Participants of New England town meeting must follow protocols to participate in this direct democratic process. Over the past 200 years, the protocols have been enacted and adapted by participants in small towns across the region. Within annual meetings, one can find small breaches that could be interpreted as playful acts. In this paper, we use the comic frame as a theoretical lens to interpret instances of such play within the rhetorical deliberation of one New England town meeting. We analyze two instances where speakers playfully use recognized parts of town meeting to achieve their rhetorical ends. We conclude with a discussion of the way play can help accomplish identification in public discourse.
AuneJ. A. (1994). Rhetoric and marxism. Westview Press.
2.
BatesonG. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Ballantine Books.
3.
BieseckerB. A. (1989). Rethinking the rhetorical situation from within the thematic of differance. In CaudillS.ConditM.LucaitesJ. L. (Eds.), Contemporary rhetorical theory: A reader (pp. 232–246). Guilford Press.
4.
BrenneisD.MyersF. R. (1984). Dangerous words: Language and politics in the Pacific. New York University Press.
5.
BurkeK. (1937/1984). Attitudes toward history (3rd ed.). University of California Press.
6.
BurkeK. (1950/1969). A rhetoric of motives. University of California Press.
7.
BurkeK. (1973). The rhetorical situation. In ThayerL. (Ed.), Communication: Ethical and moral issues (pp. 263–275). Gordon & Breach Science.
8.
CarbaughD. (1989). Talking American: Culturaldiscourses on Donahue. Ablex.
9.
CrableB. (2000). Burke’s perspective on perspectives: Grounding dramatism in the representative anecdote. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 86(3), 318–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630009384299
10.
CrableB. (2006). Rhetoric, anxiety, and character armor: Burke’s interactional rhetoric of identity. Western Journal of Communication, 70(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310500305570
11.
CrableB. (2020). “Beat the devil, beat the devil, beat the devil, beat the...” Kenneth Burke on the cleansing of tensions, both comic and tragic. UDC, 82(091), 12–42. https://doi.org/10.22455/2541-7894-2020-9-12-42
12.
CraigR. T. (2023). Introduction: Deliberative play. American Behavioral Scientist, 67(8), 951–962.
13.
FarragherT. (2020, June21). A durable democracy? It’s not debatable: The cherished New England town meeting survives the pandemic. Boston Globe.
IvieR. L. (2016). Productive criticism at the crossroads: interventions, trajectories, and intersections. Review of Communication, 16(1), 104–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2016.1183910
16.
IvieR. L. (2017). Democratic spaces of interdependence. China Media Research, 13(4), 17–27.
17.
JohnsonR. B.TrustmanB. A.WadsworthC. Y.GarfieldR.HallH. L.Jr.HarringtonJ.IIIRussellJ. M.Jr. (2001). Town meeting time: A handbook of parliamentary law (3rd ed.). Massachusetts Moderators Association.
LeslieA. J. (2018). The New England town meeting as icon and ethnographic object: New perspectives on participatory democracy. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Chicago. https://doi.org/10.6082/t2ty-2256
21.
LucaitesJ. L. (1997). Visualizing “the people”: Individualism vs. collectivism in let us now praise famous men. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 83(3), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335639709384186
MansbridgeJ.Hartz-KarpJ.AmengualM.GastilJ. (2006). Norms of deliberation: An inductive study. Journal of Public Deliberation, 2(1), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.35
25.
MorrellM. E. (1999). Citizens’ evaluations of participatory democratic procedures: Normative theory meets empirical science. Political Research Quarterly, 52(2), 293–322. https://doi.org/10.2307/449220
OlsonJ. S. (2019). Our bodies and the language we learn: The dialectic of Burkean identification in the 1930s. Rhetoric Review, 38(3), 258–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198.2019.1618159
28.
ReijvenM. H.TownsendR. M. (2021). Communicative competence and local theories of argumentation: The case of academic citational practices. In HampleD. (Ed.), Local theories of argumentation (pp. 497–503). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003149026-88
TonnM. B.EndressV. A.DiamondJ. N. (1993). Hunting and heritage on trial: A dramatistic debate over tragedy, tradition, and territory. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 79(2), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335639309384027
31.
TownsendR. M. (2004). Deliberation and democracy: Ethnography of rhetoric in a New England town meeting. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Massachusetts. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations/AAI3136786
32.
TownsendR. M. (2006). Widening the circumference of scene: Local politics, local metaphysics. KBJournal, 2(2), n.p. http://www.kbjournal.org/townsend
33.
TownsendR. M. (2009). Town meeting as a communication event: Democracy’s act sequence. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(1), 68–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802671743
34.
TownsendR. M.ReissC.. (forthcoming). An enduring system of local, deliberative democracy: The 21st century legal and normative structure of Massachusetts town meeting. Journal of Deliberative Democracy, (anticipated 2022) n.p.
35.
WessR. (2004). Representative anecdotes in general, with notes toward a representative anecdote for Burkean ecocriticism in particular. KB Journal, 1(1), n.p. http://kbjournal.org/node/54
36.
ZhangP. (2015). The human seriousness of interality: An East Asian take. China Media Research, 11(2), 93–103.
