PASSIONATE PUBLICS: CHRISTIAN MEDIA AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF CITIZENSHIP by KRISTJANA MADDUX (Under the Direction of Bonnie J. Dow) ABSTRACT This project elucidates and interrogates constructions of citizenship in contemporary Christian-themed mass media texts. Whereas Jürgen Habermas and Robert Putnam have bemoaned the decline in citizenship—rational-critical deliberation in the public sphere for Habermas and community involvement for Putnam—others have countered that their visions of decline are precipitated by a too-narrow view of citizenship and the public sphere. Beginning with a broadened approach to citizenship—informed by Robert Asen’s “discourse theory of citizenship”—I look to these popular media texts for the models of citizenship they construct. I focus on Christian media in particular in part because of the popular narrative that frames evangelical Christians as a newly-potent political force and a newly-lucrative consumer demographic, but also in light of Putnam’s admission that regular churchgoers buck the trend of declining civic participation. I pursue close textual analysis of three case studies—The Passion of the Christ, Left Behind, and The da Vinci Code—concluding that they offer distinct models of citizenship. The Passion, I maintain, celebrates feminine submission as the faithful practice of citizenship. That film, which depicts the suffering death of Jesus Christ in careful detail, makes heroines of Jesus’s faithful followers whose trust in an omnipotent God allows and encourages them to submit to unjust rulers. Left Behind, conversely, models brutish masculinity as the faithful performance of citizenship. In those novels, the Christian heroes fight the antichrist with physical violence, and they explicitly chastise characters who prize intellect. Finally, The da Vinci Code does not offer a model of citizenship. Even though it has been widely feared for its political implications— specifically its “radical feminism”—the novel’s preference for the private sphere leads it to privilege heterosexual reproduction as the performance of faithfulness. In the final chapter, I turn to the contemporary Christian backlash against the Christian Right as a way to read the political potential of the models of citizenship constructed by these mass media texts. Ultimately, I conclude that the models of citizenship offered by clergy, scholars, and elected officials share little in common with the models made so widely accessible through these media texts. INDEX WORDS: public sphere; citizenship; Christian media; feminist criticism; rhetorical criticism; femininity; masculinity; heteronormativity; The Passion of the Christ; Left Behind; The da Vinci Code PASSIONATE PUBLICS: CHRISTIAN MEDIA AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF CITIZENSHIP by KRISTJANA MADDUX M.A., University of Georgia, 2003 B.A., University of Puget Sound, 2001 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ATHENS, GEORGIA 2007 © 2007 Kristjana Maddux All Rights Reserved PASSIONATE PUBLICS: CHRISTIAN MEDIA AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF CITIZENSHIP by KRISTJANA MADDUX Major Professor: Bonnie J. Dow Committee: Celeste Condit Christine Harold John M. Murphy Patricia Richards Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia August 2007 iv DEDICATION For my grandmothers, Fran and Geri v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My graduate student colleagues have often joked that someone should create a reality TV show about our department. We have people to fill all the typical character profiles—the slacker, the preppy athlete, the go-getter, the nerd, etc. We would be articulate in the confessional. And we can certainly create enough drama to rival any reality show. But, really, graduate studies in a small department lends itself to the reality show format because it creates a sense of community otherwise uncommon outside the confines of the Big Brother or Real World houses. Although most of us don’t live together, we do share offices and hallways, take courses together, substitute teach each others’ classes on occasion, and then socialize outside of school. Given how intense this sense of community among faculty and graduate students can be, I consider myself lucky to have spent six years in the department of Speech Communication at the University of Georgia. I have spent my days (nights, weekends) surrounded by smart, caring, and interesting people. With and without the drama, it has been a great place to be. I want to acknowledge a few of the people who have made this community so special. Bonnie Dow has been the ideal advisor, and her influence on me is immeasurable. Living in both Athens and Nashville, she has always made herself accessible—through frequent meetings, phone calls, emails, and even the occasional text message. She has conscientiously read multiple drafts of (almost) everything I’ve written, providing valuable—and certainly honest—feedback at every stage. She has also been forthright in sharing her smart analyses of academic