This article was downloaded by: [New York University]On: 25 November 2013, At: 07:37Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Quarterly Journal of SpeechPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rqjs20

American values: Circa 1920–1970Mary G. McEdwards aa Associate Professor of Speech , San Fernando ValleyState CollegePublished online: 05 Jun 2009.

To cite this article: Mary G. McEdwards (1971) American values: Circa 1920–1970,Quarterly Journal of Speech, 57:2, 173-180, DOI: 10.1080/00335637109383058

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335637109383058

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purposeof the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are theopinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francisshall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs,expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arisingdirectly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

AMERICAN VALUES: CIRCA 1920-1970

Mary G. McEdwards

Myself when young did eagerly frequentDoctor and Saint, and heard great argumentAbout it and about; but evermoreCame out by the same door where in I went.

ALTHOUGH Omar, tentmaker and_/~\. amateur philosophe, was com-menting on his experiences with philo-sophical concepts as discussed in thetwelfth century, his comment here neatlyapplies to some major values held bytwentieth-century Americans. In the lastfew years, many reporters, sociologists—and philosophers—have commented onwhat they see as a drastic change inAmerican values. But an examination ofthe current American rhetoric mostAmericans approve reveals some bedrockvalues still firmly held. We are stillcoming out by the same door where inwe went.

An interesting comparison can bemade between the values embodied inthe rhetoric of Sinclair Lewis' novels ofthe 1920s and the values predominantin the major portion of today's rhetoric.The value suasion of George Babbitt, ofGideon Planish, of Elmer Gantry, andof assorted "true-blue" Americans as re-ported by Lewis rings out clearly (al-though perhaps through a larger vocab-ulary) in the rhetoric of present leadersand from those major molders of publicopinion, the advertising scribes. Lewistranscribes the rhetoric of the middle-class citizen, of the small businessman,of the moderately successful professionalman, of the politician extant in the early1900s. This rhetoric tends to center on

Mrs. McEdwards is Associate Professor of Speechat San Fernando Valley State College.

three major values held not only in theearly 1900s, but apparently strongly be-lieved in today by the large majority ofAmericans—by that "silent majority" forwhom President Nixon and (especially)Vice-President Agnew speak. MadisonAvenue and its local imitators use andreinforce these beliefs.

The language in which the values areembedded is a little more sophisticatedat this national level, but many Ameri-cans apparently have no difficulty in get-ting the message that

(1) all American men are, by definition, stronglymasculine.

(2) perfection in this world consists o£ the at-tainment of material things in large quan-tity.

(3) conformity in word and overt deed is theyardstick of goodness.

Conveying Value Number One, SpiroAgnew currently extols the cherishedAmerican belief that the real Americanman is "the man who believes in Godand country, hard work and honest op-portunity."1 Such masculinity is obvi-ously absent in those citizens Agnewcharacterizes as part of "a sniveling,hand-wringing power structure"2 indulg-ing in "national masochism . . . encour-aged by an effete corps of impudentsnobs who characterize themselves as in-tellectuals."3 According to Agnew, whatwill restore American greatness is a "re-

1 Speech in Montpelier, Vt., October 11,1969, quoted in Newsweek, LXXIV (November17, 1969), 39.

2 Speech at Ohio State University, June 7,1969, quoted in ibid.

3 Speech in New Orleans, October 19, 1969,quoted in ibid.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

37 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2013

174 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH

turn to the hard, fresh realism"4 of thepast when men were men rather than"ideological eunuchs whose most com-fortable position is straddling the philo-sophical fence."3

Masculine men are supposed to actrather than to sit and think. They shouldbe tough, manly, male. William Scrantontold his Detroit audience that "the work-ers of America are not looking for aneasy berth, a soft touch, a free ride. Theworkers of America are seeking an honestreturn for honest labor."6 During the1964 presidential campaign, GeorgeRomney appealed to voters to "save thiscountry established by divine Providenceand with a divine destiny" by using theabilities they have as "genuine real red-blooded Republicans."7 And Richard Mil-hous Nixon firmly intoned that "whatAmerica needs now is a man, a man whowill go up and down the length of thisland."8 He referred then to Goldwater,but he used the same label when speak-ing of his choice of Agnew as his vice-presidential candidate in 1968. He de-scribed his running mate by saying,"Above all, he's a man."9

