Generationsanklager – konflikt, følelser og ungdomsaktivisme

Compared to rhetorical defenses the rhetoric of accusations has not garnered much attention from rhetorical critics over time. Two common threads in existing approaches to accusatory rhetoric are a link to an underlying affirmative motive and a view of accusations as a rhetorical genre. However, these threads have not been fully developed so far. This article takes its point of departure in Carolyn Millers rhetorical theory of genre and Celeste Michelle Condit’s work with angry public rhetorics in order to reveal the social motive of the accusatory genre. The argument here is that the main motive can be found in a desire for corrective action, but is further supported by a definitory and moral motive. This is then used as a basis for treating generational accusations as a specific form of accusation as well as analyzing it in relation to Greta Thunberg’s rhetorical accusations of older generations in the climate change debate

“Being patient through the quiet”: Partnering in problem-based learning in a graduate seminar

This paper draws connections between scholarship on problem-based learning (PBL) and Students as Partners to frame a case study from a graduate seminar in Public Rhetorics for Social Change. Students partnered with each other and the instructor to decide on a public project, approaching the partnership as a pedagogical problem to explore, discuss, and collaboratively define. Drawing on student and teacher reflections about the partnership, the study’s findings highlight important themes about partnering with students: partnering with students may result in uncertainty and discomfort, takes time, values different perspectives, and can make teachers and students vulnerable to each other. Responding to a phrase from one student’s reflection—“being patient through the quiet”—the study argues that patience and quiet are necessary for supporting a successful partnership with students but that caution is needed to prevent dominant narratives from silencing marginalized student perspectives.

Making Angry Public Rhetorics Work Better for a Global 'Us'

In the twenty-first century, as throughout human history, anger has played a pivotal role in governance and international affairs. This essay contributes to the substantial scholarly literature on public emotion by summarizing an integrative analysis of public anger built both on multi-disciplinary literatures theorizing emotion and upon three case studies surrounding the attacks now commonly labelled “9/11.” Examples from the rhetorics of Osama bin Laden, President George W. Bush, and Susan Sontag illustrate the predispositional complex of anger well, because the elements of that complex are evident among all three rhetorics, despite the dramatic differences in culture, ideology, and positionality of the rhetors from whom they emanate. The essay concludes by urging the development of conditions and rhetorical practices that would enable global anger to serve its valuable adjudicatory functions rather than to reprise endlessly its function of rallying peoples to attack each other