Elucidating the critical import of the project, Morris asserts, "Opposition to queer impoverishment within public address, if it is to intervene meaningfully needs to be revelatory of discipline and complicity, what has been said and not said, and how the history of American public address-the contexts, modes, and products of historical discourse, as well as the academic contexts, modes, and products of historical discourse-has or has not been spoken" (4). Rethinking the cultural scripts defining officials such as Lincoln stimulate historical and textual discussions by shifting essential elements of the discursive situation and altering taken-for-granted assumptions about enshrined bodies and their relation to national identity.
322 RHETORIC & PUBLIC AFFAIRS those engaged in by any number of other, nonsectarian universities nationwide, nor how these programs relate to BJU’s other rhetorical attempts to remain phys- ically and spiritually separate from its surrounding Greenville community. By the time Lewis addresses BJU’s public response to the Campaign 2000 scandal, she has all but abandoned her attempt to ﬁt everything neatly within a romantic frame. Instead, the author engages a more familiar pentadic analy- sis of the rhetoric to explain the motives behind what appears to be a fairly straightforward effort on the part of BJU to restore its public image. And that shift of focus may well represent the strongest contribution of Romancing the Difference to the study of rhetoric and public address: not the clear establish- ment of a new dramatistic frame through which to consider individuals’ and organizations’ rhetorical strategies, but rather an understanding of the need to discover how the various verbal and nonverbal facets of one’s rhetorical efforts function together to persuade a target audience to one’s own moral and ethical positions. To effectively woo the rhetorical Other while maintaining physical and spiritual distinction, one must surely engage in a wide range of strategies: some romantic, others comic or tragic. In the end, Lewis’s concluding entreaty to BJU to soften comically its evangelical zealotry in a contemporary world might well be directed at her own rigid attempts to see the complex universe of Bob Jones University within a strictly romantic frame. Phil Chidester Illinois State University Queering Public Address: Sexualities in American Historical Discourse. Edited by Charles E. Morris III. Columbia: South Carolina University Press, 2007; pp. ix 1 282. $49.95 cloth. Paul Cadmus’s painting “What I Believe” is prominently featured on the cover of Charles Morris’s deft and thought-provoking anthology Queering Public Address. Looking closely at the throng of nude bodies in the reproduced art, we ﬁnd hallmarks of the queer canon, including depictions of literary lumi- naries E. M. Forster and Christopher Isherwood. “What I Believe” pays homage to Forster’s essay of the same name, which champions the virtues of secular humanism over the destructive force of normatively driven creeds. The uto- pian longings projected by Cadmus and Forster prize inv
Pages to are hidden for
"Queering Public Address: Sexualities in American Historical Discourse"Please download to view full document