Search

Call Me by Your Name (2017) became famous for its “peach scene,” though the orchard around the Perlmans’ villa where this fruit thrives could not have grown on its own. Distinctions of class and a parasitism by the most affluent of their workers cultivate the paradise where director Luca Guadagnino sets the blossoming romance between Elio and Oliver. Apricots are a clear metaphor for desire here, yet their prolificacy is only possible through the invisibility and silent intervention of other food items, from peas to latkes to frozen chicken. Critics have pointed out the beauty of the Italian setting and its use as a temporary escape from heteronormative surveillance, as well as the way domestic workers flow in and out of scenes almost wordlessly. What these critics have missed is the connection these occurrences have in explaining how the working class have built (but do not benefit from) this heaven on Earth, where the young male lovers may permit their bodies to act without restraint. While queer and class theories inform this discussion, my primary vehicle for interpretation will be food, both for its prominent place in the movie and for the ways it parallels the class structure at the villa. I find the film quietly reflects on the levels of economic privilege and exploitation needed to experience the paradise it depicts, with the usurpation of food in many scenes helping to remind the audience of the stepping-stones Guadagnino asserts are required to access this more subversive space.

This paper unpacks how dynamic political and media systems shape the kinds of frames political actors champion, when and how they express support for frames and the implications of both for individual claimsmaking. To do so, we conduct a rigorous qualitative analysis of discourse during a two-week period in which the Florida legislature considered and passed the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act after a shooter killed 17 people in Parkland, Florida. We systematically explore how two framing dynamics – competition and amplification – shape what frames political actors champion and the relative effects of these dynamics on individual claimsmaking in 438 letters to the editor and op-eds appearing in mainstream outlets, 4,962 emails sent to Florida Governor Rick Scott, and 1,000 tweets. We find that amplification and competition shape the relative visibility of frames and the frequency with which individuals use these frames in their claimsmaking. Generally speaking, gun control and progressive groups selectively amplified frames associated with the emerging, student-led Never Again Marjory Stoneman Douglas movement and legislative frames that were consistent with their goals. This seems to have increased the visibility of these ideas in mainstream outlets and influenced claimsmaking insofar as individuals drew on amplified frames across the forums relatively frequently. This was not true of frames opposing gun control. Gun rights groups bickered with politicians and among themselves. As a result, gun rights frames were less prevalent in mainstream discourse and in individual claimsmaking.

In order to identify factors that may help explain when individual claimsmaking converges around a common set of messages on different forums across a complex media system, we examine individual discourse during the two-week period in which the "Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act" was debated, passed, and signed into law by Governor Rick Scott. Specifically, we assess the extent to which two factors identified in the literature as relevant to individual expression – elite frames and movement mobilization – seem to influence claimsmaking in three mediated forums - Twitter, Letters to the Editor and op-eds that appear in mainstream news outlets, and emails sent to Rick Scott about the legislation. We find that movement mobilization, in particular, seems to have influenced individual claimsmaking across the forums. Additionally, we find that there is more coalescence in claimsmaking around the gun control movement than the gun rights movement, and that movement coordination may help explain these differences.

The third marquess of Salisbury has received a lot of attention as a domestic politician over the last 15 years.’ Even so, continuing interpretative difficulties remain in assessing his career as conservative ideologue and leader. First, historians remain uncertain about the relationship between his early journalism and speeches, and the actions of the mature politician after 1881. Second, there is still no agreement about how far Salisbury understood the contemporary changes in British socio-political culture, and from which he and the Conservative party were to take the principal advantage. Third, there is also no consensus on whether Salisbury should be seen as a driving and creative force in Conservative politics, or whether he and his party were the lucky beneficiaries of the towering, but ultimately misguided, moral energies of W.E. Gladstone. As a result, Paul Smith, in the most recent authoritative interpretation, leaves the reader to choose between Salisbury as a cautious materialist dedicated to delaying the new democratic order, or as a risk-taking opportunist prepared to play for the highest stakes and winning, or as just a lucky political leader at the right place at a propitious moment.

Gladstone, Whiggery and the Liberal Party, 1874–1886. By T. A.Jenkins. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1988. vi, 328 pp. £32.50. The Gladstonian Turn of Mind: Essays Presented to J. B. Conacher. Edited by Bruce L. Kinzer. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 1985. xv, 294 pp. £35.00. Gladstone, Home Rule and the Ulster Question, 1882–93. By James Loughlin. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan. 1986. 369 pp. No price given. Parliamentary Politics and the Home Rule Crisis: The British House of Commons in 1886. By W. C. Lubenow. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1988. vii, 389 pp. £37.50. The Gladstone Diaries with Cabinet Minutes and Prime Ministerial Correspondence, Volume IX, January 1875-December 1880. Edited by H. C. G. Matthew. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1986. xcvii, 714 pp. £55.00. Parnell and the First Home Rule Episode, 1884–87. By Alan O'Day. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan. 1986. x, 314 pp. £25.00.