# Tasks ## Week 1-4 (end: Fri 8 May) - [x] Exploratory reading - [x] Re-draft the dissertation argument and structure - [x] Re-draft the project plan ## Week 5-6 (end: Fri 5 Jun) - [x] Draft chapter 1 - [x] Draft introduction Thesis: contemporary green rhetoric is a failure because it mis-diagnoses the root causes of the problems, fails to identify credible routes to credible solutions, and fails to identify an appropriate audience. 1. Contemporary green rhetoric (R) is a failure 2. R mis-diagnoses the problem 3. R fails to identify credible routes to credible solutions 4. R fails to identify an audience that can be persuaded to make a difference 5. The material results of R have been dismal ## Week 7-8 (end: Fri 19 Jun) - [x] Draft chapter 2 Thesis: anti-apocalyptic criticism of R mis-diagnoses the problem. 6. The effect on R's audience now is a spiralling cycle of despair 7. This has led some critics to blame apocalypticism for the failure of R 8. This is a traditional criticism of apocalypticism 'from above' 9. Apocalypse 'from below' has often worked very differently 10. This difference is due to the different interests of the readers -- a difference which does not apply in the case of green crises 11. In fact, apocalypse can meet the critic's concerns in principle 12. (In order to do so in practice, those with power need to attack the structures which drive the downward spiral) ## Week 9-10 (end: Fri 3 Jul) - [x] Draft chapter 3 - [x] Draft conclusion Thesis: green rhetors need to use apocalyptic rhetoric in order to motivate their PMC audiences to a martyrdom ethic. 13. John's rhetoric exhorts his audience to a martyrdom ethic 14. R needs to exhort their audiences to a martyrdom ethic 15. Socialist rhetoric in the past has used apocalypticism for this very purpose 16. Once rhetors addressing the PMC have fixed all the other problems with R, they'll need this apocalyptic hope, too ## Week 11 (end: Fri 23 Jul) - [ ] Start re-drafting ## Week 12 (end: Fri 30 Jul) - [ ] Final re-draft