1

Paige Preston
ENC 3331
Defining Rhetorical Citizenship

Defining A Citizen

The human experience is one defined by self-discovery and

identification. Every person seeks to forge a path in life unique to their
own self-perceptions, one that validates an intrinsically conceived
concept of their identity. When one steps back to observe the larger
societal contexts in which character is molded, it becomes apparent
that autonomous perceptions of the self are not wholly definitive of
who we are. Aristotle attributed moral character to ethosa
combination of location, according to society, and identity, according
to ourselves (Palczewski, Ice, & Fritch, 12). To understand a citizens
rhetorical persona, it is imperative that their social positioning is
known, which acts as a determinant of authority. Personal identity, as
it pertains to ethos can only be accurately conveyed to an audience, if
ones place in the larger fabric of society is represented.
How, then, does a citizen challenge the constraints placed on
them by a homogenous culture? Nedra Reynolds argues that larger
forces do not bestow power upon rhetors; it is the rhetors mission to
determine how ethos can best be utilized as a discursive tool (Reynods,

2
332). In the United States, many people subscribe to a static, often
bigoted, view of what constitutes valid citizenry. While a simple
definition for citizenship could be any person whom is a legal citizen of
the Unites States of America, the reality is not so concrete. A
combination of bureaucratic, political, and sociological systems have
been established to deter undocumented citizens from becoming
legalized in the eyes of the law and privileged majority. This
perception of what makes a true citizen is incongruent with my own
definition.
Any inhabitant, whom plays a proactive role in their community,
whether at a micro or macro level, deserves the distinction of
citizenship. A formal document does not define ones experience or
identity; it cannot quantify the positive contributions someone makes
to society. Citizenship is exemplified through social action, not a piece
of paper. Why is an individual categorized as a valuable citizen merely
for being born in a location by chance, yet many others whom embark
on perilous journeys to uphold the convictions of our nation are
rejected as inferior beings? Should ones location in society be the sole
element of potential value to society? I would argue that it should not.
When the public sphere disenfranchises the voices of
marginalized populations, rhetorical strategies become a valuable ally.
Validation tends to be granted liberally to those in privileged positions,
while persons on the margins of society are burdened with the

3
expectation of proof. The notion of power manifests itself rhetorically
through the creation of a dominant ideology (Palczewski et. al., 23).
For persuasion to occur, one must operate discursively within social
constructs of power in order dismantle them. Rhetorical agency and
resources for symbolic action can be constrained for some citizens by
the persuasive continuum, culture, public memory, power, ideology
and hegemony (Palczewski et. al., 16).

Promoting Civic Engagement

Karlyn Kohrs Campbell offers methods for overcoming such

obstacles with her persuasive continuum. The creation of a virtual
experience is an effective way for a rhetor to convey their perspective
to an audience whom may have never lived through the same
circumstances firsthand (Palczewski et. al., 17). This opens the door to
altering an audience members perception of a topic that holds
personal relevance to the rhetor. If the audience is perceptive to these
ideas, the rhetor can further explain their point of view in depth.
Rhetors who prove successful at this task might be capable of
formulating new beliefs in others. Instilled beliefs are considered innate
actionsvalues we may hold dearly but refrain from acting on. When
beliefs are successfully applied to ideological pursuits in society, the
final goal of maintaining action has been achieved

4
Intersectionality is required for the process of civic engagement
to be effective. It involves the simultaneous sharing of our own
experiences, based on social positioning, juxtaposed with the
alternative perspectives of those from different backgrounds. For
society to operate at its fullest potential, it must be acknowledged that
our own experiences are not universal. Openness to understanding
other belief structures and their formation promotes positive
community discourses. Privilege is not always easily identifiable and
socially ingrained biases can manifest in forms other than blatant
racism, sexism, or ableism.
The common societal conception that rhetorics role in civic
engagement is elastic, constantly evolving and adapting within given
cultural contexts is misguided. New modes of rhetoric arise over the
course of a given cultures history. The act of writing was considered to
be detrimental to rhetoric by Plato. According to this philosophy, the
written word was divisive to the relationship between a rhetor and their
audience (Powell, Pigg, Leon, & Haas, 3). Today, we consider
transcribing words on paper to be critical in the promotion of an
engaged and conscientious society. New ideas that were once viewed
during Platos time as threatening to the established methodology
were integrated as standard rhetorical approach. Developing
alternative modes of communication offers individuals different

