Swan songs: The form and function of interregnum rhetoric of modern presidencies

The interregnum period between the federal election in the United States and inauguration of a new President is an extraordinarily critical juncture---what ritual scholars call a potent "liminal space." While this important period has attracted some attention by historians, political scientists, and other scholars, none has systematically addressed the role played by the incumbent President, and no comprehensive study heretofore existed of the rhetorical processes operating during this period. Incumbents employ rhetorical strategies providing closure and offering up ritual "surrender" of office; these are critical to ensure continuity after the performative "battle" ritual that is the federal election cycle.; This analysis studied interregnum rhetoric of the eight modern Presidents (Truman through Clinton) contained in the Public Papers of the Presidents . First, the rhetorical data set was identified consisting of the President's public messages from acknowledgement of the election outcome and continuing through Inauguration. Second, historical contexts framed the unique features of the rhetorical situation at the time of each transition. Finally, the data was analyzed in three phases. Descriptive analysis through close readings sorted the material chronologically and thematically into broad, open-ended categories. Then, guided by theoretical assumptions regarding the transition as a ritual process, emerging patterns were identified to determine how recurrent rhetorical forms accomplished ritual functions. Finally, the overarching patterns of these rhetorical schemas were integrated into current scholarship on social ritual processes.; This study revealed that modern Presidents enacted their transitions out of office across three dimensions: the Personal, the Partisan, and the Constitutional. The most effective transitions integrated these dimensions into transition performances that were more transcendent than they were administrative. The study also illuminated the evolving dialectical engagement of the Executive branch with the Judicial and the Legislative branches. Modern Presidents were surprisingly consistent in their efforts to maintain, if not expand, the parameters of Executive power. This notion of "common ground" was more fully developed in considering modern Presidents' increasing propensity to be very active in the area of foreign policy during the transition period.