The meaning of political symbols : the case of obscenity

The approach to this problem is two-fold. First, a theoretical understanding of symbol is developed in terms of symbolic interaction and of Edward Sapir's distinction between referential and condensational symbols. Specifically, such concepts as "significant symbols," "problematicism," "negotiated meaning," and "lines of action" are employed. It is proposed that the popular distinction between "symbolic" and "non-symbolic" corresponds, respectively, with "condensational symbol" and "referential symbol." Based on this, the theoretical distinction between referential and condensational symbols is tested by means of a Q-study, focusing on the obscenity issue. The main hypothesis tested is that obscenity, as a moral issue, will be treated primarily in condensational symbolic terms.

The results of the Q-study indicate that people define the obscenity issue primarily in condensational symbolic terms regardless of whether or not the subject was opposed to obscenity. It was further found that the use of condensational symbols occurred among non-elites and elites, a finding that is significant to the study of political elites.

The conclusions drawn from the research were as follows. First, obscenity is a public policy issue that will be dealt with in condensational terms by elites and non-elites. This conclusion is not in harmony with much of the literature on the nature of elites. Second, based on the notion of symbolic interaction, symbols are understood to be grounded in a pluralism of group definitions of reality and this provides an ontological basis for political pluralism. Third, it is concluded that moral political issues draw heavily on the affective dimension of personality which is why the condensational symbolic mode is so prominent in treating obscenity, for the condensational mode is characterized, in part, by affective expressiveness. It is also because moral issues engage the affective dimension of personality that questions of identity arise and thus make moral public policy issues so intractable at times. Finally, it is concluded that referential and condensational symbols are of equal ontological status and that both must be viewed as equally "real" if one is to deal realistically with American politics.