ABSTRACT
This chapter traces the disciplinary origins of the rhetorical study of social movements, identifies both the value and limitations of earlier scholarship, and suggests new directions for innovative studies. The first section shows how early scholarship typically followed a set pattern. A scholar would (1) identify and name a social movement already formed; (2) frame the nature of the conflicts and challenges faced by that movement; (3) determine the rhetorical requirements of that movement that follow from this nature; (4) measure how the specific rhetoric measures up to these requirements; and (5) draw general conclusions that applies to all movements. The second section shows how Michael Calvin McGee’s 1980 essay was a watershed moment in the discipline because it effectively denied all of the premises that have inspired historical interpretations of social movements, yet at the same time McGee could not offer an effective alternative to the modern dualistic framework that guided earlier work. The last section suggests a new framework for social movement inquiry that assumes a position of immanence in which we are always caught in a constantly interacting network of people, events, and things. It then outlines five steps for the study of social movements.
