Rozprawy doktorskie na temat „Iraq War, 2003-2011 – Veterans – United States”

Thesis (M.A.)--Indiana University, 2010.
Title from screen (viewed on April 1, 2010). Department of Sociology, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). Advisor(s): Carol Brooks Gardner, Carrie E. Foote, Lynn M. Pike. Includes vitae. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-74).

This study examines the phenomenon of abusive violence (AV) in the context of the American Post-9/11 Counter-terrorism and Counter-insurgency campaigns. Previous research into atrocities by states and their agents has largely come from examinations of totalitarian regimes with well-developed torture and assassination institutions. The mechanisms influencing willingness to do harm have been examined in experimental studies of obedience to authority and the influences of deindividuation, dehumanization, context and system. This study used Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) to examine the lived experience of AV reported by fourteen American military and intelligence veterans. Participants were AV observers, objectors, or abusers. Subjects described why AV appeared sensible at the time, how methods of violence were selected, and what sense they made of their experiences after the fact. Accounts revealed the roles that frustration, fear, anger and mission pressure played to prompt acts of AV that ranged from the petty to heinous. Much of the AV was tied to a shift in mission view from macro strategic aims of CT and COIN to individual and small group survival. Routine hazing punishment soldiers received involving forced exercise and stress positions made similar acts inflicted on detainees unrecognizable as abusive. Overt and implied permissiveness from military superiors enabled AV extending to torture, and extra-judicial killings. Attempting to overcome feelings of vulnerability, powerlessness and rage, subjects enacted communal punishment through indiscriminate beatings and shooting. Participants committed AV to amuse themselves and humiliate their enemies; some killed detainees to force confessions from others, conceal misdeeds, and avoid routine paperwork. Participants realized that AV practices were unnecessary, counter-productive, and self-damaging. Several reduced or halted their AV as a result. The lived experience of AV left most respondents feeling guilt, shame, and inadequacy, whether they committed abuse or failed to stop it.

ix, 99 p. A print copy of this thesis is available through the UO Libraries. Search the library catalog for the location and call number.
This study examines how the news media and U.S. officials within the Bush administration utilized rhetoric and specific words over others to frame the violence and civil unrest in Iraq following the U.S. invasion. This study incorporates a mixed methods approach to framing analysis. It seeks to advance framing research into the role of the media in presenting dominant frames set forth by powerful political elites. By examining Department of Defense news briefings, this study critiques the officials' framing of the violence and unrest in Iraq. Likewise, through a content analysis of two newspapers' coverage of the Iraq War, it examines the frequency of certain key terms as it attempts to locate the emergence of dominant rhetorical frames, particularly "insurgency." Results reveal that officials framed Iraq's insurgency as part of the war on terror and the insurgency frame emerged in print during the periods of study.
Committee in charge: Prof. John Russial, Chair; Prof. Patricia A Curtin; Prof. Carl Bybee

The Horse Latitudes is a collection of stories that documents one infantry squad's time in Baghdad, Iraq. The missions are long stretches of boredom, broken up by flashes of violence. The single sniper shot fired. An IED loosely buried in the roadside, waiting. A schoolyard of kids throwing fist-sized rocks at gun-trucks. The enemy is vast and changing. The downtime is a combination of homesickness, RPGs, and mortar fire. These men suffer through the war, heat, and each other. These stories look into the fire-fights and their aftermath to get to soldiers' struggles within themselves: how to fight a faceless enemy, what it means to serve, how one soldiers, what makes a man, what makes a good man, what will it mean to die here, and what does it mean not to. This collection dismisses what we think we know about war -- violence, camaraderie, masculinity, enemy, victory -- in order to tell a harder, truer story.

This study reports the findings of a systematic visual content analysis of 356 randomly sampled images published about the Iraq War in Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News and World Report from 2003-2009. In comparison to a 1995 Gulf War study, published images in all three newsmagazines continued to be U.S.-centric, with the highest content frequencies reflected in the categories U.S. troops on combat patrol, Iraqi civilians, and U.S. political leaders respectively. These content categories do not resemble the results of the Gulf War study in which armaments garnered the largest share of the images with 23%.

