On January 16, 1950, Elizabeth Waring delivered an explosive speech to the Coming Street (black) Young Women's Christian Association in Charleston, South Carolina. The speech was the first in a rhetorical campaign launched by Mrs. Waring and her husband, federal Judge J. Waties Waring, to publicize racial oppression and segregation in the South. Because of the outraged reaction and media publicity of the Charleston YWCA speech, Mrs. Waring garnered an invitation to appear on NBC's nationally televised Meet the Press. On the show, Mrs. Waring shocked Southern whites further when she declared that people should be allowed to marry whoever they please. In other words, the taboo against interracial sex was nonsensical. In this dissertation, I examine the rhetorical campaign of the Warings from historical-critical and rhetorical perspectives. I situate their rhetoric within its historical context of the Jim Crow South as well as the rhetorical situation that gave rise to the Warings' public discourse. Rather than a specific method, I employ close reading of the text of the YWCA speech to determine the ways that Mrs. Waring spoke of race relations and social equality. Along with delving deeply into the Charleston YWCA speech, I establish continuities between it and the Warings' other speeches. In addition, I argue that the Warings defied the rhetorical situation in terms of persuasion and fitting response because their rhetoric adheres to the elements of exhortation as well as polarization, shock, prophetic, and agitator rhetoric. After closely reading the text of the speech, I turn to the response among Southern whites and media by examining newspaper articles, editorials, and letters written to the Warings. The Warings endured social ostracism, vile letters, harassing phone calls, impeachment threats, and attacks upon their home. Yet, despite their efforts and perseverance, their attempts to end school segregation are little known. The timing of the Warings' rhetorical campaign is significant in terms of the Clarendon County school segregation case that began in 1948. After landing in Judge Waring's courtroom on two separate occasions, the matter eventually became one of the cases (Briggs v. Elliott) of Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court decision that ruled school segregation was unconstitutional. The rhetorical history of Briggs, specifically its prominence and significance as part of Brown, is largely unwritten. Judge Waring presided over these cases and ordered Thurgood Marshall and NAACP attorneys to revise the suit from an equalization case to a direct attack on the constitutionality of legally-mandated segregation. Southern whites continually questioned the Warings' motives, claiming that the couple was using race relations to exact revenge on the whites who socially spurned them. However, Elizabeth and Waties' activism included public and private actions. Along with their rhetoric and Judge Waring's judicial opinions, the Warings corresponded regularly with a network of prominent civil rights advocates like Septima Clark, James Dombrowsky, Aubrey Williams, Marion Wright, Walter White, and Myles Horton. They frequently entertained blacks in their home and aided Reverend Joseph De Laine after he fled South Carolina. I argue that the Warings were involved in both covert and overt actions to achieve their goal, the end of school segregation, and their motives were genuine, not spiteful. They purposefully pursued a rhetorical course of action to influence the outcome of the Clarendon County school segregation case. Examining that campaign offers a different appreciation and understanding for how Brown came about. / A Dissertation submitted to the School of Communication in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy. / Fall Semester, 2013. / August 20, 2013. / Brown v. Board of Education, Civil Rights, Elizabeth Waring, J. Waties Waring, Rhetoric, Segregation / Includes bibliographical references. / Davis W. Houck, Professor Directing Dissertation; Kristie S. Fleckenstein, University Representative; Donna M. Nudd, Committee Member; Jennifer M. Proffitt, Committee Member.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_253505 |
| Contributors | Fenimore, Wanda Little (authoraut), Houck, Davis W. (professor directing dissertation), Fleckenstein, Kristie S. (university representative), Nudd, Donna M. (committee member), Proffitt, Jennifer M. (committee member), School of Communication (degree granting department), Florida State University (degree granting institution) |
| Publisher | Florida State University, Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Language | English, English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text, text |
| Format | 1 online resource, computer, application/pdf |
| Rights | This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). The copyright in theses and dissertations completed at Florida State University is held by the students who author them. |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds