G. Thomas Goodnight ASC Core Course Spring 2012 Humanities and Social Science Approaches to Human Communication II Syllabus: Communication 526 READINGS: Meenakshi Gigi Durham and Douglas M. Kellner, Media and Cultural Studies: Key Works. Blackwell, 2006. (MCS) Charles E. Morris III Remembering the Aids Quilt. Michigan State University Press, 2011. (RAQ) Books must be ordered. Additional readings are posted on Black Board (BB), available through the library at Communication & Media Complete, or through Google Scholar. See also files on DropBox with the email [email protected] password lpsgtg2011 SOURCES: The course will take up core views of communication. Select readings are provided. You may wish to try through Alibris or other used book sites to find: Floyd W. Matson and Ashley Montagu, eds. The Human Dialogue: Perspectives on Communication, New York: Free Press, 1967; Lee Thayer, ed. Communication: Concepts and Perspectives, London: MacMillan, 1967; Stephen W. Littlejohn, Theories of Human Communication, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1983; C. David Mortensen, Problematic Communication: The Construction of Invisible Walls, Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994; Robert T. Craig and Heidi L. Muller, Theorizing Communication: Readings Across Traditions, Los Angeles: Sage, 2004; Kenneth K. Sereno and C. David Mortensen, Foundations of Communication Theory, New York: Harper and Row, 1970; Walter W. Powell and Paul J. Di Maggio, Institutional Organizational Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991. GOALS: The objectives of this course are several. First, the course introduces key thinkers and organizes theoretical spaces within the field of Communication. Second, the course identifies critical communication inquiry at the individual, group, public and collective levels of theory and practice. Third, the course discusses strategies of engagement or thinking that could extend, modify, or overturn standing theoretical positions and initiate new inquiry. Critique and criticism are developed. Fourth, the course engages development and reflection on digital age communication study. The course is taught from the position of Critical Communication Inquiry, namely that theories and practices of communication are constructed with various strengths and weaknesses, insights and blind spots. Study will equip students to explore how we moved (and continue to accelerate) from modern traditions of inquiry dominated by concerns with modern, mass media to the evolving contexts of a twenty-first century communications revolution. REQUIREMENTS: Requirements will be discussed at the opening seminar. As a strategy, the seminar is composed of many short readings, clustered around key topics and authors in the formation of the discipline. Supplemental readings are provided in some cases. Reading and participation is expected for all A level grades. OFFICE: Mr. Goodnight occupies 206A ASC West Wing. Phone 213-821-5384. The course subscribes to the Graduate School rules on academic integrity. Tentative Syllabus 1. T Jan 10 Introduction: Critical Communication Inquiry What is to become of the area, field, or discipline of communication? Herbert Laswell, “The Emerging Discipline of Communications,” 6 (1958), 245-254. Gordon A. Sabine, “The Emerging Discipline of Communications,” Journal of the University Film Producers Association 11 (1958), 3-5, 13-15. Craig Calhoun, “Communication as Social Science (and More),” IJOC 4 (2011), 1479-1496. Thomas A. Discenna, “Academic Labor and the Literature of Discontent in Communication,” International Journal of Communication 5 (2011), 1843-1852. Cheryl L. Coyle and Heather Vaughn, “Social Networking: Communication Revolution or Evolution?” Bell Labs Technical Journal 13:2 (2008), 13-18. Supplement Bibliography, The Human Dialogue. Stephen Littlejohn, “The Status of Human Communication Theory,” Theories of Human Communication, 299-309. 2. T Jan 17 Communication Theories How do communication models regulate inquiry? Wayne E. Brockriede, “Dimensions of the Concept of Rhetoric,” Foundations of Communication Theory, 25-39. Dean C. Barnlund, “A Transactional Model of Communication,” Foundations of Communication Theory, 83-102. Frank Dance, “The Concept of Communication,” The Journal of Communication 20 (1970), 201-210. Thomas R. Nilsen, “On Defining Communication,” Foundations of Communication Theory, 15-24. Frank E. X Dance, “A Helical Model of Communication,” Theories of Human Communication, 103-107. Robert T. Craig and Heidi L. Muller, “Communication Theory as a Field,” Theorizing Communication, 63- 92. Supplement Stephen Littlejohn, “Theory in the Process of Inquiry,” Theories of Human Communication, 2nd ed. Wadsworth, 9-25. 