Speaking of Terror: Challenging Norms of Rhetorical Citizenship in Danish Public Discourse
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
The notion of rhetorical citizenship is introduced and its relevance to rhetorical studies suggested through a reading of a contemporary case of political discourse. An examination of critical reactions to two controversial statements illustrates how disappointed expectations to leading figures’ public statements led to criticism of their enactment of citizenship and questioning of their rhetorical agency. The overall claim is that the case suggest that an underdeveloped understanding of and appreciation of rhetoric’s role in public deliberation can have detrimental effects to such deliberation, including active or more indirect exclusion of particular points of view, deferral of certain discussions, and a less tolerant debate culture. It is suggested that public, political debate would benefit from increased attention to, and tolerance of, various manifestations of rhetorical practice, e.g. by combating essentializing argumentation that equates dissent with otherness and embracing a view of debate as productive, not destabilizing for the community. The concept of rhetorical citizenship may be one avenue for such development by virtue of its attention to various modes of enactment and more contextually informed underlying normative principles.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Bending Opinion : Essays on Persuasion in the Public Domain |
Editors | Ton van Haaften, Henrike Jansen, Jaap de Jong, Willem Koetsenruijter |
Number of pages | 15 |
Publisher | Leiden University Press |
Publication date | 2011 |
Pages | 407-421 |
Chapter | 21 |
ISBN (Print) | 9789087280994 |
ISBN (Electronic) | 9789400600201 |
Publication status | Published - 2011 |
ID: 32895921