Lewis' Babbitt is one who sees himselfand his audience as men, as pioneers, asmanly males. He tells his audience atTurnverein Hall that he has "neverforgotten how it feels, by heck, to be upat five-thirty and at the factory with theole dinner-pail in his hardened mittwhen the whistle blew at seven."10 Bab-bitt's hands are soft, he rises at five-thirty only to indulge in the "manly"skill of fishing, and he has never carrieda dinner-pail. Yet he, like many of to-

4 Speech at Loyola College, Baltimore, Md.,June 8, 1969, quoted in ibid.

5 Speech in Harrisburg, Pa., October 30, 1969,quoted in ibid.

6 Time, LXXXIV (July 3, 1964), 18.7 CBS Newscast, July 8, 1964.8 Los Angeles Times, July 17, 1964, pt. I, p. 9.9 Newsweek, LXXIV (November 17, 1969), 42.

10 Sinclair Lewis, Babbitt (New York, 1922),p. 178.

day's American males, uses the rhetoricof masculinity.

Dr. Gideon Planish, the professor ofrhetoric and speech turned professionalfund-raiser, uses the same rhetorical ap-proach to discredit his occasional urgetoward a real intellectual or psychologi-cal understanding of his fellows, and heis constantly deciding to "be bold andmasculine and put his foot down."11 Hewants to be considered a sample of "realhairy-chested he-life," a "two-fisted Regu-lar Guy," and a "jolly, laughing, sweat-ing Royal Good Fellow" who is a "He-man."

He and Babbitt would both agreewith Patricia Sexton in her commentsabout the feminization of the Americanboy caused by our public school system.Female teachers have turned our boysinto sissies by teaching with "the wordsof women" that "have their own soundand smell, perfumed or antiseptic."12 Asauthor Sexton notes, and as Agnew andmany Americans would agree, in oursociety "a man must be autonomous,make up his own mind, follow his owndirection, without leaning on others toomuch or asking for too much help."13

She states, "Boys usually prefer toughand colorful short words... school wordsare clean, refined, idealized."14 Boys "pre-fer" such words because these wordssymbolize their masculinity; they learnedthem from their fathers and they receiveconstant reinforcement rhetorically fromDad. The rhetoric of the female teacheris not for American-men—only for Amer-ican women or feminized males.

Babbitt and Planish would join to-day's consumer in buying the "man's"cigarette (Marlboro with its ability toenable you to tame horses or women

11 Sinclair Lewis, Gideon Planish (New York,1943), p. 425.

12 "How the American Boy is Feminized,"Psychology Today, III (January 1970), 25-26.

13 Ibid., 29.14 Ibid., 26

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

37 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2013

AMERICAN VALUES: CIRCA 1920-1970 175

with equal ease), the "man's" cologne(HE, the use of which will have bothyour employer and your girl worshippingat your feet), and the "man's" soap(BRUT, whose very name connotes aWalter Mitty world of male superiority).Today we listen to and agree with thepoliticians (Agnew, Romney, and Nixonare still with us—and in high places), andwe buy the products touted in MadisonAvenue verbiage because we respond tothe rhetoric that reassures us that theAmerican male is manly and masculine.If he isn't, he ought to be at least work-ing toward such a condition by buyingthe speakers' concepts or the manufac-turers' products. Fifty years after theappearance of Babbitt and Planish onthe American rhetorical scene, we arestill responding to and using their valuesabout those masculine American males.

