Shared Land/Conflicting Identity: Trajectories of Israeli & Palestinian Symbol Use

Chapter 2: A Symbolic Template for Analyzing the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

2 zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP A Symbolic Template for Analyzing the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 11111 Sketching the evolution of Israeli and Palestinian symbol use over most of a century raises a significant problem. Many useful critical analyses focus in depth on a particular persuasive message or a specific person's use of persuasion.1 In such analytical "snapshots/' the critic has the luxury of being able to carefully describe in detail a given speech, essay, or book. Our project requires a broader approach. In order to explain the symbolic dimensions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is necessary to have a coherent perspective for breaking down that symbol use and then putting it back together in an intelligible package . Our argument is that the functions fulfilled by symbolic processes can be grouped into categories relating to rhetoric, ideology, and myth, which in turn are tied to knowledge generation, personal and societal definition, and transcendence functions.2 These categories (in combination with a detailed analysis of contextual factors) can be used to chart societal symbolic structures. Because a symbolic approach may be unfamiliar to many readers , the first step in developing it is to consider the meaning and relationship among three crucial terms: rhetoric, ideology, and myth.3 21 22 zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA Chapter Two zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO A Functionalist Interpretation of Rhetoric, Ideology, and Myth zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZ There are striking similarities in definitions of rhetoric, ideology, and myth. In each case, the most common definition associates the form with fantasy and irrationality, while others define the term in almost precisely the opposite way. The most typical treatment of rhetoric is as a form of deception. This view has a long heritage. Plato characterized rhetoric as a mere knack, like cookery, which should be shunned by all those wishing to discover the truth.4 Many philosophers have opposed rhetoric for much the same reason , viewing it, in John Locke's words, as a "powerful instrument of Error and Deceit/'5 In common usage, rhetoric maintains this negative association. While the most common view equates rhetoric with deception, there are other traditions as well. Aristotle treated rhetoric as a useful art through which people discover the "available means of persuasion" in order to make the truth persuasive.6 This view of rhetoric as a productive art shaped a tradition that dominated pedagogy from Cicero and Quintilian through the eighteenth century. A radically different perspective, originally developed by the Sophists, treats rhetoric as the central means through which humans understand the world.7 In summary, while many view rhetoric as an inherently deceptive form of communication practice, others see it at the core of the liberal arts or even as essential to knowledge generation. A similar point can be made about the various meanings of ideology. The most common interpretation equates ideology with irrationality and extremism, but a second approach treats ideology as an essential tool for explaining and improving society.8 Both the positive and the negative approaches were reflected in the first use of the term, by the Ideologues. Shortly after the French Revolution, Destutt de Tracy referred to ideology as "a general science of ideas," which could be used to "purge" language of error in order to ensure that "correct reasoning" would prevail.9 The negative interpretation of ideology as a form of false consciousness first was suggested by Napoleon, who attacked the Ideologues as "irresponsible speculators who were subverting morality and patriotism."10 The negative interpretation later was embraced by Marxists, as well as by conservatives and moderates, who view ideology as a "distorted" and "self glorifying" doctrine or "destructive falsehood."11 Analyzing the Conflict zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZY 23 zyxwvut There are, however, other approaches to defining ideology. Some continue to view ideology as a descriptive and prescriptive device for understanding and improving society. Patrick Corbett's definition of an ideology as "any intellectual structure consisting of a set of beliefs about the conduct of life and the organization of society" clearly fits this viewpoint.12 The work of Michael McGee and his students on identifying the "ideographs" that structure society and the critical approach of Philip Wander and others who use ideological analysis to critique contemporary culture also represent this perspective.13 The pattern in definitional treatment of myth is much the same. The "most common meaning of myth" in ordinary usage associates the term with falsehood, irrationality, and tyranny.14 However, a number of the most important students of mythology deny the characterization of the...