First published 1992 by Westview Press, Inc.
Published 2018 by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
Copyright 1992 Taylor & Francis
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Merelman, Richard M., 1938
Language, symbolism, and politics / Richard M. Merelman.
p. cm.
ISBN 0-8133-8581-4
1. Political psychology. 2. Symbolism in politics. 3. CommunicationPolitical aspects. 4. RhetoricPolitical aspects. I. Title.
JA74.5.M47 1992
320'.01'9dc20
92-27242
CIP
ISBN 13: 978-0-367-01095-9 (hbk)
The papers in this volume were originally presented to a Conference on Language, Symbolism, and Politics held at the University of Wisconsin, March 30-31,1990, in honor of Professor Murray Edelman. My thanks go to the Anonymous Fund of the University of Wisconsin for supporting the conference. I should also like to express my gratitude to Robert E. Lane, Michael Rogin, John Fiske, Joel Rogers, Diane Rubenstein, Ann Stoler, Timothy Cook, Lee Hansen, and David Trubek for their significant contributions at the conference.
Thanks also go to the Brittingham Fund of the University of Wisconsin for underwriting costs associated with the publication of this volume. Kristin Novotny of the University of Wisconsin labored heroically in the final editing of this collection. Kristin deserves much praise for her dedication, diligence, and discernment. Thanks also to Diane Morauske for efficient and careful preparation of the final copy and to Jennifer Knerr of Westview for her receptivity to the project. The unique combination of scholarship and personal example which is Murray Edelman's gift to his admirers motivated this volume; the volume merely returns the favor in a way which allows everyone interested in politics, language, and symbolism to partake generously.
Richard M. Merelman
Madison, Wisconsin
Richard M. Merelman
The essays in this collection analyze some of the multiple roles of symbolism and language in political life. This introduction outlines a few major themes in these essays, chiefly by linking the collection as a whole to the work of Murray Edelman, the person for whom these essays, in conference form, were prepared. First, I will set forth major themes in Edelman's work that emerge in the volume. I will then briefly describe each essay, linking it to Edelman's insights. I will conclude by suggesting some unique contributions to the analysis of political language and symbolism which this volume offers.
Edelman on Symbolism, Language, and Politics
In his seminal The Symbolic Uses of Politics (1964) Edelman argued that political cognition is not a representation of reality, but a variable and selective construction of non-referential symbols. Edelman claimed that, "For most men most of the time politics is a series of pictures in the mind, placed there by television news, newspapers, magazines and discussions" (p. 5). Moreover, because of the absence of personal contact with political events, people see politics as "... a passing parade of abstract symbols" (p. 5). The gap between experience and perception causes the relationship between political symbolism and language, on the one hand, and political events, on the other, always to be problematic.
But the absence of personal contact with political events is not the only thing that destroys the referential qualities of political language and symbols. In fact, even political actors themselves are divorced from a stable, underlying, universally comprehensible political reality. Edelman argues that political events are so complex and ambiguous that they remain opaque even to many of those intimately involved with them. Often, too, political actors lack stable values or ideologies which would afford them a clear interpretation of events. In yet other cases political actors are overly committed to particular causes or interests, so much so that they engage in selective perception. For these reasons, political actors can arrive at no spontaneous consensus about the meaning of any particular political event. Whatever consensus does emerge, therefore, is artificially created, misleading, and inaccurate.
It is evident that this approach to political meaning is at variance with most rational choice and empirical social science theories. These theories assume that revealed or stated purposes, norms, preferences, and motives in politics are stable, knowable precursors to the choices political actors make. By contrast, Edelman's perspective suggests that motives, goals, purposes, and values are an often evanescent selection from an equally plausible range of unchosen alternatives. It follows that social science should attempt to understand the processes which shape perceptions, rather than simply take perceptions as a given. Indeed, Edelman contends that social scientists who concentrate on normative or empirical analyses in their conventional forms serve to perpetuate the political status quo, rather than to reveal "reality," much less liberate people from the tyranny of the "taken for granted."
Thus, for Edelman political language and symbolism is neither detached from, nor neutral about, political events. Instead, both language and symbolism help to constitute political reality. Disputing Marxist frameworks, which artificially separate material "base" from ideological "superstructure," and early logical positivist frameworks, which dismiss political language as trivial "mindstuff," Edelman views political ideologies, language and symbolism as performatives, that is, political actions in themselves. Thus, only a social science attuned to the analysis of language and symbolism a social science informed by linguistics, semiotics, literary criticism, narrative theory, and social psychologycan begin to grasp political reality.
If, as Edelman argues, the language of politics is inherently ambiguous and misleading, then theories of politics which do not appreciate or capture this fact become one more aspect, not a "neutral description," of the political situation itself. Thus, for example, an untenable Marxist distinction between economic base and ideological superstructure reifies politics and deludes observers. Likewise, an untenable positivist distinction between facts and values lures observers into a fruitless search for an objective, timeless, universal "science of politics." Worse yet, these false distinctions deceive not only social scientists but also the general public, who read and believe these "experts."