And how are we talking today aboutthat Value Number Two, the worthof material possessions as a means tothe perfect life? We hear Mr. Ward L.Quaai, executive vice-president and gen-eral manager of WGN (the largest radiostation in Chicago) telling the 48th an-nual Kiwanis convention that we "leadall other nations in the production ofso many necessities . . . steel, housing,. . . rubber, automobiles, . . . and endlessothers."15 Senator John Pastore told hisaudience of Democrats that "our econ-omy has moved through 42 months ofcontinuous climb. We are breaking allrecords of peacetime prosperity."16 Presi-dent Lyndon Baines Johnson told thenation in 1965 that "we are in the midstof the greatest upward surge of eco-nomic well-being in the history of anynation" and that "more money will beleft in the hands of the consumer."17

Proper note of that "economic well-15 "Let's Put America Back to Work," VitalSpeeches, XXIX (September 15, 1963), 732.

16 Los Angeles Times, August 25, 1964, pt. I,p. 16.

17 Ibid., January 5, 1965, pt. I, p. 23.

being" appears in most of today's politi-cal rhetoric because such "well-being"means that more Americans can buymore bathtubs, refrigerators, and autosthan ever before. Indeed, much of thecriticism concerning President Nixon'sattempts to readjust the economy hasbeen based on the belief that Nixonwants to prevent Americans from hav-ing enough cash to buy such items. Amer-icans are reassured of their "good life"only if they have the financial ability tobuy the color TV set or the second carfor the family. If they can do that (andthey expect their leaders to provide eco-nomic conditions for such actions), thenthey truly have "the good life."

This belief that the real Americanhusband and father is the one who cansupply his "little nest" with most of thematerial items available in our economyappears in Babbitt's speech before theZenith Real Estate Board. He tells hisaudience that any American should beproud to live in a city that produces"more condensed milk and evaporatedcream, more paper boxes, and morelighting-fixtures, than any other city inthe United States, if not in the world."18

Zenith has "the finest school-ventilatingsystems in the country, . . . an unparal-lelled number of miles of paved streets,bathrooms, vacuum cleaners, and all theother signs of civilization." The epitomeof perfection lies in that "rock-ribbedpractical indication of the kind of prog-ress and braininess" that provides "onemotor car for every five and seven-eightspersons."19 California presently publi-cizes that there is one "motor car" forevery 1.4 human in the state, and Cali-fornia is (as described in Time maga-zine's cover story for November 7, 1969)"a nation unto itself," "a microcosm ofmoder American life."20

18 Lewis, Babbitt, p. 186.19 Ibid., p. 187.20 XCIV, 60.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

37 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2013

176 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH

Lewis' Dr. Planish discovers the"finer things of life" when he becomes aprofessional fund-raiser and can providehis wife Peony with "sandal shoes andsymphony season-tickets and five-poundboxes of Fanny Farmer candy."21 Andtoday's Californian is one of the 1.25million people who visit the CountyMuseum of Art or pay to get "culturalenrichment" at the Los Angeles MusicCenter or buy sandals crafted in Italy atAkron discount stores—all out of that"mass aristocracy that takes home about$1.5 billion every week."22 Peony judgesperfection, or at least a step toward it,as the possession of "gay and uncivilizedjunk that you can live with . . . achromium and black-glass portable bar,a pale birch cabinet, a sage-green Chineselamp imitating jade, and a Gauguinprint."23 Many American living roomsdecorated out of American Home orBetter Homes & Gardens tidily fit herdescription of the good life.

Americans today respond to rhetoricthat sells materialistic comfort in theseterms:

Viva La France! For Wine, Women, and Chairs!CHAIRS WORTH CHERISHING24

Botany 500 for men who Do. . . . When he doesthe town it's moon-dry martinis at her place.Then house seats at the only hit they haven'tseen. Later, it's supper action at Sardi's. . . .He'll look great doing everything. Because hisclothes are built for action. They're shaped andtailored for dash and comfort. . . . We makethese clothes for today. . . . For the men whodo.25

Ten years from now, you may look back on thisAdmiral portable as the finest bargain you everlooked at. . . . 19" . . . rectangular tube . . .long-run dependability . . . a combination ofreliable solid-state components and tubes with

21 Lewis, Gideon Planish, p . 160.22 Time, XCIV (November 7, 1969), 64.23 Lewis, Gideon Planish, p . 211.24 Las Virgenes Enterprise, February 19, 1970,

p . 5.25 Time, XCIV (November 7, 1969), 6.

