Even the title Residencia en la tierra, one of the early masterworks of Chilean Nobel laureate Pablo Neruda, suggests a subject who stands alone in a world that is his by happenstance, in which he does not permanently dwell and to which he does not naturally belong. Stylistically and politically, too, among Neruda’s work Residencia seems to stand alone. Before Residencia, Neruda’s poetry was deeply personal and, compared to what came later, profoundly standard for its time and place; after the Residencia poems were completed—though before they had all been published— Neruda’s poetry would take a turn for the political that would remain with him more or less for the duration of his career. Indeed, the series presents a paradox for critics: a pivotal moment in his poetic development—what Emir Rodríguez Monegal calls Neruda’s first truly creative work—but also a work seemingly out of sync with Neruda’s later writings and vehemently rejected by the author himself only a few years after its publication. In sum, it is a work that refuses equally to be incorporated or to be ignored. This essay will attempt to carve out a more stable place for Residencia en la tierra in the critical understanding of Neruda’s poetic trajectory precisely by returning it to the place of its genesis. By retracing Neruda’s experiences in South Asia during his sojourn in Burma [Myanmar] and Ceylon [Sri Lanka] as a diplomat in the laste 1920s, the place where the enduring symbolism and ethical framework of the Residencia series were born, I will suggest new modes of reading Residencia that shed light on both why this book is so different from his others and the ways in which they are profoundly linked. / text

Of all the boundaries that are discussed and argued in critical and rhetorical theory, one of the most central and persistently controversial is the boundary line in the binary Self/other. The dominant rhetorical theories since Aristotle tend to claim that it is by reducing the division in this most fundamental binary that the most efficacious rhetoric is effected; that is, that bringing parties Self and other closer together before argument (or whatever serves as symbol-exchange within the larger act of rhetorical exchange) is most likely to establish the best preconditions for immediately-following symbol-exchange: This act of getting-together is known as Identification. This dissertation introduces the theory of postidentification (postID), which suggests that recognizing, valorizing, and using the division between the parties in rhetorical exchange--not attempting to find, create, and use similarities--often makes for the most efficacious rhetoric, especially when efficacious means transformative. All extant rhetorical theory continues to be based on various interpretations and iterations of the enthymeme and the syllogism that require various levels of Identification and continue to privilege the dominant party in the exchange, that is, Self (or Same or Selfsame, as they appear and act in different contexts). These Identification rhetorics include rhetorics of resistance emerging from feminist, postcolonial, and queer critical theory. All of these extant theories are dependent on some form of Identification, which means that the more Self and other have in common before the symbol exchange--that is, the more like Selfsame other is forced to be--the likelier some one will be persuaded to change a belief or attitude or to cause action. The new rhetorical theory of postidentification uses differences instead of similarities to establish the preconditions for rhetorical exchange. In short, what postID does is push queer theory or GLBT theory to its logical end: If we can have GLBT theory, why not GLBTYUM<<RTOD##55zxto, etc. ad infinitum . . . theory?

Adventists hold various views with regard to their understanding of themselves as a church. They view themselves as the last remnant church of God today. They also believe that they are a part of the general Christendom. Adventists acknowledge the presence of sincere Christians in other churches. In this study, the background to twentieth century Christian ecclesiological self-understanding is examined. The origins and development of the Seventh-day Adventist ecclesiological self-understanding, especially as it relates to the remnant idea is examined. Three different types of the remnant namely historical, faithful and eschatological can be identified. Biblical images/models used in the development of ecclesiology agree with the biblical understanding and application of the remnant idea to God's people. The remnant idea is not limited in its application to organizational entities. Seventh-day Adventists should adopt an open, inclusive and universal view of the remnant concept. / Theology / Philosophy, Practical & Systematic Theology / Th. M. (Systematic Theology)

Adventists hold various views with regard to their understanding of themselves as a church. They view themselves as the last remnant church of God today. They also believe that they are a part of the general Christendom. Adventists acknowledge the presence of sincere Christians in other churches. In this study, the background to twentieth century Christian ecclesiological self-understanding is examined. The origins and development of the Seventh-day Adventist ecclesiological self-understanding, especially as it relates to the remnant idea is examined. Three different types of the remnant namely historical, faithful and eschatological can be identified. Biblical images/models used in the development of ecclesiology agree with the biblical understanding and application of the remnant idea to God's people. The remnant idea is not limited in its application to organizational entities. Seventh-day Adventists should adopt an open, inclusive and universal view of the remnant concept. / Theology / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / Th. M. (Systematic Theology)