Communication Theory at the Center: Ventriloquism and the Communicative Constitution of Reality

Abstract

In this article, I first propose to reinterpret R. T. Craig's (1999) call for a dialogue between communication perspectives as a formulation of design specs to which any constitutive model of communication should respond. I then propose to answer this call by metaphorically conceiving of communication as a form of ventriloquism, which translates our capacity to make other beings say or do things while we speak, write, or, more generally, conduct ourselves. Finally, I show to what extent this ventriloqual model of communication responds to the design specs of each of the 7 traditions Craig identified (rhetoric, semiotics, phenomenology, cybernetics, sociopsychology, sociocultural theory, and the critical approach), while maintaining a certain ontological and epistemological coherence.

A Relational Approach to Materiality and Organizing: The Case of a Creative Idea

“…We would like to show that these constitutive approaches -in particular those associated with the so-called Montreal school [9,11,41,43,[45][46][47][48] -are not only compatible with this material turn, but that they allow tackling the aspectual approach to sociomateriality we just introduced in a manner that is at once practical, embodied, and dynamic. To this end, we propose to follow the aspectual view by taking as our starting point the etymology of the word "materiality" to show that mentioning the materiality of something (or someone) always amounts to showing that this thing (or person) is made, constituted, or composed of elements/properties that can be experienced as related to each other.…”

“…Having established our position, we then examine what it implies for the CCO (Communication as Constitutive of Organization) approach [7][8][9] in its various forms [10], that is, the view according to which organizations and, more generally, reality itself [11], should be considered as communicatively constituted. As we will show, the CCO approach should not only be considered compatible with this material turn, but allows tackling the questions of materiality and relationality in a manner that is at once practical, embodied, and dynamic.…”

Diversity as Polyphony: Reconceptualizing Diversity Management from a Communication-Centered Perspective

“…Cooren has added the notion of 'ventriloquism' to the CCO debate (Cooren and Sandler, 2014;Cooren, 2010Cooren, , 2012, i.e., the idea that all kinds of persons, but also non-human entities or 'figures' (Cooren and Sandler, 2014), such as the concept of diversity management, can gain agency in their own right in organizational settings. This idea goes beyond our current approach as well as those of our precursors (e.g., Pless, 1998Pless, , 1999.…”

“…This 'constitutive' notion of communication (Cooren, 2012;Craig, 1999) is grounded in 'speech act theory' (Austin, 1962;Searle, 1969), which argues that utterances tend to be 'performative' in character; in other words, utterances do not only represent, but actively contribute to the creation of social reality. In stark contrast to viewing communication as a 'conduit', a metaphor that implies a simple and friction-free transfer of information or ready-made meanings between senders and receivers (Axley, 1984), CCO scholars depict communication as an inherently complex, dynamic, and precarious accomplishment (e.g., Cooren et al, 2011).…”

“…Within the CCO perspective, our argumentation primarily follows the work of the 'Montreal School' (e.g., Bencherki and Cooren, 2011;Cooren, 2004Cooren, , 2012Taylor and Cooren, 1997). This is because this line of CCO thinking tends to contrasts most strongly with the transmission view of communication (Axley, 1984) and is thus particularly helpful for our inquiry.…”