stepped-up voltage for a finer picture, longerlife.26

So near and yet so far . . . you can escape fromthe noise and hustle of the metropolis in onlya half-hour . . . when you live at Hidden Hills. . . put yourself into the picture of happy suc-cessful families living in Hidden Hills.27

Your next car should look this beautiful . . .and be this practical . . . 1970 Chrysler withTorsion-Quiet Ride.28

Gourmet Dishes are being served at the Cali-fornian.29

And we buy the chairs, the Botany 500suits, the status homes, and we dine atthe restaurants with their gourmet disheseven if we disguise our hamburger asSalisbury steak for the rest of the week.And we still buy the "civilized junk" thatPeony so admires and we are willingrecipients and producers of that samerhetoric that "sells" the good materialis-tic life.

But manliness and material wealth arenot all that is required of the man whois a real American, of the man who fol-lows the "American way." He must con-form. As Babbitt explains the worth ofValue Number Three: "The ideal ofAmerican manhood and culture isn't alot of cranks sitting around chewing therag about their Rights and their Wrongs,but a God-fearing, hustling, successful,two-fisted Regular Guy . . . whose an-swer to his critics is a square-toed bootthat'll teach the grouches and smartalecks to respect the He-man and get outand root for Uncle Samuel, U.S.A.!"30

Spiro Agnew commented that "the dis-ease of our times is an artificial and maso-chistic sophistication—the vague uneasi-ness that our values are false, that thereis something wrong with being patriotic,

26 Ibid., 8.27 Enterprise, p . 6.28 Time, CXIV (November 7, 1969), 32-33.29 Enterprise, p . 6.30 Lewis, Babbitt, p . 188.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

37 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2013

AMERICAN VALUES: CIRCA 1920-1970 177

honest, moral, and hard-working,"31 Thecontributing editor of The Globe, pub-lished at Point Park College in Pitts-burgh, Mr. Howard George Bronder,castigates nonconformist Gore Vidal as"an egotistical, pseudo-intellectual night-mare. He is totally repulsive to goodAmericans who wave the flag, belong tothe American Legion and pray to Godfor salvation. Vidal also has the audacityto speak 'the truth.' Now I'm sure he'sone of those Communist perverts."32

A letter to Playboy's editor comes froma Texan. Upset about an article attack-ing some leaders of the Minutemen or-ganization, this rhetorician called forconformity to the old American values.He said: These men "are all top patriots.When the shooting starts, we'll know wecan count on them because they haveguts, brains, and weapons. The ones youcannot count on are those spineless, so-called conservatives . . . [those] mon-grelizers, Communists, infidel blood-suckers and one world-brotherly loveboys like the Kennedys and Rockefel-lers."33 Or as Babbitt so colorfully notesfifty years ago: "The worst menace tosound government is . . . gentry who callthemselves 'liberals' and 'radicals' and'non-partisan' and 'intelligentsia' andGod only knows how many other tricknames! Irresponsible teachers and pro-fessors constitute the worst of this wholegang, and I am ashamed to say that sev-eral of them are on the faculty of ourgreat State University."34 Spiro Agnewcharged that the October Vietnam Mora-torium had been "encouraged by aneffete corps of impudent snobs,"35 agroup of decadent people misleadingAmerican youth, a group that should bethrown out of good, solid, conformistAmerican society "with no more regret

31 Newsweek, LXXIV (November 17, 1969), 41.32 September, 1969, p . 14.33 Ibid., p . 9.34 Lewis, Babbitt, p . 187.35 Newsweek, LXXIV (November 17, 1969), 39.

than we should feel over discarding rot-ten apples from a barrel."36 Given Ag-new's popularity among many Americanvoters today, we may assume his rhetoricclearly typifies the average citizen's de-sire to have everybody behave and speakand think as he does.

