Welcome to 2020, to volume 50 of Rhetoric Society Quarterly, and to a new set of editors and editorial board members. My thanks to Susan Jarratt and her editorial assistant, Allison Dziuba, for their gracious and efficient help in making this transition go as smoothly as it could. In her first “Editor’s Message” in 2016, Susan noted the “editorial challenge presented by [the] glorious profusion” of/in rhetoric, and laid out a compelling case for furthering that profusion, for maintaining rhetoric as an open concept but also for finding ways to build alliances, bridges, archipelagos of increasingly fine-grained scholarly islands (1). These last few years have been successful on that score. Special issues like “La Idea de la Rétorica Americana” (45.3), the “Counterpoint” feature, and regular-issue discussions of “bullshit,” for example, have considered the place of the Rhetoric Society of America. Whose Americas? Whose rhetorics? I’d like to continue facilitating these discussions, with intention and care for all that RSQ already does well: encouraging good writing by both new scholars and established ones; insisting on carefully contextualized research; and furthering the discussion of such writing’s implications for the worlds both inside and outside academia. My vision for RSQ doesn’t rely on changing that good focus. In fact, my sense of RSQ as it is brings to mind Wordsworth’s call in his famous preface to maintain a regular meter both for the pleasure of experiencing it and to better amplify the moments of “vivid sensation.” I propose this at the risk of acknowledging the pleasures of “straight” time, the regular meter like a heartbeat. But what about vivid sensation? Fast forward a couple of centuries from Wordsworth to Jose Esteban Muñoz, who in Cruising Utopia writes that moments of “collective temporal distortion” (in which we give in to the propulsion of queer potentiality) might lead us to “ecstasy” (185). What might such distortion, such ecstasy, look like at RSQ? Some ideas we’re working on:

中文翻译：

---

编者的话

欢迎来到 2020 年，阅读《修辞学会季刊》第 50 卷，以及新的编辑和编辑委员会成员。我要感谢 Susan Jarratt 和她的编辑助理 Allison Dziuba，感谢他们慷慨而有效的帮助，使这一过渡尽可能顺利。在她 2016 年的第一篇“编辑致辞”中，苏珊指出了“丰富的修辞所带来的编辑挑战”，并提出了一个令人信服的理由来促进这种丰富，保持修辞作为一个开放的概念，但也为了寻找方法来建立越来越细粒度的学术岛屿的联盟、桥梁和群岛 (1)。过去几年在这方面取得了成功。例如，“La Idea de la Rétorica Americana”（45.3）、“Counterpoint”专题以及对“废话”的定期讨论等特殊问题，已经考虑过美国修辞学会的地位。谁的美洲？谁的花言巧语？我想继续推动这些讨论，并有意并关心 RSQ 已经做得很好的所有内容：鼓励新学者和老学者写出好文章；坚持仔细的情境化研究；并进一步讨论此类写作对学术界内外的影响。我对 RSQ 的愿景不依赖于改变这种良好的关注点。事实上，我对 RSQ 的感觉让我想起了华兹华斯在他著名的序言中呼吁保持规律的仪表，既是为了体验它的乐趣，也是为了更好地放大“生动的感觉”时刻。我冒着承认“直线”时间的乐趣的风险提出这个建议，常规仪表就像心跳。但是生动的感觉呢？快进几个世纪，从华兹华斯到何塞·埃斯特班·穆尼奥斯（Jose Esteban Muñoz），他在《巡航乌托邦》中写道，“集体时间扭曲”的时刻（我们屈服于酷儿潜力的推动）可能会导致我们“狂喜”（185）。在 RSQ 中，这种扭曲、这种狂喜会是什么样子？我们正在研究的一些想法：