Prophets, Gurus, and Pundits: Rhetorical Styles and Public Engagement

Conclusion: Style, the Public Sphere, and a Call to Action

142 ConClusion: stYle, the PuBliC sPhere, and a Call to aCtion this book is dedicated to investigating the potential of style as a rhetorical frame for intellectual engagement in the public sphere. As such, the six public intellectual rhetorical styles presented here represent “point[s] of connection between intention and effect, an aspect of social action” (Miller, 1984, p. 153). And at different times and in different cultural milieus , different rhetorical styles emerge as particularly relevant, powerful, and persuasive. Such is the case with the first five styles I have detailed here: The Prophet, The Guru, The Sustainer, The Pundit, and The Narrator . The Prophet is called by a higher power at a time of crisis to judge sinners in the community and outline a path to redemption. The Guru is the teacher who gains a following of disciples and leads them to enlightenment . The Sustainer innovates products and processes that sustain natural, social, and political environments. The Pundit is a subject expert who discusses the issues of the day in a more superficial way via the mass media. The Narrator weaves experience with context, creating relationships between event and communities and offering a form of evidence that flies below the radar in order to provide access to information. The sixth style is distinct in that it is not constrained by the same boundaries of time that limit the future efficacy of The Prophet, The Guru, The Sustainer, The Pundit, and The Narrator. Instead, The Scientist harnesses the American mythic landscape to secure buy-in to bring dreams to life through scientific experimentation and engineering. It is the difference between focusing on the disease du jour and articulating a path to the eradication of disease forever. The strength of Scientist style is that it eschews the particular in favor of the general—in other words, instead of getting bogged down in time-specific problem solving, The conclusIon 143 Scientist rhetorically constructs his or her project as one that answers questions that have plagued humankind since the beginning: a quest for more time; a desire to know what is “out there” whether on land, in the water, or in space; a cure for physical illness; a way to be superhuman; a chance to read God’s mind. In this final chapter, I compare the styles using the five dimensions outlined for each style: fluidity, degree, location, media, and resources. More critical, I try to begin to address issues of particular concern for this stylistic intervention. A stylIstIc comPArIson of the PublIc IntellectuAl A larger comparison across all six public intellectual styles provides several important benefits. First, it offers a lexicon for those of us interested in rhetorical style to use in grappling with issues where style is central or peripheral to understanding other constructs. Second, while style has been studied in fields from fashion to literature, the concept of rhetorical style as applied to social and political issues is relatively young (Hariman, 1995). Because we are in the early stages of discerning how style “fits” into contemporary rhetorical studies, the comparison is particularly valuable as a basis for theoretical development. Finally, the categories of public intellectual rhetorical style remain extendable. New sociopolitical situations will call forth different styles yet undetermined, and styles that transcend those boundaries may be discovered and articulated in future studies. As mentioned at the start of this book and as readers have, no doubt, already discerned, this is an inductive project. Because each of these styles is embodied by a single individual, I invite others to help think through, bolster, extend, challenge, reframe, hybridize, and/or amend the specific styles highlighted. I hope this book begins that conversation. Fluidity Fluidity accounts for a public intellectual’s ability to move between the “worlds” of intellectual and public. What fluidity really gets at is a public intellectual’s rhetorical style and its capacity to appeal to both intellectual and public “worlds.” It highlights adaptability. Recall that the history of the prophetic tradition requires the prophet to live a somewhat lonely existence in order to be perceived as authentically called when offering judgment on a nation. Thus, the traditional prophet’s fluidity is limited by his or her social isolation. The prophetic public intellectual, though, cannot be isolated; otherwise, he or she would not qualify as a public intellectual . In other words, the public intellectual Prophet is less isolated 144 conclusIon than exotic—he or she does not...