Submitted by syntaxfactory on April 24, 2012 - 10:46pm
So let's get down to brass tacks:
The NCA Distinguished Scholar Award winners are listed below. If the winner listed is dead and you know their religious affiliation and feel comfortable sharing it, please do. If YOU are one of the winners listed below and you feel comfortable sharing your religious affiliation, please do.
Will this help? I don't know. There's a passage in a book edited by Van Eemeren in which Wenzel claims that he and Brockriede basically "invented" the same distinction in rhetorical studies at the same time (1978). Woot, I guess. But what if we learned that biographically, they come from different religious traditions --does that give us a hermeneutic to offer texture to distinguish their common innovations? When Gronbeck calls Ehninger a Modernist Rhetorician, does that contain within it implicit claims about orientation toward religion? Or could it be inflected if we understood something about Ehninger's religious orientation?
Religion, in other words, is a key hermeneutic for biographical criticism of philosophers, literary figures etc. - what is its place as a hermeneutic for the history of our common rhetorical field?
(Composition colleagues, I will be posting a similar list soon.)
1992
Carroll C. Arnold
Samuel L. Becker
Ernest G. Bormann
Karlyn Kohrs Campbell
Dennis S. Gouran
Franklyn S. Haiman
Kathleen H. Jamieson
George Kennedy
Gerald R. Miller
Robert L. Scott
1993
Jesse Delia
Roderick P. Hart
Mark L. Knapp
1994
Wayne Brockriede*
James J. Murphy
David Zarefsky
1995
Wallace A. Bacon
A. Craig Baird* -- Attended a Prebyterian Seminary -- Possibly Presbyterian?
Donald C. Bryant*
Douglas Ehninger*
Walter R. Fisher
Wilbur Samuel Howell*
Everett Lee Hunt*
Franklin H. Knower*
Marie Hochmut Nichols*
Herbert Simons
Karl Wallace*
Herbert A. Wichelns*
James A. Winans*
Charles Wollbert*
1996
Edwin Black
Beverly Whitaker Long
Bruce E. Gronbeck
1997
Lawrence Grossberg
Lloyd F. Bitzer
Thomas W. Benson
1998
Thomas B. Farrell
Julia T. Wood
Henry W. Johnstone Jr.
1999
Judee K. Burgoon
Linda L. Putnam
2000
James R. Andrews
Robert P. Newman
Ellen A. Wartella
2001
Michael C. Leff
2002
Celeste M. Condit
Michael S. Schudson
2003
No Honorees
2004
Stanley A. Deetz
Robert Hariman
David R. Seibold
Frans H. van Eemeren
2005
Joseph N. Cappella
Gerard A. Hauser
Martin J. Medhurst
Marshall Scott Poole
2006
John Waite Bowers
Brant R. Burleson
Doris A. Graber
2007
Lance Bennett
W. Norwood Brigance*
Robert Entman
Howard Giles
2008
James A. Aune
Leslie A. Baxter
Charles R. Berger
J. Michael Hogan
2009
Carole Blair
Stephen E. Lucas
Michael E. Roloff
Edward Schiappa
2010
John A. Daly
Steven W. Duck
Karen Tracy
Joseph Turow
2011
Clifford G. Christians
Gail T. Fairhurst
Dennis K. Mumby
Barbie Zelizer
I think it's actually a very important question, David, although let me complexify it a little. Several of the Jews on the list are, to my knowledge at least, NOT synagogue-goers. Two of them are. But all them would have been murdered by Hitler or targeted by radical Islamists. Similarly, I know many identify as "culturally Catholic," and, say, Tom Farrell, my PHD advisor who I know left the Church fairly early nonetheless had a Catholic funeral. It's sort of like the annoying "people of faith" thing I hear so often lately as a lame attempt at inclusion--Jews don't have a "faith" per se, simply varying degrees of "observance," and for groups like, say, Parsees or Sikhs for whom race/ethnicity/observance are inextricably entwined in ways that make no sense to US cafeteria Christianity, there are some problems. But it's funny, perhaps because I'm a Midwesterner and one who studies religion, that I actually know the affiliations of so many people on this list. .
and some more clews here:
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/rhetoric_and_public_affairs/toc/rap7.4.html
I can see this "hermeneutic" endeavor getting very messy (and contentious) quite easily - which is not to say it isn't worth pursuing.
DS
...and I'm not really expecting any living people to post their own religious orientations. After all, of living people, we respect a division between public and private, professional and private, that we do not distinguish for the dead, for whom all aspects of biography are open game for understanding their intellectual work.
I seem to recall that Ehninger attended Trinity Episcopal Church in Iowa City. And Gronbeck is Lutheran.
Putnam, Southern Baptist
Hariman, Presbyterian (northern)
Hauser and Medhurst, RC
Hogan, UCC
Christians, Reformed
Judging just by last names, you have a disproportionate number of Jews, of course.
"Rhetoric" exists right now as an odd conjuncture of writing, political/social theory, and the "field formerly known as speech." As Pat Gehrke and Josh Gunn and Bill Keith, among others, have taught us: Speech was weird. It never fit in to the dominant Discourse of the American University, but the untold story is that the US has been a mostly Protestant nation for most of its history, and "preaching" displaced ritual and the sacraments as the heart of worship. It is not surprising, then, that "speech" grew up as an at least partially cultural expression of the peculiar features of American life. One can no longer assume, of course, that people with PHD's in COMM, or even in Rhetoric, can display even rudimentary public speaking skills. Check out RSA in May. I won't name any names, but it fucking amazes me. I think I'm going to start campaigning to add a course in Voice and Articulation as a performance course option in our major. Right? Right? Um?
It's funny you should note that; Bill and Pat point out the attempt to distinguish the Speech Art types (the SAA members of 1890-1920) from the Public Speaking types without any mention of education in homiletics or preaching, right?
There were the elocutionists on the left, the academic teachers of public speaking on the right, and the teachers of preachers where? Affect, rationality, and faith, where faith is absent in the narrative?
methinks it was so taken for granted that it didn't come up.
I started by adding A. Craig Baird's possible Presbyterian roots based on seminary attendance.
Post new comment