhetorics. Current narrowing rhetorics envision large segments of the populace as enemies rather than as co-citizens who have legitimate interests that should be encompassed in the rhetorical frames that one offers.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"20 1","pages":"441 - 445"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81191714","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 : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2128204
Natalie Fixmer-Oraiz
ABSTRACT We inhabit a world fundamentally transformed in the decades since Roe v. Wade. This includes seismic shifts wrought by the rise of homeland security culture, wherein intense digital surveillance and privacy violations are figured as both pedestrian and inevitable. It is no coincidence that the evisceration of constitutionally-protected abortion care under the right to “privacy” specifically unfolds in this moment. There is no going back. Moving forward entails understanding the Dobbs decision in the broader context of homeland security culture and a centering of reproductive justice as critical to US democracy.
{"title":"No going back: The struggle for a post-Roe reproductive justice","authors":"Natalie Fixmer-Oraiz","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2128204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2128204","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We inhabit a world fundamentally transformed in the decades since Roe v. Wade. This includes seismic shifts wrought by the rise of homeland security culture, wherein intense digital surveillance and privacy violations are figured as both pedestrian and inevitable. It is no coincidence that the evisceration of constitutionally-protected abortion care under the right to “privacy” specifically unfolds in this moment. There is no going back. Moving forward entails understanding the Dobbs decision in the broader context of homeland security culture and a centering of reproductive justice as critical to US democracy.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"27 1","pages":"426 - 430"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82251049","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 : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2144180
Kiara Walker, Patricia Roberts‐Miller
{"title":"I the People: The Rhetoric of Conservative Populism in the United States","authors":"Kiara Walker, Patricia Roberts‐Miller","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2144180","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2144180","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"5 1","pages":"450 - 453"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85861724","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 : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2131215
K. Anderson
ABSTRACT In this forum, feminist rhetorical scholars address reproductive justice and injustice in the aftermath of Dobbs. Exhibiting diverse perspectives, concerns, and critical approaches, forum contributors consider topics such as the reinforcement and disruption of the gender binary in the discourse surrounding Dobbs; privacy and precarity in the homeland security state; the structures of power and control that perpetuate gendered violence and reproductive injustices; how anti-abortion arguments are “nested” within one another in a structure that obscures their complexity; and how radical and reformist rhetoric might productively respond to the conservative judicial and legislative climate that resulted in Roe’s repudiation.
{"title":"Rhetorics of reproductive justice and injustice in the aftermath of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization","authors":"K. Anderson","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2131215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2131215","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this forum, feminist rhetorical scholars address reproductive justice and injustice in the aftermath of Dobbs. Exhibiting diverse perspectives, concerns, and critical approaches, forum contributors consider topics such as the reinforcement and disruption of the gender binary in the discourse surrounding Dobbs; privacy and precarity in the homeland security state; the structures of power and control that perpetuate gendered violence and reproductive injustices; how anti-abortion arguments are “nested” within one another in a structure that obscures their complexity; and how radical and reformist rhetoric might productively respond to the conservative judicial and legislative climate that resulted in Roe’s repudiation.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"67 1","pages":"418 - 420"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83967875","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 : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2144182
Wallace S. Golding
{"title":"Ecologies of Harm: Rhetorics of Violence in the United States","authors":"Wallace S. Golding","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2144182","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2144182","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"48 1","pages":"453 - 457"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84522153","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 : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2144186
Michael Klajbor-Smith
{"title":"The Deportation Machine: America's Long History of Expelling Immigrants","authors":"Michael Klajbor-Smith","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2144186","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2144186","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"117 1","pages":"460 - 464"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76864822","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 : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2087611
Victoria T. Fields
emerged, justifying the accommodation of various art forms in academic research. Blending critical and creative thinking, ABR targets at harmonizing science and arts in the troubled times. ABR integrates academic research and creative art forms, specifically language arts, visual arts, and performative arts. A remarkable strength of Speaking of Race is that it embraces multiple forms of research and argumentation, including anecdotes and narratives, etc. On the one hand, this kind of research is marginalized, and criticized by some mainstream academic researchers for being non-academic and unscientific. On the other hand, it engages a wider readership, affords alternative ways to carry out academic research, and attempts to harmonize the scientific tradition and the tradition of writing in a critical and creative way. Top-tier academic journals have been publishing papers written in this style, for instance Text and Performance Quarterly, Qualitative Inquiry, Canadian Literature, Life Writing, etc.. Roberts-Miller’s book manifests the endeavor to enhance the polylithic academia. From a white scholar’s perspective, this book showcases how controversial, pervasive and tricky racism is in our daily lives, as well as how to adopt appropriate attitudes toward racism and how to confront racism in a practical and effective way. RobertMiller’s natural tendency to resort to stories in her argumentation also increases the readability of the book and conforms to the “conventions” in biblical narratives from the very beginning of Genesis. Overall, it is a high-quality book that merits recommendation.
