Moving the Common Sensorium: a Rhetoric of Social Movements and Pathē

MOVING THE COMMON SENSORIUM: A RHETORIC OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND PATHĒ DISSERTATION PRESENTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY BY TIMOTHY TRIER JENSEN, M.A. GRADUATE PROGRAM IN ENGLISH * * * THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 2013 DISSERTATION COMMITTEE: PROFESSOR WENDY S. HESFORD, ADVISOR PROFESSOR EVONNE K. HALASEK PROFESSOR AMY SHUMAN Copyright by Tim JeNseN 2013 ABSTRACT This project seeks a more precise accouNt of aNd laNguage for what DaNiel Gross calls the “[emotioNal] coNtours of a dyNamic social field” aNd what MartiN Heidegger, iN referriNg to Aristotle’s accouNt of pathē, labels “the everydayness of BeiNg with oNe aNother.” Although such phrases poiNt toward theoretically fecuNd grouNd, they also iNdicate the termiNological difficulty eNcouNtered at the intersection of rhetoric, pathē, and structures of the social. The common sensorium, theorized as aN affective aNd emotioNal aNalogue to commoN seNse, is advanced as a concept to help elucidate the dyNamics occurriNg at this iNtersection. Whereas commoN seNse refers to the tacit logics of everyday liviNg, the commoN seNsorium refers to a cultural ambieNt of emotioNal Norms. IN order to examiNe the coNtours of the commoN seNsorium, I turN to social movemeNts, which I argue are primarily attempts to shift collective affective aNd emotioNal orieNtatioNs—in other words, attempts to move the common sensorium. The analysis of each chapter is organized around an apposite ideograph—a key term or slogaN particularly potent in binding, defining, aNd mobiliziNg collectivities. Specifically, I perform rhetorical aNalyses of <eco-friendly>, <local>, and <occupy>. Chapter ONe, “What Moves iN a Social MovemeNt,” establishes the project’s methodology aNd argues that the ideograph caN be reNdered more coNceptually ii robust aNd valuable to critics when integrated with insights from affect theory aNd critical emotioN studies. Chapter Two, “A Rhetoric of Collective Guilt: AtoNemeNt aNd the ENviroNmeNtal MovemeNt’s DevelopmeNt,” demoNstrates how <eco- friendly> rhetorics present a ready-made guilt-redemptioN cycle. By positioning iNdividual coNsumer acts as the solutioN for ecological ills, the desire to joiN collectivities of resistance and striving against political powers is significantly attenuated. Chapter Three, “Local Food’s Affective Advocacy,” reveals how Local Food movement rhetorics predomiNaNtly seek to sensitize others to the “feltness” of food aNd its coNtexts, thereby overcomiNg the NumbNess iNstilled through commodificatioN. I introduce the notion of affective advocacy to identify this rhetorical strategy, one that places the body aNd its material dyNamics as a primary locus for enacting social change. Chapter Four, “Occupy Anger,” explores the multiple valeNces of <occupy> within the context of Occupy Wall Street rhetorics and argues that because Occupy Wall Street rhetorics never coalesced around a siNgle demaNd—as their model movemeNt of Egypt’s Tahrir Square did—the movemeNt’s collective aNger never achieved resolution. Moving the Common Sensorium: A Rhetoric of Social Movements and Pathē contributes to the rhetorical theorization of how historical events, cultural institutions, and social practices are shaped through affect and emotioN, and in turn, how they shape the very conditions of possibility for pathē. iii DEDICATION To Genevieve Critel, colleague for life iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To my committee members, WeNdy Hesford, Kay Halasek, aNd Amy ShumaN, my immeasurable gratitude for the support, iNsight, aNd eNcouragemeNt you have so generously given throughout the evolution of this project. Wendy, you stopped me to chat one day iN August of 2006 and I have growN increasingly grateful for that momeNt, since it has led to such a fruitful scholarly relationship. To Cindy Selfe and Louie UlmaN, who also served oN my committee at various poiNts iN my time here, my most sincere thanks. Thank you to the ENglish DepartmeNt, iN particular the Rhetoric, CompositioN, aNd Literacy Studies program, aNd The Ohio State UNiversity Graduate School, which generously supported my research iN a Number of ways over the years. Kathleen Griffin, you deserve a large raise for the amouNt of good deeds you perform. TusiNd tak to the iNdomitable Amy Spears aNd the Digital Media Project, who not oNly taught me about techNology, but who also demoNstrated oN a daily basis what is needed to create a culture of innovative teaching. Special thanks to Scott DeWitt aNd Dickie Selfe, who were my meNtors iN more ways thaN they probably realize, aNd who remiNd me regularly through their actions that youthful exuberance, wonder, and curiosity have little to do with Numerical age. Numerous other scholars, staff and students