5
discursive platforms which might have not been previously available to
them.
Responsible rhetorical citizenship requires that we acknowledge
divisive cultural factors while working to diminish their impact within
society. Making an active choice to not engage with rhetoric that
reinforces prejudiced social constructs opens the door for marginalized
persons to enter, and alter, existing conversations. Andrea Smith does
an effective job of addressing this delicate balance in the context of
communal workshop spaces promoting solidarity and empowerment. In
such environments it is common practice to identify oneself by the
possession of societal privilege. This approach proved counter-effective
as the space devolved into a confessional of sorts for the privileged
members to be admonished of their guilt by minority members,
deviating the groups focus from that of the oppressed to the
oppressor (Smith). The compulsion to accept accountability for the
woes of societal constructs is well intentioned but flawed. Focusing on
this type of engagement as a means of empowerment is based on a
circular argument. Such discourse serves, at best, as a form of selfimprovement therapy for some individuals and, at worst, another
means of objectification for others. Its essential that kairotic spaces
promote effective rhetorical engagement for all participating citizens.
Rhetorical Citizenship at UCF

6
Utilizing societal positions of privilege as a vehicle for
reallocating power and promoting positive communal exchange is not
only applicable to human beings. UCFs Dont Shop Adopt is a
registered student organization with the objective of advocating for a
population that cannot speak for themselvesshelter pets. Through
fundraising objectives, the group encourages discourse around the
ethics of pet ownership and in doing so welcomes new participants to
be apart of a valuable conversation. Rhetorical citizenship manifests
itself through community service and awareness. Group members host
charity drives for supplies, volunteer at Orange County Animal
Services, work with local rescues groups, foster animals waiting for
permanent homes and take part in local catch and release programs
for feral cats. Members utilize their personhood as a position of power
in society to ensure that the agenda of animals is not ignored.
American consumerist culture robs many pets of their autonomy,
leaving them viewed as nothing but an accessory or a projection of
their owners self-conceived persona. Many pet owners do not realize
their actions directly perpetuate the abuse, abandonment, and
euthanasia of countless cats and dogs. After all, who doesnt love
puppies and kittens? Problems arise when owners fail to educate
themselves to the reality of puppy mills and unethical breeders, or
when they no longer feel capable of maintaining the major
responsibility that is animal care. These actions arent arising from a

7
place of malice, but rather ignorance. As a species with the faculties to
express ourselves in so many ways, the role of safeguarding the well
being of our communities pets falls on the shoulders of us humans.
Dont Shop Adopt promotes rhetorical engagement within the UCF and
Orlando about what we can all do to further the club mission of
promoting adoptiondont breed or buy while shelter pets die!
Members of the group have found a space for practicing civic
engagement that is relevant to their own moral compass and passions.
The practice of rhetorical citizenship manifests itself in different
cultural and sociological contexts but it is up to each individual to
construct their own identity as a citizen. We all possess the necessary
tools for active rhetorical citizenship but must learn the most effective
way to wield them.

Works Cited

8
Powell,Malea,Pigg,Stacey,Leon,KendallandHaas,Angela(2010)Rhetoric,
EncyclopediaandInformationSciences,ThirdEdition,1:1,45484556
Reynolds, Nedra. "Ethos as Location: New Sites for Understanding
Discursive Authority." Rhetoric Review 11.2 (1993): 325-38. JSTOR.
Smith, Andrea. "The Problem With "Privilege"" Wordpress. ANDREA366,
1 Sept. 2014. Web. <https://andrea366.wordpress.com/>.
Snedeker, Brigitte. "Campus Spotlight: Dont Shop, Adopt."
KnightNews. UCF, 27 Oct. 2014. Web.
<http://knightnews.com/2014/10/campus-spotlight-dont-shopadopt/>.