Pointing to the Death of Discourse?

Mindful of the famous allegory of the cave in Plato's Republic, some skeptics might say that life in the Carnival, far from being reality, is "nothing other than the shadows of artificial things." ¹⁶³ These critics might find our cursory examination of the culture of the First Amendment to be little more than artful shadow­boxing. But the line between reality and virtual reality is not for us to draw. It is enough to make two points: that the Carnival is fundamentally ambivalent about such line­drawing, and that the Carnival represents the predominant form of mass communication in our popular culture. In this sense, we, like Machiavelli, ¹⁶⁴ are concerned less with First Amendment discourse as it should be than with First Amendment discourse as it is often practiced.

Skeptics might also point to mass communication that appears not to fit the paradigm of the Carnival. They could cite examples of such discourse that seem more fact­ than image­based, more logical than associative, and more informative than entertaining. But we need not deny this possibility in order to defend a cultural approach to the First Amendment. On this score, it is enough for now to make a single but important point: The Carnival depends heavily on its economic and social contexts as much as it influences them. Although economic, social, or natural crises may well impair the Carnival's vitality, unless crisis trumps capitalism, the Carnival is likely to thrive. ¹⁶⁵

This little essay, informed by James Twitchell's Carnival Culture, represents our first take on a cultural approach to the First Amendment. Of course, the first ought not be the last. We invite others, looking at popular culture as they may, to join us in soiling the snow. Such collective efforts might lead some to ask: Does all of this point to the death of discourse? Perhaps it does. Then again, it is well to ponder the quip of the legendary rock hero Jimi Hendrix: "Once you are dead you are made for life." ¹⁶⁶