This study concludes that embedding photojournalists, in addition to media economics, governance, and the media-organizational culture, restricted an accurate representation of the Iraq War and its consequences. Embedding allowed more access to both troops and civilians than the journalistic pool system of the Gulf War, which stationed the majority of journalists in Saudi Arabia and allowed only a few journalists into Iraq with the understanding they would share information. However, the perceived opportunity by journalists to more thoroughly cover the war through the policy of embedding was not realized to the extent they had hoped for. The embed protocols acted more as an indirect form of censorship.

L'invasion et l'occupation de l'Irak ont montré les capacités des Etats-Unis de renverser un ordre politique, et les difficultés d'en construire un à leur profit. Le postulat de départ de la présente recherche consiste à s'interroger sur les effets produits par la présence américaine en Irak. Ceux-ci ne peuvent être analysés indépendamment des logiques qui en sont à l'origine ni de l'interaction avec de multiples acteurs. C'est donc à une analyse stratégique que cette interrogation invite : analyse du raisonnement, de l'articulation entre fins, voies et moyens, mais aussi de l'interdépendance entre les actions américaines et celles des acteurs irakiens. A cette aune, l'histoire militaire devient l'occasion d'une étude sociologique de l'utilisation de la force ainsi que des rapports entre sphères politiques et militaires. D'autre part, l'inscription des actions militaires dans un contexte sociopolitique dynamique porte à se poser la question du rôle joué par la coercition dans l'établissement d'un ordre politique au niveau local. Plus largement enfin, cette thèse interroge les prétentions des Etats occidentaux et de la communauté internationale à promouvoir un ordre libéral dans un contexte de consolidation de l'Etat.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 transformed the way in which Americans and their leaders viewed the world. The tragic events of that day helped give rise to a foreign policy strategy commonly referred to as the “Bush Doctrine.” At the heart of this doctrine lay a series of propositions about the need to foster liberal democracy as the antidote to terrorism. President George W. Bush proclaimed in a variety of addresses that democracy now represented the “single surviving model” of political life to which all people aspired. In the course of making this argument, President Bush seemed to relate his policies to an overarching “teleology” of progress. This discourse implied that the United States might use force to hasten the emergence of liberal norms and institutions in selected states. With a sense of irony, some commentators soon referred to the Bush administration’s position as “Leninist” because of its determination to bring about the so-called “end of history” today. Yet, surprisingly, these critics had little more to add. This thesis is an attempt to assess in greater depth the Bush administration’s claim to comprehend historical eschatology. Developing a concept termed “democratic vanguardism,” this study investigates the idea of liberal modernity, the role of the United States as a force for democracy, and the implications of using military intervention in the service of idealistic ends. It examines disputes among political theorists, public intellectuals and elected statesmen which help to enrich our understanding of the United States’ efforts under President Bush at bending history to its will.

Evaluation des mutations de la stratégie politico-militaire américaine depuis l'occurrence de la Revolution in Military Affairs jusqu'au processus actuel de "Transformation". L'analyse des évolutions vues - y compris à l'aune des opérations menées en Afghanistan et en Irak - montre, au delà du phénomène de technicisation (i.e. le processus d'intégration de nouvelles technologies aux armées) un phénomène de "technologisation".

Dans ce cadre, le discours stratégique américain, examiné au travers des débats stratégiques et des contributions doctrinales, tendrait à être sur-déterminé par la technologie, du niveau tactique au niveau politique, de sorte que ledit discours tendrait à devenir en soi une technologie.
Doctorat en Sciences politiques et sociales
info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

Orientador: Reginaldo Nasser
Banca: Antonio Pedro Tota
Banca: Igor Fuser
O programa de Pós-Graduação em Relações Internacionais é instituido em parceria com a UNESP/UNICAMP/PUC-SP, em projeto subsidiado pela CAPES, intitulado "Programa San Tiago Dantas"
Resumo: O presente trabalho tem por objetivo analisar a percepção e o posicionamento do jornal americano The New York Times sobre a Guerra do Iraque conduzida por George W. Bush em 2003. Também será trabalhada a questão da relação entre mídia e governo. O alicerce teórico do trabalho consiste de literatura do campo de relações internacionais, política externa americana e comunicação política. A parte empírica omplicará na tentativa de estabelecer uma correlação entre o tom e o conteúdo dos editoriais do referido jornal e a popularidade do presidente durante a guerra
Abstract: This study aims to analyze the perception and positioning of the American newspaper The New York Times about the Iraq war led by George W. Bush in 2003. It will also approach the question of the relationship between media and government. The theoretical foundation of the work consists of the literature of the field of international relations, American foreign policy and political communication. The empirical part will involve the attempt to establish a correlation between the tone and content of the newspaper editorials and the president's popularity during the war
Mestre

