Death, Difference, and Dialogue

University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 1-1-2009 April 4, 1968: Death, Difference, and Dialogue Kristine Marie Warrenburg University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the Communication Commons Recommended Citation Warrenburg, Kristine Marie, "April 4, 1968: Death, Difference, and Dialogue" (2009). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 950. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/950 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. APRIL 4, 1968: DEATH, DIFFERENCE, AND DIALOGUE ROBERT F. KENNEDY ANNOUNCES THE ASSASSINATION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. __________ A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of Arts and Humanities University of Denver __________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy __________ by Kristine Warrenburg August 2009 Advisor: Darrin Hicks, Ph.D. ©Copyright by Kristine Warrenburg 2009 All Rights Reserved Author: Kristine Warrenburg Title: APRIL 4, 1968: DEATH, DIFFERENCE, AND DIALOGUE ROBERT F. KENNEDY ANNOUNCES THE ASSASSINATION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. Advisor: Darrin Hicks, Ph.D. Degree Date: August 2009 ABSTRACT Robert Kennedy’s announcement of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., in an Indianapolis urban community that did not revolt in riots on April 4, 1968, provides one significant example in which feelings, energy, and bodily risk resonate alongside the articulated message. The relentless focus on Kennedy’s spoken words, in historical biographies and other critical research, presents a problem of isolated effect because the power really comes from elements outside the speech act. Thus, this project embraces the complexities of rhetorical effectivity, which involves such things as the unique situational context, all participants (both Kennedy and his audience) of the speech act, aesthetic argument, and the ethical implications. This version of the story embraces the many voices of the participants through first hand interviews and new oral history reports. Using evidence provided from actual participants in the 1968 Indianapolis event, this project reflects critically upon the world disclosure of the event as it emerges from those remembrances. Phenomenology provides one answer to the constitutive dilemma of rhetorical effectivity that stems from a lack of a framework that gets at questions of ethics, aesthetics, feelings, energy, etc. Thus, this work takes a pedagogical shift away from discourse (verbal/written) as the primary place to render judgments about the effects of communication interaction. With a turn to explore extra-sensory reasoning, by way of the physical, emotional, and numinous, a multi-dimensional look at public address is delivered. The rhetorician will ii be interested in new ways of assessing effects. The communication ethicist will appreciate the work as concepts like answerability, emotional-volitional tone, and care for the other, come to life via application and consideration of Kennedy’s appearance. For argumentation scholars, the interest comes forth in a re-thinking of how we do argumentation. And the critical cultural scholar will find this story ripe with opportunities to uncover the politics of representation, racialized discourse, privilege, power, ideological hegemony, and reconciliation. Through an approach of multiple layers this real-life tale will expose the power of the presence among audience and speaker, emotive argument, as well as the magical turn of fate which all contributes the possibility of a dialogic rhetoric. iii Acknowledgements This work is a result of several thoughtful conversations, genuine reflection, and a sincere interest to uncover moments of connection despite difference. Beginning as a historical research project, this work has evolved from my M.A. thesis, Butler University 2003, through many turns as class and conference presentations, some parts published in proceedings, and is presented here now as my most collective reflection of April 4, 1968. I thank the following advisors, friends, and family: Michelle Mannering, Ph.D., Robert Cornet, Ph.D., Darrin Hicks, Ph.D., Roy Wood, Ph.D., Christina Foust, Ph.D., Ann Doybns, Ph.D., and others; fellow HCOM colleagues - Sue, Rob, Kate, Alexa, Dave, Rachel, Michelle, Bert, and others; those who are closest to me, especially the Backs and Warrenburgs, Vince, Diane, Ryan and Jonathan - who have provided support, both intellectual and otherwise, in stressful times and in liberation. An introductory version of this paper was delivered as a conference paper and published in the proceedings as part of The Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, June 2006. More recently, parts of the visceral chapter were delivered as a conference paper and are to be published in the proceedings as part of the Argumentation Cultures conference, sponsored by the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada, June 2009. Reviewers, panel and audience members, present at these and the following academic meetings deserve acknowledgment for appraising portions of this dissertation project: National Communication Association Annual Conference 2004, 2007, 2006; Rhetoric Society of America Biennial Conference 2006; Central States Communication Association Conference, iv 2006; the Rocky Mountain Interdisciplinary History Conference, 2003; and the Indiana Association of Historians Conference, 2003. I also thank Sara Veglahn, Ph.D., for her editorial review. Other resources, including those audience members willing to share their memories of April 4, 1968, are essential to this dissertation project. Furthermore, the “Interviews done for the documentary “A Ripple of Hope; Robert F. Kennedy in Indianapolis, 1968”, conducted by Donald Boggs and David Baird © 2008 Covenant Productions provide layers of meaning unattainable without the assistance of these other researchers. My gratitude is great. The legacy and leadership of both Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr., is also paramount to the work you read here. It is because of their courage, action, and influence, that so many are inspired to follow messages of hope. v Table of Contents CHAPTER ONE: THE INTRODUCTION: THE STORY: APRIL 4, 1968: SCENE, SITUTION, WORDS, AND BEYOND ...........................................................................1 Robert F. Kennedy Hits the Campaign Trail .......................................................2 A Tragic Turn ...........................................................................................2 The News ..................................................................................................4 The Decision .............................................................................................9 17th & Broadway: A Dark & Stormy Night ........................................................11 Kennedy Arrives on Site .........................................................................14 Kennedy Takes the Stage ........................................................................17 Crowd Responds Nonviolently ...............................................................26 The Power of Kennedy’s Appearance: What the Crowd Remembers .................27 The Conclusion ....................................................................................................31 CHAPTER TWO: THE PROBLEM: MULTIFACTED ACCOUNTABILITY AND CONTRIBUTION TOWARD RHETORICAL EFFECTIVITY ...................................34 The Problem: Accounting for the Multifaceted Effects ......................................35 Kennedy’s Announcement of King’s Assassination: A Review of Literature ...40 Biography ................................................................................................42 Words/Arguments ...................................................................................50 The Conclusion ...................................................................................................57 CHAPTER THREE: THE METHOD: PHENOMENOLOGY AS METHOD: ACCOUNTING FOR CONTEXT IN ARGUMENTATION ........................................61 Immediacy, Risk, and Fusion Found in the Rhetorical Situational Context .......62 Traditional Views of Argument and the Repression of Multimodality ..............69 Context and Constitutive Effects ........................................................................73 Accounting for Multimodal Contexts .................................................................74 The Multiple Modes of Reasoning: Conceptualizing the Tasks at Hand ...........76 The Logical Mode of Reasoning.............................................................77 The Visceral Mode of Reasoning ...........................................................79 The Emotional Mode of Reasoning ........................................................80 The Kisceral Mode of Reasoning ...........................................................82 The Conclusion: Phenomenology & Multi-Modal Reasoning ...........................84 CHAPTER FOUR: THE VISCERAL: POLTICS IN A RACED SPACE: VISCERAL REASONING IN CRITICAL COMMUNICATION .....................................................86 The Racial Contract ............................................................................................87

Load more