politics, which have added up to useful professional development advice for me. And from time to time, Bonnie has even dealt with my emotional outbursts—certainly her least vi favorite part of the advising relationship, but one she performs better than she ever gives herself credit for. The members of my comps and dissertation committee have been fantastic. All have been careful readers whose thoughtful questions have pushed my projects in productive ways. John Murphy has been caring, accessible, and reliable. His ever-comforting and cheerful presence in Terrell Hall, as well as his genuine care for the well-being of all of the graduate students, make Murphy integral to the success of graduate studies in this department. I am particularly grateful for Murphy always being accessible—often when he’s “just Murphin’” outside Blue Sky or Walker’s—to answer my questions, listen to my ideas, and talk me through writer’s block. Celeste Condit has been a constantly supportive presence for me. I have especially appreciated her encouragement through the manuscript review process, as well as her willingness to nurture my work even when my research interests veered ever more sharply from hers. I am thankful for the useful perspective Christine Harold has provided on my comps papers and dissertation. She has been a careful reader who has asked provocative and helpful questions. And I’m grateful to Patricia Richards whose graduate seminar in social movements gave me space to think and talk about the issues of public engagement as well as to confront my own disciplinary bias in approaching these issues. Like the others, Patricia has also provided helpful insights in committee meetings. I also want to acknowledge the other Speech Communication faculty members who have been integral to my professional development. Kevin Barge and Jen Monahan have both been great resources as basic course directors. Monahan spent a lot of time listening to me freak out during my first year of teaching, and Kevin allowed me leadership opportunities with the other TAs that may have benefited me more than them. I also appreciate the opportunity I had to take vii two classes with Kevin and to work on a research project that pushed me beyond the types of reading and thinking I’m accustomed to doing. Ed Panetta has also been a valuable influence, especially as his seminar on the Public Sphere immersed me in the literature that grounds this dissertation. And beyond UGA, my thanks go to Jim Jasinski at the University of Puget Sound, through whose undergraduate classes I acquired critical principles—especially the all-important demand to describe before interpreting—that continue to guide my writing. I have also benefited immensely from my interactions with the other smart people around me—the graduate students in Speech Communication. As a young MA student, I was lucky to be surrounded by more advanced graduate students pursuing feminist work, whose influence on me has been lasting. I remember especially fondly the Second Wave Feminism seminar I took my first year with Ashli Quesinberry Stokes, Kristan Poirot, Tasha Dubriwny, and Wendy Atkins-Sayre, all four of whom would serve as models of the feminist critic I aspire to be. Tasha, in particular, has remained a good friend and a valuable colleague. As often as we’ve traded “help me! I’m stuck” phone calls, Tasha’s role as a sounding board for my ideas has improved my writing significantly. Throughout my time at Georgia, these feminism conversations have continued, but I’ve also been delighted by the growing community of graduate students interested in religion. I am especially grateful for discussions of Christianity with Bethany Keeley over the last two years. And I would be remiss not to thank the members of the Rhetoric Writing Group—Jarrod Atchison, Shannon Holland, Davi Johnson, Shanara Reid, and Dylan Wolfe—who have been valuable resources for talking about ideas, trading citations, and providing feedback on drafts. As Shannon, Davi, and Dylan went through the job search process a year before the rest of us, they provided unmatchable insight into what might have otherwise been a mysterious ritual. Because of his characteristic honesty, integrity, and viii selflessness, Jarrod has been a great friend and colleague through the job applications, interviews, and dissertation writing that defined our last year. In addition to my colleagues in the department, I’m also grateful for my larger support network of friends in Athens and around the world—especially Carly, Cassie, Chris J., Elissa, Jen, Justin G., Justin K., Lavelle and Xornam—who have always been available for phone calls and coffee shop time, the kind of breaks that make writing possible. As always, I am thankful for the support I receive from my family. Mom, Rachel, and Riley have become especially invaluable distractions in the age of instant messenger. Finally, since I started working on this project, I have lost two strong women in my life—both of my grandmothers, Frances Elaine Anderson Bolerjack and Geraldine Jeannette Rowe Maddux.