Orientador: Reginaldo Mattar Nasser
Banca: Carlos Gustavo Poggio Teixeira
Banca: Cláudia Alvarenga Marconi
O Programa de Pós-Graduação em Relações Internacionais é instituído em parceria com a Unesp/Unicamp/PUC-SP, em projeto subsidiado pela CAPES, intitulado "Programa San Tiago Dantas"
Resumo: O objetivo desta dissertação é fazer uma investigação a respeito do impacto e influência que a diplomacia, em sua vertente multilateral, pode ter sobre a opção dos membros do governo dos EUA em fazerem uso de suas forças armadas no exterior. A análise é desenvolvida com base no estudo de caso específico da Guerra contra o Iraque, que teve início em março de 2003. Primeiramente desenvolvemos uma delimitação conceitual do que entendemos por unilateralismo e multilateralismo como sendo categorias de classificação do grau de abertura e influência de outros atores na política externa de um determinado Estado. Em seguida, fazemos uma revisão bibliográfica da história da política externa norte-americana, identificando os sentidos e possíveis fontes respectivas do unilateralismo e multilateralismo neste panorama, e quais as suas especificidades. Finalmente, desenvolvemos a análise proposta, através da contextualização da questão iraquiana e do envolvimento norte-americano nela, para em seguida identificarmos na ação dos EUA o grau em que sua atuação diplomática envolveu outros atores e interesses, com vistas a realizarmos uma gradação do seu multilateralismo ou unilateralismo e se esta categorização serve para o melhor entendimento do papel que a diplomacia teria na política externa dos EUA especificamente no caso da guerra resultante deste processo. Nossas conclusões apontam para um balanço complexo, pois as fontes trabalhadas indicam uma forte vocação unilateral na escolha da opção militar para desarmar o Iraque. Porém, ao mesmo tempo é possível notar que houve um amplo e sistemático esforço de convencer aliados e especialmente o Conselho de Segurança da ONU da legitimidade e da necessidade da ação militar contra o Iraque. E este esforço parece não ... (Resumo completo, clicar acesso eletrônico abaixo)
Abstract: The objective of this dissertation is to make an investigation about the impact and influence that diplomacy in its multilateral expression may have in the option of using military forces abroad by members of the government of the United States. The analysis is developed for the specific case of the Iraq war, which started in March 2003. First we present one conceptual understanding of unilateralism and multilateralism as categories of classification of the degree of openness and influence of others actors in the foreign affairs of one State. After this we make one bibliographical review of the history of United States foreign affairs, identifying the meanings and the possible sources of unilateralism and multilateralism in its development, and which are their specificities. Then, we develop the proposed analysis, through the details about the context of the Iraqi crisis and north American involvement in it, and afterwards we identify in the United States action the degree in which its diplomatic action involved others actors and interests, for the purpose of having a scale of its multilateralism or unilateralism. Then we evaluate if these categories are useful for the better understanding of the role diplomacy may have in the United States foreign policy, specifically in the case of the war. Our conclusions points out a complex balance, since our sources indicate a strong unilateral tendency in the choice about the military option to disarm Iraq. However, at the same time we could see an wide and systematic effort to convince allies and specially the UN Security Council of the legitimacy and the need of the military action against Iraq. This effort appears to not have been more insistent on the account of the favorable domestic conditions for the war, with the support of US Congress, and the threat of a veto openly made by others member of ... (Complete abstract click electronic access below)
Mestre