A California state senator describedan opponent (current U.S. Senator AlanCranston) as one who "has consistentlyidentified himself with leftist and anti-patriotic view-points."3T In his biography,Where's the Rest of Me? California'sGovernor Ronald Reagan invokes ournational colors to prove his conformitywith the American system when he de-scribes his birth: "My face was blue . . .my bottom red . . . and my fatherclaimed afterward that he was white. . . .Ever since I have been particularly fondof the colors that were exhibited—red,

• white, and blue."38

Many Americans today are still ob-jecting to the voicing of views other thantheir own, and they are enforcing theirobjections by negating school bonds atall levels of education, by refusing in-creases in pay for teachers (especiallycollege professors), and by voting out ofoffice many of the politicians whose rhet-oric indicates a nonconformist view ofour society.

The accepted rhetoric of today stillanchors its ideas to solid American val-ues—or as Phil Harris sings, "talk to mein American—big A, A that I can under-stand." Or as Peony Planish advises herhusband, "Try to look like the YMCAwas named after you."39 The speakers oftoday who not only look like the YMCAwas named in their honor but who extolthese major values of manliness, of per-fection through material possessions, ofconformity in thought and visible deed

36 Ibid., 38.37 Van Nuys News, June 26, 1964, p . 17-A.38 With Richard B. Hubler (New York, 1965),

p. 1.39 Lewis, Gideon Planish, p . 128.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

37 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2013

178 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH

are the ones who are succeeding rhetori-cally with the American public. The votecount in recent elections supports thisview—and the public's financial responseto those Madison Avenue advertisementsembodying these values is ample proofthat these values still have a warm spotin the heart of the Average American.

Now we come to the question of howthe rebel-innovator rhetorician mightuse these values in some way to advancehis own cause. Jerry Rubin, EldridgeCleaver, Stokely Carmichael, RapBrown, and others want to move theU.S. voters to their views. At present,their rhetoric does not seem to take intoaccount these solidly-based Americanvalues, but how could they use such be-liefs to plead their cause?

The rebel/innovator can do a numberof things with the notion of maleness—ifhe is willing to adapt his rhetoric to par-ticular values held by his audience.

First, he can use the maleness conceptto argue that the real man makes deci-sions for all persons within his sphere ofinfluence. If a man is truly male, he willnot be afraid to advocate new ideas norafraid to adopt them. After all, a manmakes up his own mind. The mark ofthe true American male is strengthagainst immense opposition—exactly theposition in which the rebel-innovatorfinds himself. When Jerry Rubin callsfor revolution (physical revolution withbombs, fires, and riots) against the statusquo, the people who join his cause areREAL MEN. It takes brains, energy, andcourage to fight the Establishment. "Areyou your 'own man' or are you merely aservile, cringing pseudo-man?"

The rebel/innovator can also arguethat real men lead. And who can leadanyone to new fields, new thoughts, newactions if he does not accept new ideas,promote radical changes in the society—in short, be a leader} Such a position re-quires the same strength, energy, and

brains that built this nation. The fron-tiersman led the way across the physi-cal country; the real man will lead theway across the ideological and culturalcountry. A man who is a male leads theway in spite of the great odds facing him—be they Indians, river rapids, or the en-trenched Establishment and the so-calledElite.

The rebel/innovator can argue fur-ther that a man who is really a mancontrols. To control, one must be strong,both physically and mentally. Andstrength of all kinds is considered amajor mark of the male. After all, wasn'tit men who conquered and tamed themountains, the prairies, and the desertsof this country? And wasn't it men whowrote the Constitution, made the laws,and controlled the masses? A real manis not afraid to use his abilities and ener-gies to do what he knows is "right."What is "right" is what the rebel/inno-vator says is "right." Charge on and bea man!

For the average American male to hearhimself castigated as a sissy, a weaklingbecause he will not accept new ideas orperform radical actions is painful—he isa man in his own' eyes and cannot affordto appear less in the eyes of the fieryrebel/innovator speaker. Men make de-cisions; men lead others; men controltheir own society. If a man cannot de-cide that the speaker's idea is a good one,if he cannot lead others to accept it, andif he cannot control his followers, thenhe is not a MAN.

