SACROSANCT VALUES, CONTROVERSIAL ARTISTIC EXPRESSION, AND TODAY’S GLOBAL SOCIETY: A DRAMATISTIC ANALYSIS OF THE MUHAMMAD CARTOON CONTROVERSY BY C2009 ZETA C. HALL B.S., Business, University of Kansas 1995 J.D., University of Kansas, 2000 Submitted to the graduate degree program in Communication Studies and the Graduate Faculty of The University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy _______________________ Dr. Diana B. Carlin Chairperson Committee members: _______________________ Dr. Dorthy Pennington _______________________ Dr. Beverly Mack Department of African and African American Studies _______________________ Dr. Margaret J. Rausch Department of Religious Studies _______________________ Dr. Thomas W. Volek School of Journalism and Mass Communications Date defended: January 20, 2009 The Dissertation Committee for Zeta C. Hall certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: SACROSANCT VALUES, CONTROVERSIAL ARTISTIC EXPRESSION, AND TODAY’S GLOBAL SOCIETY: A DRAMATISTIC ANALYSIS OF THE MUHAMMAD CARTOON CONTROVERSY Committee: _______________________ Dr. Diana B. Carlin Chairperson _______________________ Dr. Dorthy Pennington _______________________ Dr. Beverly Mack Department of African and African American Studies _______________________ Dr. Margaret J. Rausch Department of Religious Studies _______________________ Dr. Thomas W. Volek School of Journalism and Mass Communications Date approved: January 22, 2009 ii DEDICATION To Timetrious and Ronald, the two most important people in my life. Yes, you, I, we can. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe a debt of gratitude to the many people who assisted me in bringing this project to completion. Ronald’s encouragement to keep moving forward was invaluable. And his attention to some of life’s details made it possible for me to focus on the work at hand. Expressions of support from Timetrious empowered me to press on in the face of what, at times, seemed like insurmountable challenges to completing this project. I owe an enormous debt of gratitude to my immediate and extended family for their unwavering love and support. You are a gift from God. I am grateful to Dr. Diana Carlin, my advisor and committee chair, for her insight and direction. Dr. Carlin helped me to narrow my topic in order to develop a project from the immense amount of material that I collected over the years. Her confidence in my skill as a rhetorical critic was motivational. I am also grateful to my committee members. Dr. Beverly Mack’s interest in my project was a source of encouragement that I drew upon often. Her criticism and amazing skill in delivering it with the touch of a feature was priceless. I thank Dr. Dorthy Pennington for investing the time to review my work and provide meaningful feedback. I am extremely grateful to Dr. Carlin for recommending that I ask Drs. Margaret J. Rausch and Thomas W. Volek to serve on my committee. Dr. Rausch provided helpful feedback and her participation made for an enlightening oral defense. Dr. Volek’s enjoyment in reading my work inspired me to continue writing. Over the course of a long project, such as a dissertation, the pleasure of writing can diminish. I reflected on Dr. Volek’s iv words of appreciation and encouragement often during my regular pre-dawn work hours. I thank my entire committee for sharing their knowledge and expertise with me during the completion of this project. In the process I learned much more about you, myself, scholarship, and editing. And in the process I became more passionate about scholarship and writing. I would be remiss if I did not mention that I am extremely grateful to Gretchen Anderson in Instructional Services for her expertise with computer software and her skill in assisting software users. With her help, I was able to maintain my sanity during the development and completion of this project. Some of my committee members and others who helped me along the way told me that they were just doing their job. My response to them is thank you for being consummate professionals. Finally, I am grateful for the opportunity to develop and complete my project, which is an expression of my love for both humankind, and the written and spoken word. v ABSTRACT The Muhammad1 Cartoon Controversy was unique to all other art controversies involving the melding of the sacred and the profane. And it differed from all art conflicts prior to it in that it was global in scope; engaged millions of people in protest (peaceful and violent); and resulted in property damage, economic disaster, the loss of good will between nations, and the loss of life. Following publication of the cartoons, a debate about freedom of expression vs. religious sensibilities swept the globe. This study is an exploration into how the Muhammad Cartoon Controversy unfolded at three critical thresholds of the conflict’s development vis-à-vis a comprehensive examination of the scope of the phenomenon. First, this study focuses a lens on critical communications that transpired in Denmark among key figures engaged in the conflict. Second, the interviews of Flemming Rose provide insight into how the conflict was dramatized by Jyllands-Posten and Flemming Rose for international dissemination. Third, the televised broadcasts provide examples of how the controversy was dramatized for American audiences. Together, these rhetorical artifacts allow for analysis of the product of the worldviews as expressed through the cartoons, multiplied by the values and traditions of the interlocutors, and multiplied by the amplification of the conflict through televised broadcasts. Dramatizations by parties at the center of the controversy 1 Out of respect for the religious sensibilities of readers, where the name Muhammad and the term Prophet appear in this work the phrase Peace Be Upon Him is understood. vi affected how the phenomenon was perceived in Denmark and Europe. How the controversy was framed in mediated discourse resulted in a different, more toxic, interpretation of the conflict for American audiences. The ultimate purpose of this study is to determine what lessons learned can be applied to ameliorate future international conflicts involving disparate value systems. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ............................................................................................................. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... iv ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. vi CHAPTER ONE Symbolic Disequilibrium ................................................................ 1 Anatomy of the Controversy ..................................................................................... 3 Controversial Artistic Expression ............................................................................. 9 The Sacred and the Profane ................................................................................ 12 Visualizing the Sacred ......................................................................................... 16 Representations and the War of Words .............................................................. 20 About this Study ..................................................................................................... 29 Overview of the Study ............................................................................................ 30 References ............................................................................................................... 33 CHAPTER TWO Clang of the Symbol ...................................................................... 41 Method .................................................................................................................... 41 Selection of Texts ................................................................................................ 42 Official communications. ................................................................................ 42 Interviews. ....................................................................................................... 42 Television broadcasts. ..................................................................................... 43 Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................... 44 Kenneth Burke’s pentad. ................................................................................. 46 Erving Goffman’s frame analysis. .................................................................. 48 Walter Fisher’s narrative paradigm. ............................................................... 51 viii Pan & Kosicki’s strategic framing. ................................................................. 52 Additional Burkean tool. ................................................................................. 53 Weaver’s “god” and “devil” terms ................................................................. 54 Questions for the Objects of Study ......................................................................... 56 Analyzing the Objects of Study .............................................................................. 57 References ............................................................................................................... 59 CHAPTER THREE Analysis of the Official Communications ................................. 63 Official Communications