• View
• Edit
• History
• Print

The CCCC Program Cover

The CCCC Program Cover
reviewed by Caroline Dadas
dadasce@muohio.edu

In her “Greetings from the 2009 Program Chair,” Marilyn Valentino announces San Francisco as “a city known for its waves—waves of immigrants, waves of writers, waves of activists.” She encourages CCCC attendees to make waves “by examining significant rhetorical events in the city’s history and by contextualizing our own field’s research, theory, and pedagogy in a time of change.” The cover of the conference program, with its montage of famous places, people, and events in San Francisco’s history, ostensibly seeks to highlight moments of cultural influence and political action. But a significant aspect of San Francisco’s cultural and historical influence was absent from the CCCC program cover: GLBTQ representation.

Although the program’s publisher, Bedford/St.Martin’s, held their annual reception at City Hall in honor of slain city supervisor and gay activist Harvey Milk, nothing on the cover alludes to San Francisco’s rich GLBTQ histories. If we as a field want to talk about “making waves”—both within the context of particular locations and from a broader cultural perspective—and contextualize our scholarly work in a “time of change,” then we need to acknowledge the present and past work being done to assure equitable conditions for people who identify as GLBTQ. The CCCC program cover aims to put on a face on the conference—to not only reflect the particular location where we gather, but also to serve as an instigating voice in the kinds of conversations that should take place at the conference. If this cover is any indication, then we as a field are choosing to downplay, and perhaps even ignore, GLBTQ issues, histories, and rhetorics.

Disappointment over the CCCC program cover emerged in the panel “Charting New Routes: GLBTQQ Discourses in Professional Spaces” (G.03). To paraphrase one audience member as she held up a copy of the program: “C’mon, this is the year of Harvey Milk! Sean Penn just won the Academy Award!” In their presentation, speakers Matt Cox and Trav Webster of Michigan State University theorized the possibility of queer-hybrid kairotic moments, asking whether we might consider the present day kairotic—in terms of giving voice to GLBTQ issues, honoring GLBTQ rhetorics, and achieving equality for all people. While audience members disagreed on whether we are living in a kairotic moment, I believe that recent events have established an exigency for initiating and maintaining GLBTQ dialogues in our field. Less than one month after the conference ended, the Iowa Supreme Court legalized gay marriage in a unanimous decision, and Vermont became the first state to allow gay marriage via its state legislature. In sharp contrast, as Trav Webster pointed out, there were only a handful of presentations on GLBTQ issues during this year’s conference. While there is clearly an active cultural discussion taking place regarding gay marriage, we as a field are remaining largely silent when it comes to GLBTQ issues—both in terms of the topics that we choose to engage at our major conference and in the way that we promote that conference.

My critique of the conference program cover is not intended to downplay the significance of the images that were included. Alcatraz, for example, was the site of a highly successful protest by American Indians. The 1969 takeover of Alcatraz Island paved the way for the federal government to officially end its policy of termination. The Black Panther Party has worked for justice and equality, keeping issues of race at the forefront of America’s social consciousness in the 1960s. Robbie Robertson, Michael McClure, Bob Dylan, and Allen Ginsberg have contributed enormously to an American artistic and cultural sensibility that prizes creativity, honesty, and tradition. The cover’s images of Vietnam protestors and peace activists communicate San Francisco’s longstanding commitment to social activism. But that social activism encompasses a dedication to GLBTQ rights—as evidenced in the work of Harvey Milk, who, in 1978, became the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in California. Why, especially in a year that honored Milk’s achievements, would the CCCC program cover not celebrate San Francisco’s commitment to GLBTQ discourses?

This oversight should also make us wonder whether we are seizing the opportunities that we have as scholars to work for GLBTQ awareness and advocacy. As addressed in the same session by respondent Will Banks of East Carolina University, the Queer Caucus has worked to establish several sense-of-the-house motions this year to address a lack of engagement with GLBTQ concerns. The motions took up the need for CCCC to argue for domestic partner benefits; address GLBTQ issues within the profession; and encourage members of the Scholars for the Dream committee to identify GLBTQ people as an underrepresented category of individuals. These motions represent a small but significant step in encouraging increased dialogue about GLBTQ issues and rhetorics at CCCC.

This dialogue needs to be dispersed throughout the entirety of the field’s conferences, publications, and publicity. By holding the major conference in our field in San Francisco and then not using the program cover to celebrate the city’s commitment to GLBTQ rhetorics, we are sending the message that rhetoric and composition should not concern itself with some of the basic tenets of citizenship: public voice, self-determination, and equal rights.