Psychiatric Disability and Rhetoricity: Refiguring Rhetoric and Composition Studies in the 21St Century
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Psychiatric Disability and Rhetoricity: Refiguring Rhetoric and Composition Studies in the 21st Century Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Elizabeth Marie Brewer, M.A., B.A. Graduate Program in English The Ohio State University 2014 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Brenda Jo Brueggemann, Advisor Dr. Cynthia L. Selfe Dr. Maurice Stevens Copyright by Elizabeth Marie Brewer 2014 Abstract “Psychiatric Disability and Rhetoricity: Refiguring Rhetoric and Composition Studies in the 21st Century” examines the ways in which mental health activists in the consumer/survivor/ex-patient (c/s/x) movement reframe medical models of mental illness by asserting their lived experience as valuable ontology. I use a mixed qualitative research methodology to analyze discussion board posts and vernacular videos as well as data from interviews I conducted with c/s/x activists. Seeking to correct the absence in rhetoric and composition of first-person perspectives from psychiatric disabled people, I demonstrate how disability studies provides a position from which the rhetorical agency of psychiatrically disabled people can be established. In Chapter 1, “Naming Psychiatric Disability and Moving Beyond the Ethos Problem,” I contextualize the absence of psychiatric disabled perspectives in the history of rhetoric. By demonstrating that the logic of psychiatric-disability-as-an-ethos-problem functions as an enthymeme that warrants re-examination, I denaturalize discourses that assume psychiatrically disabled rhetors have ethos problems. An interchapter follows Chapter 1, and provides an overview of Chapters 2-5 and my mixed, emergent qualitative research methodology. ii In my second chapter, “Interactivity and Rhetorical Ownership: The Icarus Project Discussion Board Posts,” I analyze the collaborative creation of a “mad vocabulary” taking place on an active discussion forum within a c/s/x community called the Icarus Project. Using grounded theory methods, I coded over 2,000 discussion board posts written over a span of ten years. Using this data, I demonstrate how individuals participating in the Icarus Project online draw on lived experience to claim “rhetorical ownership” over labels (Sontag 93). Chapter 3, “Vernacular Videos as Performances of Recovery: MindFreedom International’s I Got Better Project,” forges new ways of including psychiatrically disabled people in rhetoric and composition, and it does so by analyzing critical incidents within a collection of personal stories titled I Got Better that discuss recovery from psychiatric disabilities. I theorize stories from within the c/s/x movement function as performances of recovery, which contribute situated knowledge to the public discussion of mental health treatment and encourage identification with various audiences. In Chapter 4, “Constructing a Counterpublic: C/s/x Participants and Leaders Reflect on Alternative Communities” I analyze interviews that I conducted with six c/s/x activists and/or allies. This chapter adds depth to my analyses in Chapters 2 and 3 of c/s/x activists’ online rhetorical practices by uncovering the benefits of online communities from users’ perspectives. Although online c/s/x communities are publicly accessible and talk back to dominant cultural understandings of mental illness, these interviewees cite personal connections with peers as the main benefit of participation in online communities. I characterize online c/s/x communities as a counterpublic that embraces disability as a defining attribute of the online environment. iii My concluding chapter, “Creating Institutional Change by Moving Beyond the Ethos Problem: Pedagogical, Administrative, and Professional Implications,” synthesizes the findings from my research and imagines pedagogies, research projects, and administrative approaches that are designed by and for psychiatrically disabled people. I ultimately argue that first-person perspectives of psychiatrically disabled people are necessary for changing attitudes and professional practices. iv Dedication To my family, with all my love v Acknowledgements There is a lot of love in this dissertation. It has always been a project of the heart, fueled by the support of a community. To my parents, who believed in me always, before I believed in myself. Mom, you are a model of hard work mixed with passion—a combination I hope I’ve picked up along the way. Dad, I’m grateful for your unconditional support and generosity, and for your belief that this experiment in following my dreams would be worth it. To my brother, Rob. Your memory is in every one of these pages, and this project would never have existed without you. If you were here, I don’t think you’d