John F. Kennedy, the Construction of Peace, and the Pitfalls of Androgynous Rhetoric

Abstract

This essay examines paradoxical tensions in “The Strategy of Peace,” John F. Kennedy's (JFK) 1963 commencement address at American University. Building on recent explorations of gendered stylistics, the analysis initially shows how JFK's speech portrayed a number of characteristics typical of a feminine style. It then demonstrates that the address simultaneously featured characteristics typical of a masculine style. The subsequent androgynous style, the essay concludes, limited the potential success of what was likely JFK's most ambitious attempt at constructing détente with the Soviets in the course of the Cold War.

Keywords:

• Androgynous Style
• Cold War
• Feminine Style
• John F. Kennedy
• Masculine Style
• Peace Rhetoric
• War Rhetoric

Thanks to Charles J. G. Griffin, Janette Kenner Muir, Trevor Parry-Giles, Anita Taylor, and the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions.

Notes

The full text of “The Strategy of Peace” (directly transcribed from an original audio recording) is available in Kennedy (1963). I cite quotations from the speech in the main text by referring the reader to the appropriate paragraph numbers on this Web page.

Kennedy also released a campaign booklet in 1960 that was entitled The Strategy of Peace, although it had no obvious connection to the later speech (see Goldzwig & Dionisopoulos, 1995).

Kennedy's speech was one of the few of the era that was not jammed by Soviet censors when broadcast on Voice of America into the Soviet empire. In another unusual move, Soviet newspapers published the speech verbatim (O'Donnell & Powers, 1970, p. 358).

Indeed, Menges (1988) mentioned four periods of Cold War détente between 1943 and 1979; he did not include the period immediately after Kennedy's 1963 speech.

I do not mean to suggest, of course, that John F. Kennedy (JFK) and his advisors consciously constructed a speech with an androgynous style in mind. The American University address, however, appears to have bypassed much of the administration's typical advising process for a major speech because JFK wanted to avoid watering down his central message with disclaimers supported by various departments. The speech, then, was perhaps a better glimpse into JFK's mindset in the summer of 1963 than many of his other speeches.

In following the tradition of research on gendered styles, I am making no assertions about a biological connection between gender and speaking style. Rather, I see the adoption of masculine or feminine styles as a result of varying levels of socialization, context, and rhetor preference.

See also S. J. Parry-Giles and Parry-Giles (1996), who found aspects of a feminine style in several campaign films presented on behalf of male political candidates.

Although it is not often well-known, the tradition of resistance to war is ancient. Aristophenes's play, Lysistrata, for example, showcases a feminine approach to attempts to halt a war.

My analysis in this section is an adaptation of an earlier description of re-humanizing rhetoric (Kimble, 2004).

The telegram specifically listed “guidelines for use in discussions with foreign officials and press reps…[that are] designed to suggest the basic motivations and expectations underlying the President's remarks” (Department of State, 1963, p. 1).

An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2005 Eastern Communication Association Conference in Pittsburgh, PA.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

James J. Kimble

James J. Kimble (PhD, University of Maryland, 2001) is an assistant professor of Communication at Seton Hall University.