The National Public Space
Contents
Return to COMM 460 Home Page
The National Public Space
-
To overcome the tensions of the era, there needed to be a strong national identity. To build national identity off the rhetoric of the post-revolutionary period through a celebration of nationhood.
-
Authority in national public sphere was concentrated in orators. The great orators were trained in oratory and in the classics to become leaders. They felt a role as moral teachers and addressed the multitude as moral superiors.
-
Role of ordinary citizens was to listen for hours . A passive role. To learn from the orator. And the speeches lasted for hours.
- Three arenas dominated the national public space
Return to Contents of this file
Return to COMM 460 Home Page
The Silver Orators
Three Orators dominated the United States Senate
- Henry Clay of Kentucky. 1777-1852. The Great Compromiser. Represented the West. Although he represented the West, and often did so by allying with North to defeat the South and vice versa, he ultimately became the force seeking to reconcile the North and South.
These three represented the balance of power of the time
Return to Contents of this file
Return to COMM 460 Home Page
The Argumentative Arena: The Senate
The Senate, conceived as the aristocratic protector of moral authority, became
the arena of the orator
The rhetoric was shaped by three motivational forms:
- Errand of progress authorized active government. <Progress>
emerged as an ideograph that would allow involvement of government in development
and expansion.
- Errand of Moral inheritance. The founding fathers were elevated
to near-deities and debate revolved around that heritage and how to preserve
it. This rhetoric provided a conservative force to counter the expansionism
of <progress>. Yet, moral superiority was also available to justify
the purifying of American life.
- Rhetoric of Compromise. Disputes became <factions> to
be reconciled by coalition. The errand of <Union> primary.
The Great Debates had a distinctive style
- Detailed support for ideas. Tradition and history were particularly
important strategies for proof.
- Debate was overlaid by the pragmatism of threat to the Union.
Ultimately the Senate fails as a public space
-
Provides no expression for local public life
-
Participation to ordinary citizens was only as a spectator in the gallery watching the show. A good show, but a show nonetheless.
Return to Contents of this file
Return to COMM 460 Home Page
The Epideictic Arena: The Civic Celebration
The Epideictic developed from the problem of creating a nation
- The tension between individualism and community required a new rhetoric
Public civic celebrations were the heart of the Epideictic
- The uncompromising venom of the partisan arena was stylized into a rhetoric of glorious errand in the epideictic
- The role of the public was to listen
A distinctive style marked the Epideictic: The Sentimental Style
- Materially spacious. A feeling of a great land and unlimited
vision. Transform the material into vastness. American romanticism.
-
Sentimentally definitive. The rhetoric was specific all the
way to the proper emotional reaction. Thus, it provided little audience
involvement, only audience performance. Emotion was directed into unity.
- To listening was added the deadening of involvement. No room for dissent. Emotion is directed toward unity.
This style became a counterpoint to partisanship
Return to Contents of this file
Return to COMM 460 Home Page
The National Public Sphere was ultimately non-participatory
- The Partisan was strident and closed; it had no influence.
- The Senate was open to participation only if you were a Senator; others were spectators
- The Epideictic was so specified, it was mass communication instead of public communication
- So, public life required other venues.
Return to Contents of this file
Return to COMM 460 Home Page