Contemporary Rhetorical Citizenship by Christian Kock and Lisa Villadsen (review)

Following the fourth “Rhetoric in Society” conference hosted in Copenhagen in 2013, Christian Kock and Lisa Villadsen present a sampling of individual essays in the book Contemporary Rhetorical Citizenship. Building off of their 2012 book Rhetorical Citizenship and Public Deliberation, the editors revisit what it means to be a “rhetorical citizen” by bringing together works that offer diverse perspectives from authors who “challenge, develop, or make use of” rhetorical citizenship “to conceptualize the discursive, symbolic, and otherwise participatory aspects of civic life” (9). In the introductory chapter, Kock and Villadsen remind us that although rhetorical citizenship is not a new idea, it highlights a significant theoretical framework that stems from understanding “the fact that legal rights, privileges, and material conditions are not the only constituents of citizenship; discourse that takes place between citizens is more basic to what it means to be a citizen” (11). In providing readers with a reorientation to rhetorical citizenship, the editors also suggest a loose organizing principle for the book: rhetorical citizenship can be viewed as “citizens’ possibilities for gaining access to and influencing civic life through symbolic action; or it may be embraced from a focus on how people may be involved with, and evaluate, public rhetoric—not as participants, but as recipients” (10). This participant/recipient boundary provides some guidance for the otherwise extensive scope of methodologies, case studies, and international perspectives covered in the 18 chapters that follow. Together, these essays offer a cross-disciplinary conversation about how individuals across the globe understand and enact their role in civic life.

The book is divided into three sections, each commencing with an essay from one of three invited keynote speakers. The first section focuses on rhetorical criticism from the perspective of rhetorical citizenship. David Zarefsky’s opening chapter questions the “positive force” (29) of rhetorical criticism in democracy, positing, “Rhetorical sensitivity can rehabilitate the concept of deliberative democracy and can invigorate its practice—if rhetorical criticism will allow it to” (35). Zarefsky sets the tone for subsequent essays in this section by discussing the potential threats posed to democratic deliberation by everyday criticism and academic criticism, mainly through an attempt to demystify all means of rhetorical invention. The essays that follow mostly heed Zarefsky’s call for constructive critiques that simultaneously generate ideas for improving civic life—though some more pointedly than others. For example, Maureen Daly Goggin’s essay on “yarn bombing” explores protest as a means to lay claim to rhetorical citizenship in public spaces by participating in creative, alternative responses to social and economic injustices. Charlotte Jørgensen explores the threat of political “promises” made during Danish political debates to rhetorical citizenship. In doing so, she provides insight regarding when deliberation becomes toxic, urging the importance of dissent and civic engagement over consumer citizens. In sum, the essays in this section offer the most cogent grouping of case studies, with all utilizing rhetorical criticism to explore how individuals enact and mold citizenship in the public sphere.

The second section “raises the perspective from the rhetorical criticism of intriguing cases to a more general level” (20) by investigating different rhetorical culture(s) in which rhetorical citizenship emerges. Karen Tracy’s initial chapter provides grounding for this purpose, calling us to consider rhetorical citizenship as a “culturally-inflected practice”(149). Other rhetorical cultures explored include Carolyne Lee and Judy Burnside-Lawry’s look at rhetorical citizenship in small groups, which contributes a theoretical lens linking voice, narrative, and listening. Gene Segarra Navera’s investigates “people power” in the Philippines as a model for democracy that has been (re)conceptualized in postdictatorship presidencies. Raymie E. McKerrow importantly considers the need to embrace what it means to enact agency by not participating through silence or overt refusal in those spaces reserved for public participation. Varying in method and attention to micro/macro contexts, these essays speak less directly to one another but frame a larger conversation about the sociological, historical, and...