Off-campus UMass Amherst users: To download dissertations, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your UMass Amherst user name and password.
Non-UMass Amherst users, please click the view more button below to purchase a copy of this dissertation from Proquest.
(Some titles may also be available free of charge in our Open Access Dissertation Collection, so please check there first.)
Public talk in the afterglow of the Gulf War: The slight magics of gender
Abstract
This study used metaphors and narrative elements in prominent media coverage of the Gulf War aftermath to examine how the Gulf War was being memorialized. As America's most recent war and most current war story, what legacies would it bequeath for future policy and war discourses? The primary data included articles, editorials, and commentaries in the New York Times and Washington Post between May and August 1991. For comparison, a brief analysis of ABC Evening News was also undertaken. The two predominant metaphors used about the war, family and therapy, were noted for their benign connotations. More antagonistic metaphors, including war, were applied to pacific subjects, such as family problems. This reversal of benevolent and deadly events, corresponded with findings about gender. Male subjects were more positively cast, while danger more commonly clung to female subjects and realms. Moreover, gendered conformity was a critical criteria for positive casting. Two forms of narrative analysis were done. The primary metaphors were found to organize a double narrative. There was a simple story of a fight well fought and an enemy conquered. A meta-story, framed most prominently by the therapy metaphor, recast the foe as the "Vietnam syndrome," and America, triumphant, united and feeling good. Explicit narrative elements also were analyzed. Use of "the other story" reinforced the Gulf War's image as less dangerous than occurrences outside its boundaries. Memorializing references reinforced the Gulf War story as worthy of remembrance. These findings were explored in terms of some current political issues as well as their legacy for framing and justifying future wars. Of particular concern were the problematization of public debate, "feeling good" as a justification for war, the national leadership's refusal to take responsibility for the Vietnam war, militarism equated with patriotism, and the exaggerated gender polarization when the subject is war. In conclusion, the study recommended alternative constructions, including Elshtain's "chastened patriot," as more complex, circumscribed and viable frames for war and war stories.
Subject Area
Mass communications|American studies
Recommended Citation
Patterson, Eleanora, "Public talk in the afterglow of the Gulf War: The slight magics of gender" (1993). Doctoral Dissertations Available from Proquest. AAI9316702.
https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations/AAI9316702