be surprised at all that I powered through 11 years at Ohio State. You always were convinced I was resilient if nothing else. To my sisters, Amber and Nicola, for being the best friends a girl could ever ask for. We’ve really been through it all together. I don’t know how I got lucky enough to have two people in my life who take their best friend duty so seriously. To my family that has grown while I’ve been in graduate school. The Olsons, for accepting me as a part of your family and for making me laugh until I cry. I smile when I think about you calling my dissertation a romance novel. To the Cennas, for welcoming Brad and I into your clan and for putting my SAGE book on your Amazon wishlist (Jeff). vi To my Ohio State community. I am convinced that there could have been no better time for me to be in graduate school at Ohio State. What an extraordinary group of women to go through the program with. Jen, Annie, Julia, Lauren, Katie, Deb, Erika, and Melanie, how is there is such a list of sincere friends who also push my research, teaching, and administrative work to be better? And sincere thank you to Nan Johnson and Kay Halasek for their mentorship. To my advisor, Brenda. It has been an absolute delight to learn from you and work with you. You are a model of the academic I strive to be. You lead with joy, and I’ve always loved that about you. Thank you for telling me, yes, I could work in disability studies and rhetoric on that first day I visited your office hours. To my committee members—Cindy, for adopting me when Brenda went to Louisville, and for not letting me stop at ideas before they’ve turned to action. Maurice, for teaching me to occupy the space. To you both, for always believing I should be here. To my mentor, Margaret, for letting me ask all my questions. And for sending me portable fortitude cards. I continue to carry these with me. And, of course, to my loving husband, Brad. You have made me happier than I ever knew I could be. Thank you for making sure I am more than all work, all the time. vii Vita 2003………………………………………….…Mentor High School 2007…………………………………………….B.A., English, The Ohio State University 2009………………………………………...…..M.A., English, The Ohio State University 2009 to present…………………………………Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of English, The Ohio State University 2014……………………………………………Graduate Associate Teaching Award, The Ohio State University Publications Brewer, Elizabeth, and Brenda Jo Brueggemann. “A View from DSQ.” Disability Studies Quarterly. Special Issue on Growing Disability Studies. Eds. Michelle Jarman and Alison Kafer 34.2 (2014): n.pag. Web. Yergeau, Melanie, Elizabeth Brewer, Stephanie Kerschbaum, Sushil Oswal, Margaret Price, Michael Salvo, Cynthia Selfe, and Franny Howes. “Multimodality in Motion: Disability and Kairotic Spaces.” Kairos 18.1 (2013): n.pag. Web. Brueggemann, Brenda Jo, Elizabeth Brewer, Nicholas Hetrick, and Melanie Yergeau. Arts and Humanities (The SAGE Reference Series on Disability: Key Issues and Future Directions). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2012. Print. Fields of Study Major Field: English Rhetoric, Composition, and Literacy Studies Disability Studies viii Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………ii Dedication…………………………………………………………………………………v Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………….…vi Vita……………………………………………………………………………………...viii List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………….xii List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………...xiii Chapter 1: Naming Psychiatric Disability and Moving Beyond the Ethos Problem …………………………………………………………………….....1 Naming Psychiatric Disability…………………………………………………….6 Psychiatric Disability as an Ethos Problem……………………………………...14 Models of Disability in their Function as Terministic Screens………………….19 Psychiatric Disability in the History of Rhetoric………………………………...21 The Prominence of Reason in Aristotle………………………………………….25 Beyond Reason: Kenneth Burke’s Expansion of Rhetoric………………………27 Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca’s Challenge to Reason………..…31 Interdisciplinary Contributions to Rhetorical Theory from the 20th and 21st Century…………………………………………………………………………...34 Disability Studies Challenges the Reasonable Rhetor…………………...34 Feminist Theories and the Social Construction of Knowledge....……….37 Digital Media Studies: Valuing Diverse Modalities……………………..40 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….44 Interchapter: Chapter Organization and Methodology Overview…………….……45 Chapter Overview………………………………………………………………..45 Methodology………………………………………………………………..……48 Grounded Theory……………………………………………………..….49 Critical Incident Technique………………………………………………51 Audience-Driven Rhetorical Analysis……………………………...……54 Research Stance………………………………………………………….………54 Institutional Review Board Protocol……………………………………………..58