O’Rourke’s public scholarship combines rhetorical knowledge with activism to produce op-ed pieces

Sean O’Rourke doesn’t come off like an activist. On the phone he’s cheery, earnest, and quick on his scholarship. And besides, his dissertation was on the belle lettre rhetorical theorist Hugh Blair.

But O’Rourke counters that the Scottish enlightenment philosophers were eager students of the law and were equally as eager to communicate their scholarship to public audiences for the public good. And, O’Rourke seems to have cast himself in that mold.

A holder of both the J.D. and the Ph.D. degrees, O’Rourke spends his scholarly time as an assistant professor in the Department of Communication Studies at Vanderbilt University, where he teaches and does research in the areas of rhetorical theory, argumentation theory, British and American public address, and freedom of expression. But, a significant part of his work is public: O’Rourke writes regular opinion pieces for the editorial pages of newspapers around the country.

“I wanted to use my scholarship to remind people of what they might otherwise forget,” O’Rourke said.

The scholarship O’Rourke uses more often than not focuses on the law, particularly on the First Amendment. O’Rourke and frequent collaborator Ron Manuto have authored op-ed pieces on such topics as pornography and the First Amendment, trials as public spectacles, prior restraint and the free press, the speech rights of the accused, the historical basis of affirmative action programs, the upholding of the ban on a lesbian and gay group from marching in the Boston St. Patrick’s Day parade, and restrictions on pro-life demonstrations at abortion clinics.

In each case, O’Rourke attempts to preserve the integrity of the scholarship while writing a lively and engaging commentary. “Generally, you’ve got about 800 words,” he said. “You don’t have the space to support the scholarly argument the way you would in a journal article.” Sometimes, though, he introduces knowledge that may have been well supported but not well known. For example, in a commentary centered around George Washington’s Farewell Address, he and co-author Terry Morrow disclosed that much of the speech was really written by Alexander Hamilton.

Readers do respond, sometimes vehemently, and O’Rourke finds it particularly satisfying when he’s stirred up someone’s thoughts. He remembers vividly the long, thoughtful letter he received from an Alabama physician after one of his freedom of expression pieces. And, there are many responses that range from off-topic rantings to declarations that “you will burn in Hell” to requests for help in getting a manuscript published. O’Rourke is well aware of the suspicion that intellectuals and the public have of each other and how the term “public intellectual” could be a nonsequiter.

When asked to describe how he got started, O’Rourke praised Manuto, his frequent collaborator. “Ron has a background both as an academic and a journalist, and he was able to work on our ideas to phrase them in a journalistic style,” O’Rourke said. An early success led the pair to compile lists of editorial page editors of major newspapers, and they would submit their commentaries by fax, or more recently by e-mail. As more and more of them were published, the public affairs office at Vanderbilt took an interest, and now that office takes O’Rourke’s pieces and attempts to place them.

When asked to characterize the state of freedom of expression in today’s society, O’Rourke mused that most people think that the burden of proof rests with the speaker when someone wants to limit free expression. He believes that the reverse ought to be the case. Given such a strong position on the First Amendment, no wonder he calls himself an activist.