Le différend entre la France et les Etats-Unis sur le règlement de la question irakienne a provoqué une crise diplomatique majeure entre les deux pays, jugée par certains comme la plus sérieuse dans l’histoire des relations bilatérales. Le dossier irakien a cristallisé les positions diplomatiques des deux alliés et mis en lumière deux lectures d’une grande question internationale. Pour la France, il a été l’occasion de défendre des principes, de faire entendre sa voix et de partager sa vision d’un monde multipolaire fondé sur la quête d’un règlement pacifique des différends. Pour les Etats-Unis, cette question relevait d’un enjeu de sécurité nationale, dans une Amérique profondément traumatisée par les attentats de septembre 2001. La rupture franco-américaine a résulté de facteurs structurels anciens : la concurrence entre deux modèles politiques et diplomatiques qui se veulent universels et le déséquilibre entre une puissance française, déclinante, qui aspire à préserver ses sphères d’influence sur la scène internationale, et une puissance américaine, ascendante, devenue, depuis l’effondrement du bloc soviétique, l’unique superpuissance à la tête d’un monde unipolaire. L’affrontement bilatéral du printemps 2003 a ainsi révélé les caractères intrinsèques qui opposent la diplomatie française et la diplomatie américaine et dévoilé leur conception très éloignée qu’elles se faisaient du nouvel ordre mondial et de la place qu’elles aspirent à occuper sur l’échiquier international
The disagreement between France and the US over the Iraqi issue led to a serious diplomatic crisis between the two countries, considered by many analysts as the most serious one in the history of bilateral relations. The Iraqi case crystallized the diplomatic positions of both allies and revealed two different reads of this major international issue. For France, this case was the opportunity to defend its principles, to get itself heard by the rest of the world and to share its vision of a multipolar world, where disputes would be peacefully settled through international organizations. For the US, that issue fell under a matter of national security, in a country deeply traumatized by ‘9/11’. The split between thetwo countries resulted from historical structural causes : (i) the competition between two political and diplomatic models that present themselves as universal, and (ii) the imbalance between France’s declining power aspiring to preserve its spheres of influence over the world and America’s ascending power that has become, since the end of the Cold War, the only superpower. The bilateral confrontation of 2003 revealed the distinctive patterns of both French and American foreign policies and exposed their different views and models of the new world order, as well as their ambitions on the international scene

Le différend entre la France et les États-Unis sur le règlement de la question irakienne a provoqué une crise diplomatique majeure entre les deux pays, jugée par certains comme la plus sérieuse dans l’histoire des relations bilatérales. Le dossier irakien a cristallisé les positions diplomatiques des deux alliés et mis en lumière deux lectures d’une grande question internationale. Pour la France, il a été l’occasion de défendre des principes, de faire entendre sa voix et de partager sa vision d’un monde multipolaire fondé sur la quête d’un règlement pacifique des différends. Pour les États-Unis, cette question relevait d’un enjeu de sécurité nationale, dans une Amérique profondément traumatisée par les attentats de septembre 2001. La rupture franco-américaine a résulté de facteurs structurels anciens : la concurrence entre deux modèles politiques et diplomatiques qui se veulent universels et le déséquilibre entre une puissance française, déclinante, qui aspire à préserver ses sphères d’influence sur la scène internationale, et une puissance américaine, ascendante, devenue, depuis l’effondrement du bloc soviétique, l’unique superpuissance à la tête d’un monde unipolaire. L’affrontement bilatéral du printemps 2003 a ainsi révélé les caractères intrinsèques qui opposent la diplomatie française et la diplomatie américaine et dévoilé leur conception très éloignée qu’elles se faisaient du nouvel ordre mondial et de la place qu’elles aspirent à occuper sur l’échiquier international
The disagreement between France and the US over the Iraqi issue led to a serious diplomatic crisis between the two countries, considered by many analysts as the most serious one in the history of bilateral relations. The Iraqi case crystallized the diplomatic positions of both allies and revealed two different reads of this major international issue. For France, this case was the opportunity to defend its principles, to get itself heard by the rest of the world and to share its vision of a multipolar world, where disputes would be peacefully settled through international organizations. For the US, that issue fell under a matter of national security, in a country deeply traumatized by ‘9/11’. The split between the two countries resulted from historical structural causes: (i) the competition between two political and diplomatic models that present themselves as universal, and (ii) the imbalance between France’s declining power aspiring to preserve its spheres of influence over the world and America’s ascending power that has become, since the end of the Cold War, the only superpower. The bilateral confrontation of 2003 revealed the distinctive patterns of both French and American foreign policies and exposed their different views and models of the new world order, as well as their ambitions on the international scene

