The American counter-monumental tradition: renegotiating memory and the evolution of American sacred space

This dissertation explores U.S. monuments as contested sites where marginalized groups who have been either omitted or villianized in the original monument at a site have sought to gain inclusion and have their narratives of the past articulated on U.S. sacred sites. My project expands on academic literature on German counter-monuments and links American counter-monuments to this field of study. Following my analysis of three German counter-monuments, this project explores three American counter-monuments: Chicago’s Haymarket Square, “Liberty Place” in New Orleans, and the Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial in Washington D.C., which offer examples of struggles over public memory on issues of class (Haymarket Square), race (Liberty Place), and sex (Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial). I selected each site intentionally because each has been marked with an original monument, as well as served as a site where the narrative contained in that monument has been challenged by those denied representation on the sacred site. Each has been altered significantly since the creation of its original monument, and has also been the locus of vernacular performances and responses in the years since the inception of the original monuments. Accordingly, my dissertation offers a critical analysis of the aforementioned counter-monuments by exploring four central traits of counter-monuments: 1) the evolution of monumental sites, 2) presence, absence, and irony, 3) the monument’s relation to sacred space, and 4) the use of the site as a forum. I argue that American counter-monuments begin with competing claims to a sacred space, the eventual creation of multiple monuments (each representing a different perspective on how the past should be remembered), and the representation of the development of the site across time. Ultimately, those in control of each site have attempted to reconcile the competing perspectives under some transcendent ideal, thus rearticulating the different perspectives not as competing, but as different perspectives pursuing common American ideals. Both by gaining access to build a monument at U.S. sacred sites, and by having this monument marked as a perspective contributing to an American ideal, counter-monuments offer spaces at which U.S. public memory has been expanded to include previously marginalized perspectives

The Daily Show and Rhetoric Arguments, Issues, and Strategies

The Daily Show and Rhetoric approaches the popular program from a scholarly, rhetorical perspective to uncover the rhetorical nature of the show. Using a variety of rhetorical methods, the book, taken as a whole, concludes that The Daily Show is more that just a show designed to make the audience laugh; it's designed to make the audience think.Intro -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction: The Daily Show and Rhetoric-Arguments, Issues, and Strategies -- I: The Nature of the Beast -- 1 The Arete of Amusement: An Aristotelian Perspective on the Ethos of The Daily Show -- 2 Before and After The Daily Show: Freedom and Consequences in Political Satire -- 3 Cramer vs. (Jon Stewart's Characterization of) Cramer: Image Repair Rhetoric, Late Night Political Humor, and The Daily Show -- II: Arguments -- 4 The (not-so) Laughable Political Argument: A Close-Textual Analysis of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart -- 5 Models of Democratic Deliberation: Pharmacodynamic Agonism in The Daily Show -- 6 Purifying Laughter: Carnivalesque Self-Parody as Argument Scheme in The Daily Show with Jon Stewart -- 7 The Voice of the People: Jon Stewart, Public Argument, and Political Satire -- III: Strategies -- 8 We Frame to Please: A Preliminary Examination of The Daily Show's Use of Frames -- 9 Breaking News: A Postmodern Rhetorical Analysis of The Daily Show -- 10 Visual Aspects of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart -- IV: Issues -- 11 Gaywatch: A Burkean Frame Analysis of The Daily Show's Treatment of Queer Topics -- 12 Modern Hebrew Prophets? The Daily Show and Religious Satire -- 13 The Daily Show and Barack Obama's Comic Critique of Whiteness: An Intersection of Popular and Political Rhetoric -- Index -- About the ContributorsThe Daily Show and Rhetoric approaches the popular program from a scholarly, rhetorical perspective to uncover the rhetorical nature of the show. Using a variety of rhetorical methods, the book, taken as a whole, concludes that The Daily Show is more that just a show designed to make the audience laugh; it's designed to make the audience think.Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries