Yesterday the U of I Board of Trustees approved our department's name change. After many years trapped in layers of bureaucracy, our proposal to drop the "speech" from Speech Communication made it through and now we will be called the Department of Communication. The change will not only put us in the company of the majority of doctoral programs in the field, but it also reflects broader changes in the discipline as a whole. We are about much more than speech, so it makes sense that our name reflects that.
But names are fleeting things. According to our departmental history, this will be the eleventh name for our department. They are, in order, beginning in 1886: Department of Rhetoric and Oratory; Course in Rhetoric and Oratory (1890); Department of Oral Rhetoric (1893); Department of Rhetoric and Oratory (again, 1898); Department of Public Speaking (1903); Division of Public Speaking, Department of English (1906); Department of Speech (1947); Department of Speech and Theatre (1960); Department of Speech (again, 1967); Department of Speech Communication (1973). Those familiar with the field might be able to discern specific moments in disciplinary history reflected in these names. It strikes me as I list these that this would make a great comprehensive exam question for graduate students: Trace the key historical shifts in the discipline of communication by tracking the name changes of the department.
Although one might assume that a rhetorician would bemoan the loss of the moniker "speech," I have always been a bit more ecumenical. I began at the University of St. Thomas as a freshman major in Communication, Telecommunication, and Theater and graduated as a major in Communication. I began a master's degree in Speech Communication at the University of Maine and graduated with a master's degree in Communication and Journalism. And I got a Ph.D. in Communication Studies at Northwestern's School of Speech, which is now a School of Communication.
So let's just say I'm not too attached.
One of the reasons why the field moved away from the name "speech" (not to mention "oratory" or "rhetoric") is that it needed to recognize and account for the rise of mass communication, which includes most recently the profound shift to digital media. I think it's marvelously ironic that one of the most recent effects of that shift has been a rise in attention to...speech. As the Huffington Post, Oratorical Animal, and politico.com have noticed, oratory is having something of a renaissance thanks to sites like YouTube. Even though, as the cable pundits repeated over and over again last week, mouths agape, Obama's speech on race was thirty-seven minutes long, more than three million people watched the whole thing on YouTube. All of it. You Tube is the new fireside chat.
So thumbs up for speech. Or communication. Or whatever. It's all good.