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has emerged as a major cause of morbidity among U.S. soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even mild TBI (mTBI) can result in cognitive impairments that can impact how veterans experience such things as physical symptoms, emotions and behaviors, instrumental activities of daily living, interpersonal interactions, and community reintegration. The purpose of this study was to develop a comprehensive self-management intervention for veterans with mTBI to facilitate their community reintegration upon returning from deployment to combat zones. This study was conducted in two Phases. Phase I entailed collecting qualitative data regarding needs, concerns, strategies used, and advice given by eight veterans with mTBI, guided by a conceptual model derived from Ferrans’ and colleagues’ health-related quality of life model and the TBI literature. Six key categories and predominant themes emerged providing further support for the model (cognitive impairments, physical symptoms, emotions and behaviors, instrumental activities of daily living, interpersonal interactions, and community reintegration). Guided by the conceptual model, a mTBI Veteran Needs and Concerns Checklist and 14 algorithms making up the VETeranS Compensate, Adapt, REintegrate (VETSCARE) intervention were developed. Phase II entailed obtaining review of the mTBI Veteran Needs and Concerns Checklist and the 14 VETSCARE algorithms from six TBI experts. On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being strongly agree, expert ratings provided moderate evidence of content validity for the checklist (3.33), and for the 14 algorithms (problem relevance 3.92, accuracy 3.73, feasibility 3.80, acceptability 3.84). The average overall expert rating for the VETSCARE intervention was 3.82. The checklist and the 14 algorithms are being revised based on specific comments provided by the experts. Once revised, the mTBI Veteran Needs and Concerns Checklist and the VETSCARE intervention will be tested for feasibility in a future pilot study with veterans with mTBI who have recently returned from combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)
Symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are a common comorbidity in veterans seeking treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP). However, little is known regarding the mutual influence of PTSD and CMP in this population. Using cross-sectional and longitudinal data from a randomized clinical trial evaluating a stepped care intervention for CMP in Iraq/Afghanistan veterans (ESCAPE), this dissertation examined the relationships between PTSD and CMP along with other factors including depression, anxiety, catastrophizing and health-related quality of life. The Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis was conducted to identify key factors associated with baseline PTSD besides CMP severity. A series of statistical analyses including logistical regression analysis, mixed model repeated measure analysis, confirmatory factor analysis and cross-lagged panel analysis via structural equation modeling were conducted to test five competing models of PTSD symptom clusters, and to examine the mutual influences of PTSD symptom clusters and CMP outcomes. Results showed baseline pain intensity and pain disability predicted PTSD at 9 months. And baseline PTSD predicted improvement of pain disability at 9 months. Moreover, direct relationships were found between PTSD and the disability component of CMP, and indirect relationships were found between PTSD, CMP and CMP components (intensity and disability) mediated by depression, anxiety and pain catastrophizing. Finally, the coexistence of PTSD and more severe pain was associated with worse SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores. Together these findings provided empirical support for the mutual maintenance theory.

Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) (Afghanistan) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) represent one of the longest wartime deployments in the history of the American military. To date, 1.6 million American military members have deployed. Of these, an estimated 300,000 have returned with a mental health condition, such as depression or PTSD. The Department of Defense has established a robust screening program to identify and track deployment-related physical and psychiatric illnesses. The Post-Deployment Health Reassessment (PDHRA) is a primary tool to identify physical and psychiatric risk following a deployment. The PDHRA is a web-based survey, which is administered between 90-180 days after a deployment. This study seeks to evaluate the psychometric properties and clinical utility of the Post-Deployment Health Reassessment (PDHRA) for accurately identifying truama and depression among Airmen following a deployment. Descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling were used to address separate research aims. Study aims assessed the impact of deployment on military members and the clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Post-Deployment Health Reassessment. Findings suggest that the Post-Deployment Health Reassessment is a useful triage tool to identify trauma and depression among Airmen following deployment. The study makes recommendations for improving the clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Post-Deployment Health Reassessment (PDHRA).
text