3. T Jan 24 The Library & the Archive: Spaces for Communication Inquiry Of what use are the archeological and anthropological approaches to communication study? Hanah Arendt, “Society and Culture,” The Human Dialogue, 346-354. Leo Lowenthal, “Communication and Humanitas,” The Human Dialogue, 335-345. Ernst Cassirer, “The Power of Metaphor,” Myth and Language, S. Langer, trans. Dover: 1946, 83-99. Dell Hymes, “The Anthropology of Communication,” Human Communication Theory, 1-39. Hans Blumenberg, “An Anthropological Approach to the Contemporary Significance of Rhetoric,” After Philosophy, K. Baynes, J. Bohman, and T McCarthy, eds., MIT Press, 1987: 429-57. BB Michel Foucault, “Discourse Formation,” Archeology of Knowledge Tavistock, 1978, 21-39. BB Gary R. Radford, “A Foucauldian Perspective of the Relationship between Communication and Information,” Between Communication and Information, Schement and Ruben eds., Transaction, 1993, 105-114. BB Raymie E. McKerrow, “Critical Rhetoric: Theory and Praxis,” Communication Monographs 56 (1989), 91- 111. BB Barbara Beisecker, “Of Historicity, Rhetoric: The Archive as Scene of Invention, Rhetoric and Public Affairs 9 (2006), 124-131. BB Supplement G. Thomas Goodnight, “The Nuclear Age,” Dubrovnik Yugoslavia, 1987. BB 4. T Jan 31 Phenomenology & the Life World What is it to experience communication or not? William Ernest Hocking, “Knowledge of Other Minds,” The Human Dialogue, 539-547. Gabriel Marcel, “Intersubjectivity,” The Human Dialogue, 118-127. Alfred Schutz, The Phenomenology of the Social World, G. Walsh and F Lehnert, trans., 1967. Maurice Natanson, “The Privileged Moment: A Study in the Rhetoric of Thomas Wolfe,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 2:43 (1957), 143-151. BB C. David Mortensen, “The Construction of Interpersonal Boundaries,” Problematic Communication, Praeger, 1994, 109-132. BB Robert L. Scott, “Dialectical Tensions of Speaking and Silence,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 79 (1993), 1- 18. C. David Mortensen, “Silence, Discourse and Dialogue,” Problematic Communication, Praeger, 1994, 73- 108. BB Abraham H. Maslow, “Isomorphic Interrelationships Between Knower and Known,” The Human Dialogue, 195-206. Carl R. Rogers, “The Therapeutic Relationship: Recent Theory and Research,” The Human Dialogue, 246- 259. 5. T Feb 7 Social Theory of Communication: Self, Society & Existence Why does communication generate symbolic worlds? Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. “Free Trade in Ideas,” The Human Dialogue, 295-300. BB George Herbert Mead, “Thought, Communication and the Significant Symbol,” The Human Dialogue, 397-403. BB Hans H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills, “Symbol Spheres in Society,” The Human Dialogue, 404-410. Hugh Duncan, “Communication and Social Oder,” The Human Dialogue, 383-396. Susanne K Langer, “On a New Definition of ‘Symbol,” The Human Dialogue, 548-554. Herbert Blumer, “Social Problems as Collective Behavior,” Social Problems, 3:18 (1971), 298-306. BB Herbert Blumer, “Fashion: From Class Differentiation to Collective Selection,” Sociological Quarterly 3:10 (1969), 275-291. BB Supplement: Stephen Littlejohn, “Symbolic Interaction and Rules Theory,” Theories of Human Communication, 45-73. 6. T Feb 14 Systems World: Cybernetics How does autonomic communication shape and position the system world? Ludwig von Bertanlanffy, “The Mind-Body Problem: A New View,” Human Dialogue, 224-245. Nicolas Luhman, “What is Communication?” Communication Theory, 2 (1992), 251-259. BB Nicolas Luhman, “On the Scientific Context of the Concept of Communication,” Social Science Information 35 (1996) 257-267. Norbert Weiner, “Cybernetics and Society,” The Human Dialogue, 15- Leah Ceccarelli, “Manufactured Scientific Controversy: Science, Rhetoric and Public Debate,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs 14:2 (2011). BB Lee Thayer, “Deconstructing Information,” Between Communication and Information, Schement and Ruben eds, Transaction, 1993, 105-114. Paul Weiss, “Love in a Machine Age,” The Human Dialogue, 67-70. Supplement Stephen W. Littlejohn, “General Systems Theory and Cybernetics,” Theories of Human Communication, 2nd ed. Wadsworth, 29-43. 7. T Feb 21 Groups, Organizations, Institutions How do state of the art institutional practices of communication embed and change? F. A. Hayek “Rules, Perception, and Intelligibility,” The Human Dialogue, 555-578. Jack Knight, “Spontaneous Emergence of Social Institutions,” Institutions and Social Conflict, Cambridge University Press, 123-170. Lynne G. Zucker, “The Role of Institutionalization in Cultural Persistence,” Institutional Organizational Analysis, 83-107. Walter W. Powell, “Expanding the Scope of Institutional Analysis,” Institutional Organizational Analysis, 183- 203. Paul J. DiMaggio, “Constructing an Organizational Field,” Institutional Organizational Analysis, 267-292. Amalya L. Oliver and Kathleen Montgomery, “Field-Configuring Events