{"title":"Politics for the Love of Fandom: Fan-Based Citizenship in a Digital World","authors":"Victoria T. Fields","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2087611","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2087611","url":null,"abstract":"emerged, justifying the accommodation of various art forms in academic research. Blending critical and creative thinking, ABR targets at harmonizing science and arts in the troubled times. ABR integrates academic research and creative art forms, specifically language arts, visual arts, and performative arts. A remarkable strength of Speaking of Race is that it embraces multiple forms of research and argumentation, including anecdotes and narratives, etc. On the one hand, this kind of research is marginalized, and criticized by some mainstream academic researchers for being non-academic and unscientific. On the other hand, it engages a wider readership, affords alternative ways to carry out academic research, and attempts to harmonize the scientific tradition and the tradition of writing in a critical and creative way. Top-tier academic journals have been publishing papers written in this style, for instance Text and Performance Quarterly, Qualitative Inquiry, Canadian Literature, Life Writing, etc.. Roberts-Miller’s book manifests the endeavor to enhance the polylithic academia. From a white scholar’s perspective, this book showcases how controversial, pervasive and tricky racism is in our daily lives, as well as how to adopt appropriate attitudes toward racism and how to confront racism in a practical and effective way. RobertMiller’s natural tendency to resort to stories in her argumentation also increases the readability of the book and conforms to the “conventions” in biblical narratives from the very beginning of Genesis. Overall, it is a high-quality book that merits recommendation.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"21 1","pages":"346 - 349"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84123946","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 : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2091154
Jenny Rice
ABSTRACT By the 1980s, the standard sender-receiver communication model (borrowed from Shannon and Weaver) had largely fallen out of favor in disciplinary circles. Yet, at the same time that communication and rhetoric scholars were taking aim at sender-receiver models, a different conversation about communication was circulating in public spaces. Throughout the 1980s, the rise of both New Age channeling and Pentecostal practices of speaking in tongues was, in their own ways, also re-imagining the concept of communication and the traditional categories of senders, receivers, information, and messages. In this essay, I argue that channeling as a public phenomenon in the 1980s contributed to a lay theory—or paratheory—of communication that simultaneously worked against, alongside, and outside traditional communication models. Further, this para-normal paratheory continues to resonate in some of our most troubling contemporary public rhetoric.
{"title":"Communication channels in the 1980s: A paratheory","authors":"Jenny Rice","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2091154","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2091154","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT By the 1980s, the standard sender-receiver communication model (borrowed from Shannon and Weaver) had largely fallen out of favor in disciplinary circles. Yet, at the same time that communication and rhetoric scholars were taking aim at sender-receiver models, a different conversation about communication was circulating in public spaces. Throughout the 1980s, the rise of both New Age channeling and Pentecostal practices of speaking in tongues was, in their own ways, also re-imagining the concept of communication and the traditional categories of senders, receivers, information, and messages. In this essay, I argue that channeling as a public phenomenon in the 1980s contributed to a lay theory—or paratheory—of communication that simultaneously worked against, alongside, and outside traditional communication models. Further, this para-normal paratheory continues to resonate in some of our most troubling contemporary public rhetoric.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":"93 1","pages":"317 - 338"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76715724","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 : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2087614
J. Edwards
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.
{"title":"Resowing the Seeds of War: Presidential Peace Rhetoric since 1945","authors":"J. Edwards","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2087614","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2087614","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":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79858204","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：