This dissertation explores the ways in which feminine culpability is verbally articulated by the male courtly lover to his beloved lady within the amorous relationship in three fifteenth-century Spanish sentimental novels: Diego de San Pedro’s Cárcel de amor, published in 1492, and two of Juan de Flores' sentimental novels, Grimalte y Gradissa and Grisel and Mirabella, both published in approximately 1495, and how these motifs of feminine culpability are subverted in the anonymous fifteenth-century Catalan chivalric novel Curial e Güelfa. This subversion of culpability motifs is facilitated in Curial e Güelfa since there is also a subversion of gender roles within the amorous relationship of the novel's protagonists: a female lover, Güelfa, who courts her male beloved, Curial. To execute this study, I begin by discussing the origins of this rhetoric of feminine culpability in patristic, Biblical and philosophical texts, illustrating their sedimentation into the collective ideologies of medieval audiences. I also examine these feminine culpability models in Provençal lyric poetry written and recited by Occitan troubadours between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries, as one of its particular genres, the mala cansó, aims to not only blame the beloved lady, but also to publicly defame her, a threat that is also ever-present in the words of the male lover in the sentimental novel. After analyzing the tactics used by the male courtly lover to blame the beloved lady for his suffering and the demise of the relationship, I demonstrate how these same tactics are employed by the female characters of Curial e Güelfa toward the beloved man. However, feminine blame still occurs in Curial e Güelfa, manifested as feminine self-blame and blame between women, while the male characters engage in self-absolution, absolution of other men, and utter shirking of the blame. The theoretical framework employed is that of medieval canon law, and the way in which culpability was determined under this law from the twelfth century onward, which was by the intentions of the offender at the time of the crime or transgression rather than the consequences of the transgression. If we examine these fifteenth-century courtly love texts, it becomes clear that the beloved lady is innocent, while the male lover himself is the culpable party. Finally, following Rouben C. Cholakian's reading of the troubadour poetry through the work of twentieth-century psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, I conclude that although the poet-lover verbally enunciates erotic metaphors and adulating language toward his beloved lady in the guise of courtly love, the true desire that he cannot articulate is to dominate, to overpower, and possibly to eradicate the feminine. Thus, in a Lacanian sense the notion that courtly love literature praises the woman is a fallacy. Both the poet-lover of the Provençal lyric and the courtly lover of the sentimental novel subvert the concept of alleged feminine superiority and exaltation in these texts. / Spanish

The advent of social media has provided an arena where barriers to entry are low. Individuals may persuade, question others and defend both their philosophies and their actions. This study examines the classic role of rhetorical criticism as it may apply in new media venues. A blog written by a public figure was examined through a synthesis of rhetorical criticism analyses derived from Ware and Linkugel, Vartabedian, and Downey. Four strategies and associated positioning in the practice of apologia were identified in selected blog posts, indicating the genre of apologia applies to social media apologies and extends the genre of apologia. Rhetorical criticism was found to be an effective tool in identifying rhetorical postures and strategies used in social media.

I use the body to investigate the ideas of morality, mourning and mortification. I look towards costume history, traditional Catholic rituals and themes in 19th century literature to feed my obsession with transformation, reconciliation and communication through dress. My making focuses on feminine objects and materials. Lace, veils, undergarments and hair adornment speak not only of womanhood, but also of the duality of human nature. Lace speaks of purity and sexuality, it reveals and conceals, it is humble, yet gluttonous in its ornamental overindulgence; lace is the ultimate dichotomy. I use it as a potent symbol to represent the duality of body and soul, right and wrong, good and evil. Historically, neglected, disheveled and unbound hair was a sign of mourning and penance, a physical representation of one's sin and sorrow. In my work, hair comes to represent an uncomfortable binding of one's self to one's alter ego, while helping to serve as an act of penance and mortification. As I make, my hands hopelessly yearn to create beauty from burdens; the repetitive and penitential process of stitching creates a metaphor for my longing towards perfection and purification. My use of video, photography and installation work to provide a unique experience for the viewer, for here they are invited to enter these imaginary worlds of wonder.

This paper examines how the Swedish nationalistic political party Sverigedemokraterna communicates regarding the crisis they experienced when the Swedish newspaper Expressen published a few video clips of three, in that time, highly important party members that got in an argument after a late night of drinking. Two of the party members were at the time of the publication the members of the Swedish parliament and all of them had important senior positions in the party. In the argument one of the party members used abusive, offensive, sexist and racist language while all acted threatening and even armed themselves with iron bars from a nearby construction site.The aim of this paper is to examine how the party Sverigedemokraterna conducts their crisis communication, if they apologies and the fashion of the apology. A press conference with the party leader and the most active user of abusive language and also an interview with the second member of parliament who is involved in the argument are studied. The rhetorical arena is used to describe and pinpoint the most important stakeholders in the crisis. Hearits structure “from wrongdoing to absolution” is used to describe the crisis and it’s context. Benoits apologiastrategies and Hearits requirements for an ethical apologia are used to describe and assess the crisis communication and apologia at the press conference and interview.The paper concludes that the individuals who communicate the apologia use different strategies. The party leaders focus is towards the future and corrective actions while claiming not to have all the necessary information. The other two party members portray themselves as victims. One of them apologizes while the other only acknowledges wrongdoing without apologizing. They all acknowledge wrongdoing.

The aim of this essay is first and foremost to clarify which kind of different answers there are to identify within an evangelical-lutheran tradition considering what a person should confess and take responsibility for as their sin and guilt. Secondly this essay aims to suggest the most plausible one. This essay thematically present four different figures of ideas that answers to the question of what a person should confess as their sin and guilt. These figures are: 1) To confess the ontological state of guilt 2) To confess the subjective sin and guilt 3) To confess the objective sin and guilt 4) To confess participation in the structural sin and guilt. These four different views of what to confess have been tested through three different criterias: a criteria of theology - by testing the coherence with an evangelical-lutheran tradition, a criteria of pastoral psychology - by testing the correspondence with theories in pastoral psychology and a criteria of good consequences - to see if the views of what to confess have a liberating effect on an individual and collective level. After testing these different views of what to confess my conclusion is that the most valid one is “ to confess our objective sin and guilt” because it expresses the violation of the “relation”. Some of the other views may serve as a good explanation for the human “situation”, but are not appropriate to confess as guilt.