at OSU have contributed to this project. You know who you are. Thank you. v To those friends whose support and advice help guide this project, my eterNal thaNks. Special thaNks goes to my work wife, Katie Comer, who pushed me (gently, she’ll tell you) into the field of rhetoric; every day I awake grateful for that guidance. I’m iNdebted to Michael Harker, who coNtiNually iNspires me to give back to the field that’s giveN me so much. ThaNks, too, to my best frieNd Cory CatigNaNi, my best frieNd Mike Pakula, aNd my best frieNd Tim Cleary. Ubi amici, ibi opes. To my family, I want to express my deepest appreciatioN for offering the kind of unfailing support at which I caN ofteN oNly marvel. My mother taught me to pay it forward and to be true to your school, just like you would to your girl or guy. Mom, thank you for your subtle suggestions that I should attend OSU, which has indeed giveN this sturdy soN of Ohio some of the gladdest days oN earth. My father taught me, quite simply, to work hard; No matter what passioNs you are pursuiNg, work hard at them. Dad, thaNk you for teachiNg me about ruNNiNg aNd raciNg back in the day. I didN’t realize at the time that you were really talkiNg about life aNd how to be a maN, Not just ruNNiNg. Tracy, Tammy, Tyler, DeaN, aNd LyNN: thaNk you for teachiNg me the wisdom iN raw, siNcere laughter. FiNally, my uNceasiNg thaNks aNd limitless love to Joy, who was kind enough to stop datiNg KeNNeth Burke aNd give me a shot. Joy taught me to chase storms, ride bulls, hop soul trains, stare down bad guys, puff up frog bellies, sow voodoo into cobblers, and wash dishes iN a timely, orderly fashion. Thank you, Joy. I’ve got my duds shouldered—shall we hasten forth? vi VITA JuNe 11, 1980…………………………………………......................BorN—Toledo, Ohio 2003…………………………………………........................................B.A. ENglish, Miami UNiversity, Oxford, Ohio 2008…………………………………………........................................M.A. ENglish (Rhetoric, CompositioN, & Literacy), The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 2006 – 2012…………………………………………........................Graduate AdmiNistrative and TeachiNg Associate, ENglish, The Ohio State University 2012 – preseNt…………………………………………...................Graduate Instructional ConsultaNt, University Center for the AdvaNcemeNt of Teaching, The Ohio State University PUBLICATIONS “ON the EmotioNal TerraiN of Neoliberalism,” The Journal of Aesthetics & Protest, 8.1 (2011): 231-38. “StagiNg the BeijiNg Olympics: INtersectiNg HumaN Rights & EcoNomic DevelopmeNt Narratives,” with Wendy S. Hesford, in The Megarhetorics of Global Development. ed. Rebecca Dingo and Blake Scott (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2011), 121-146. “LaNguage aNd LimitatioNs: Toward a New Praxis of Public INtellectualism,” with KathryN B. Comer, in Global Academe: The Location of Public Intellectual Discourse, ed. Karyn Hollis and Silvia Nagy-Zekmi (New York City: Palgrave MacMillan Press, 2011), 135-150. vii FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: English Specialization: Rhetoric, CompositioN, aNd Literacy Studies viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract……………………………..………..……………………………………………………………………….……ii DedicatioN………………………………………………………………………………………….………………….…iv AckNowledgemeNts………………………………………………………………………………….……….………..v Vita………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....vii List of Figures..………………………………………………………………………………………………………….xi Preface……….....………………………………………………………………………………………………………...xii Chapters IntroductioN: Case for the Common SeNsorium…….…………………………………………..…………1 IntroductioN……………………………………………………………………………………………...……1 Glossary INterlude…………………………………………………………………………………………..7 Stimmung as Affective Atmosphere……………………………………………………………….12 Common SeNsorium as ANalogue………………………………………………………….……….18 OutliNe of Chapters……………………………………………………………………………………....26 1. What Moves iN a Social MovemeNt……………………………………………………..………………….29 IntroductioN……………………..………………………………………………………………..…………29 IrratioNal FouNdatioNs……….………………………………………………………………………....33 RereadiNg FouNdatioNs iN Readings on the Rhetoric of Social Protest……………….38 MovemeNts of Ideographic OrieNtatioN..………………………………………………………..47 MovemeNts of EmotioNs………………………………………………………………………………..56 MovemeNts of TermiNology…………………………………………………………………………..61 2. A Rhetoric of Collective Guilt: AtoNemeNt aNd the ENviroNmeNtal MovemeNt’s DevelopmeNt……………………………….68 IntroductioN…………………………………………………………………………………………………68 “To CoNtaiN the EmergeNce”……….…………………………………………………………………73 Toward Guilt aNd Away From INdigNatioN……………………………………………………..80 Collective Guilt aNd Recalibration of the Guilt-RedemptioN Cycle……………...…….86 AgeNcy iN Collective Guilt……………………………………………………………………...………94 Guilt iN the CommoN SeNsorium……………………………………………………………...…….97 ix 3. Local Food’s Affective Advocacy………………………………………………………………………….102

Load more