Secondly, the rebel/innovator can usethe concept of materialism. At firstglance, this concept might not seem auseful value for the speakers for the "To-day" generation with their stated re-fusal to accept all the "good things inlife" that our technology provides. Butlook again. The rebel/innovator can usethis value to show his listeners (overthirty) that the "good life" is one that

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

37 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2013

AMERICAN VALUES: CIRCA 1920-1970 179

provides all of those lovely creaturecomforts for everybody: "If you wouldonly accept my ideas, you will have allyou need and want for physical comfort.Spread the wealth around—we can allhave a car if Detroit were forced to stopbeing so greedy. We can all have dish-washers, washing machines, and comfor-table furniture if we support the over-throw of the Establishment. Get the Eliteout of office, throw out the greedy ras-cals, and let this country's resources beused to provide the good life for all ofus."

The listener who may not have all ofthese "good" materialistic things but be-lieves he is entitled to have them becausehe is an American living in the land ofequality may be a very receptive listener.Brought up on the American dream ofa high standard of living for everybody,he resents the status quo if he doesn'thave all the goodies that make life worth-while. Given a way, a direction in whichhe can go to achieve them, he may be-come a convert to the cause and actionpropounded by the rebel/innovator. Hewants to be one of those benefitting fromthe economic prosperity of this nation;if he is not, he is open to persuasiontoward actions that will get him thosematerial items that signify "success" inthe American way of life.

The listener who already has a rea-sonable amount of material comfort inhis life can be made to feel guilty by hav-ing more than others do. He then is readyfor conversion to the ideas of the rebel/innovator. Thus, the value of material-ism can work for the rebel/innovatorwhether he is speaking to the Haves orto the Have-Nots.

Thirdly, the rebel/innovator can turnto the value of conformity as a motiva-tion for his listeners to accept his ideas.He can ask: "Who is really the trueAmerican? He is the man who works forequality of race, religion, and sex. He is

the man who wants to invoke the realmeaning of the Constitution. He is theman who is a red, white, and blueAmerican." The good American is theone who conforms to the real values, tothe basic ideas on which this countrywas built. And those ideas are individu-alism, progress, and change: "After all,if we had not all been individualistic,we could not have conquered the physi-cal country. If all of us had not beenprogressive, we would never haveachieved the high standard of livingthat we have. And, above all, if we hadnot all been willing to accept change,we would never have started the UnitedStates in the first place." These threeconcepts conform to the original notionsthat started and built the nation:

Now, are you unwilling to be an individual,to be progressive, to be receptive to change? I£you won't do so, you are not conforming to thehighest ideals our people hold. I£ you will, thenyou are the real American.

Do your own thing—that's what built thiscountry. People who had ideas, who had thestrength to carry them out, and who believedin the institution of true democracy. Thiscountry is the greatest in the world, and whatmade it so? Everybody working together andbelieving the same thing. United we stand;divided we fall. We must follow the high idealsof our nation—and that means equality for all;it means real equal opportunity for everyonefor a job; it means respect for every individualregardless of his ideas and actions. You mustlisten to all people, you must allow them tolive their lives in their own way—that's theAmerican way.

To paraphrase Spiro Agnew, "Thereis nothing wrong with being patriotic,honest, moral, and hard-working." Andthe rebel/innovator can define theseterms for himself so they fit into theideas he wants accepted by his audience.Listeners are not "conforming" if theyrefuse to listen, to accept new ideas, tomake changes in our society that willbenefit all Americans—not just a few.

And so it goes. The rebel/innovator

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

37 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2013

180 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH

rhetorician can use these values and canbe effective in their use—if he is brightenough to discover how they can be ap-plied to his own ideas.

Perhaps the real question every speak-er today has to ask himself is this: AmI taking advantage of the ingrained val-ues that every American has been trainedto accept? And if I do, what is my re-sponsibility? That is a question that,ideally, all rhetoricians must answer astheir own consciences tell them. Car-

michael, Nixon, Jerry Rubin, JamesBurnham, William Buckley, John Lind-say, Ronald Reagan, and others all havethe chance to use these major Americanvalues. The future of American life maydepend on how effective these variedspeakers are in persuading their audi-ences that their notions, their policiesare the ones that best meet the require-ments of the American values.

Perhaps Babbitt still reigns supremeover the USA.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

New

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

37 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2013