This thesis examines the way in which the mass media, including major newspapers, and television channels, dealt with the issues of weapons of mass destruction and the issue of legality surrounding the US led attack on Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq, in the periods immediately before, during, and after the 2003 invasion. The thesis focuses on the issue of Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction and how it was portrayed by the mass media as a justifiable reason for the invasion. It concentrates on three phases of the event: the first surrounding efforts by the ‘coalition of the willing’ to obtain a UN resolution for the invasion of Iraq; the second concerning mass media management and the issue of no weapons being found during the invasion; and third the role of the mass media in shaping public opinion during the invasion and thereafter. The key issue examined here is whether the mass media served, essentially, to promote the agenda of executive government in the U.S and U.K or whether it had an agenda of its own. Hence, with this in mind the study investigates the role of the mass media with reference to weapons of mass destruction. Administrations in both the U.S and the U. K, along with mainstream mass media in these states presented the Iraq invasion as a legal act. The U.S administration asserted that the invasion was legal relying on the doctrine of pre-emptive self- defence, by arguing that Iraq’s WMD’s were an imminent threat to the U.S and its interests in the Middle East region. The British government asserted that U.N resolution 1441 indicated that if Iraq failed to cooperate and comply with U.N WMD’s team, then it would face an international consensus calling for serious consequences. The Blair administration argued that Iraq breached international law and thus demonstrated that an Iraq invasion was justified relying on security claims. The Blair administration argued that Iraq’s WMD’s were capable of targeting the U.K, and therefore, according to Blair, it was legitimate to act before the Iraqi regime conducted any attacks against England. Evidence in this thesis indicates that the invasion of Iraq in 2003 by both the US and the U.K governments was neither legal nor moral. The mainstream mass media in both countries functioned to present the arguments to invade Iraq to the public relying on Iraq’s WMD’s imminent threat. The thesis shows that mainstream mass media in both countries asserted Iraq’s possession of WMD’s and presented the case to the public in order to shape opinion that would unquestionably support an Iraq invasion and regime change. In chapter 6, the thesis shows how mainstream mass media uncritically followed the administrations pronouncements without questioning the validity and the accuracy of such claims. In this thesis I argue that the mass media and the governments of the US and UK played a definitive role in legitimising and justifying the war for both the American and the British people. This role was achieved through the extensive usage of rhetoric and closely managed discourse which helped influence public opinion in these countries that the invasion of Iraq was justified. This thesis examines the crucial role played by the mass media in driving its own agenda, as well as acting as a vehicle for government propaganda in their countries, and in other developed countries. I conclude by arguing for the importance of mass media neutrality as an integral element of a healthy democracy. The thesis shows how consideration of mass media’s treatment of WMD in the Iraq invasion can help to suggest some possible reforms which could contribute to greater media responsibility in times of war.

This dissertation considers the relation between literary documents and public identities, and how U. S. culture is reflected and transfigured by poetry in the United States after 1960. Concerned with epideictic communication in public contexts, this study looks at how private interventions in public spaces can shape attitudes toward cultural phenomena. A secondary concern elucidates the ways literary texts are valued in English departments, bearing critical reflection on rhetorical, literary, and creative pedagogy. Insofar as the epideictic mode prepares individuals for a decision-making process in current democratic situations, this dissertation considers recent examples of strategic public engagements, and provides rhetorical readings of key situations in American social and cultural life since 1960 to illustrate how such methods can bring rhetoric and literature together in contemporary public contexts. The first of these studies inspects the correspondence and poetry of Robert Duncan and Denise Levertov during the Vietnam War over the uses of poetry as a public document. Public identity and U. S. social practices are explored in the following chapter with the 1970s and ’80s poetry of Lorenzo Thomas and Edward Dorn, whose poems participate in the articulation of tensions between private and public life. Chapter 4 argues that Charles Olson’s poems and letters appearing in the editorial pages of The Gloucester-Daily Times in the 1960s effectively helped bring civic attention to the transformation of public space in Gloucester, Mass. While he interpreted the changes he perceived in Gloucester through literary and historical theories, he framed them within rhetorically motivated communication strategies to deliver new perceptions of what constituted civic value. Chapter 5 concludes by examining more recent attempts by poets to influence public reflection on crucial events that led to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through digital media, public performance, and civic encounters mediated by fugitive texts. The opening and final chapters introduce my methodology and present the problem of poetry in public contexts, and advocates for reflection within English departments on the rhetorical value of literary texts.
text