|
THE
REVIEW OF
COMMUNICATION JFK: The Artful Evolution of a Great Communicator
Steven R. GoldzwigVito N. Silvestri. Becoming JFK: A Profile in
Communication. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2000. xiv + 323 pages. Notes,
bibliography, and index. $65.00. In Becoming JFK, Vito N. Silvestri, Professor Emeritus of Communication Studies, Emerson College, draws on his own studies of John F. Kennedy’s public discourse and extends that work into a book-length study. The book is clearly written and draws upon archival resources to lend insight into John F. Kennedy’s evolution as a public speaker. Silvestri divides his book into four major sections that unfold in chronological sequence: Part 1 covers the early years from 1945-1952. Part 2 outlines Kennedy’s years in the Senate from 1953-1960. Part 3 covers the years 1956-1960 in a discussion of Kennedy’s public address as he approached and executed his campaign for the presidency. Part 4 is concerned with Kennedy’s presidential public address covering 1961-1963. The book also contains selected reprints of the speeches either discussed or analyzed in the various chapters. In the preface, Silvestri outlines his purpose, which is to write a book that “provides political and social background contexts and analysis on John F. Kennedy’s development as a communicator.” I believe Silvestri’s study is perhaps most valuable for the focus it sustains on Kennedy’s early public speaking career. It is rare that we get an opportunity to savor the major events and speaking engagements of the young Kennedy as a congressional representative or a thorough accounting of his Senate years. While Silvestri’s coverage in this area may not be the final definitive work, it certainly advances our knowledge of the “early” Kennedy’s influences and commitments. A few oversights tend to undermine the fine work that is accomplished in this study. First, except for the chapter on Kennedy’s inaugural address (which is an adaptation from an earlier published article), I believe the book is more descriptive than analytic. Most of the “analytic” segments of Silvestri’s discussion usually rehearse patterns of organization, lines of argument, or memorable phrases. In a word, he seems to describe rather than fully analyze the texts. Almost all evaluations, when offered, are universally positive. Perhaps the latter is a function of the texts Silvestri has chosen for inclusion in the book; or perhaps it displays a certain bias. It is difficult to tell which of these observations might hold true. I suspect that a combination of these two components is largely at play here. Perhaps the best way to begin to make the case for privileging description over analysis is to describe Silvestri’s general methodology and then select an individual speech treatment as an exemplar of his approach. Silvestri adopts a Neo-Aristotelian methodology that pursues a detailed discussion of the background, organization, style, lines of arguments, and “effects” of many instances of Kennedy’s public address. The discussions of “effects” are documented through traditional sources, including reactions contained in letters by dignitaries, news editorial and speechwriter commentaries, and other secondary evaluations. While such discussions can reflect care and thoroughness, they can also, at times, be overwhelming, drowning out the author’s own critical voice. For example, in describing Kennedy’s July 2, 1957 speech on the Algerian “question,” we are informed that Kennedy adopted a problem (90%)-solution (10%) organizational strategy. There is copious description of Kennedy’s arguments. It is also noted that this was Kennedy’s longest address. As to “effects,” Silvestri provides editorial reactions from the New York Times, the San Francisco News, the Indianapolis Times, the Buffalo Evening News, the Erie Times, the Kansas City Star, the Los Angeles Herald and Express, and the Massachusetts Independent. Silvestri also documents French newspaper and news magazine reaction. He reports that Kennedy received over 300 letters and 100 telegrams in response to the address and then documents many of Kennedy’s reactions to the letters he received in response to the speech. While on its face, none of this seems particularly problematic, it is puzzling in light of Silvestri’s choice not to publish this text in the volume. All the attention that this speech receives is equally puzzling in light of Sorensen’s claim (quoted by the author) that the Algerian address was “‘one of the most carefully researched, widely publicized and officially ignored speeches Senator Kennedy ever delivered’” (76). Second, and related to the latter point above, many of the choices made in selecting and describing the various public addresses seem less than apparent. Rationales for including (or not including) long discussions of certain speeches, short discussions of others, and the exclusion of still others, do not materialize. Similarly, clear rationales for publishing certain of the speech texts and not others that are fully discussed in the book are also difficult to find. More explanation for these choices seemed to be in order. Third, I believe the book would have been enhanced by more careful engagement with newer literature on Kennedy that has been offered in recent years by scholars in communication studies. Here, I must admit, I tread on delicate ground because some of the inattention involves my own work, but it also involves the work of others. For example, no mention is made of the earlier work of Goldzwig & Dionisopoulos’ ‘In a Perilous Hour’: The Public Address of John F. Kennedy. Nor was there an attempt to link this study with Ted Windt’s Presidents and Protesters. Also, the communication studies literature on the campaign and the 1960 debates seemed under-utilized. For example, attention to Vancil & Pendell’s 1987 study, which explored the “myth” of viewer-listener disagreement in the first Kennedy-Nixon debate, would potentially have modified the author’s claims. This is not to discount the fact that those at the time, and many since -- right up until today -- have held vigorously to the myth. Syvestri’s discussion of Kennedy and Vietnam might also have been enhanced by Bostdorff & Goldzwig’s argument that Kennedy’s public speech seemed to commit him more fully to Vietnam. They note that the undelivered speech Kennedy scheduled for delivery at the Dallas Trade Mart actually warned Americans “we dare not weary of the task.” While it is not incumbent on the author to cite such specific sources, it does seem that attention to the communication studies literature could have at least helped form and justify a stronger rationale for Silvestri’s study and, more importantly, helped him to fine-tune and amplify the significance of the contribution that he has made to the discipline. To my mind, this work does go beyond the introductory purpose of ‘In a Perilous Hour’ and it easily transcends the topical and strategic limitations of Windt’s book-length study, which covered both the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. Attention to recent books published outside the communication discipline might also have rendered healthy service. For example, Richard Reeves’s revisionist President Kennedy, Christopher Matthews’ post-war America saga Kennedy & Nixon, and even Seymour Hersh’s controversial The Dark Side of Camelot might have provided useful updated material. Another helpful perspective supplied by historians recently could have been found in Mark J. White (ed.) Kennedy: The New Frontier Revisited. These problems are not fatal. Silvestri’s study
probes Kennedy’s discourse in greater detail than ever before, and
this is something that should be welcomed by a number of disciplines.
Moreover, this book represents yet another contribution to the
renaissance of book-length studies that have diligently pursued the
renewal of “rhetorical history.” This is healthy for the discipline
and for the wider scholarly community. Steven R. Goldzwig teaches communication at
Marquette University WORKS CITEDBostdorff, Denise M. and Steven R.Goldzwig. “Idealism and Pragmatism in American Foreign Policy Rhetoric: The Case of John F. Kennedy & Vietnam.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 24 (1994): 515-530. Goldzwig, Steven R. and George N. Dionisopoulos. ‘In a Perilous Hour’: The Public Address of John F. Kennedy. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1995. Hersh, Seymour M. The Dark Side of Camelot. Boston: Little, Brown, 1997. Matthews, Christopher. Kennedy & Nixon: The Rivalry that Shaped Postwar America. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996. Reeves, Richard. President Kennedy: Profile of Power. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993. Vancil, David. L., and Sue D. Pendell. “The Myth of Viewer-Listener Disagreement in the First Kennedy-Nixon Debate.” Communication Studies 38 (1987): 16-27. White, Mark J., ed. Kennedy: The New Frontier Revisited. Houndmills: Macmillan, 1998. Windt, Theodore Otto, Jr. Presidents and Protesters: Political Rhetoric in the 1960s. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press, 1990.
|