Sunday, April 19, 2020

Symbolic Production & Mise-En-Scene in the Eighth Democratic Debate

In Mast’s The Performative Presidency we are introduced to the concept of cultural pragmatics and the idea that political campaigns are in many ways concertedly curated cultural performances (Mast 10). One of the six components Mast highlights as making up these cultural performances is symbolic production, which he describes as being, “the material environments from which actors project their meanings. The material objects that surround the actor, from the stage and setting, to props and costumes, all contribute to the meanings a performance
will project” (Mast 12).
            Using this component that Mast introduces, we can better analyze the eighth Democratic Debate of 2020, which took place in New Hampshire, to assess how the material environment that was constructed for the democratic candidates played a role in conveying both explicit and implicit meanings to the American audience. More specifically, we can look at how the material objects that surrounded the candidates played a role in how the eventual final democratic candidates (Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders) were conveyed to potential voters in the 2020 democratic primaries. Before the democratic candidates were presented to the american public and before the political barbs would be exchanged on stage the television audience was presented with the scene and stage itself. The debate was hosted by the ABC television network and was filmed in front of a live audience in a large arena in New Hampshire. The audience was dimly lit while the stage itself consisted of a massive backlight digital screen that was lit up in red, white, and blue and had patriotic american symbols like stars floating across the background to convey the importance of not only the debate that was to come, but the democratic tradition and ideals of the United States of America. Freedom of political discourse and the gravity of democratic ideals were being put on display through the pomp, circumstance, and symbolism that were embodied in this stage setup. As the debate began, each candidate was introduced and led to stand in front of a straight line of podiums where the moderators explained that candidates would be placed based on their recent national poll standings as well as the candidate’s standing in the state of New Hampshire. The leading candidates, which happened to be Joe Biden and Bernie at the time, were placed in the center of the collection of candidates and stood directly next to each other. The placement of the candidates was an explicit indication of who the American people should, and frankly already had been, listening to and projected the viability and strength of the leading candidates visually to the television audience by literally centering their visual attention. Finally, the props/costumes used in the debate were typical for American politicians. The men wore suits and ties while the women wore pants suits with blazers. If we look more closely though we can see even in these par for the course political uniforms there are differentiations that convey slight, yet significant, cultural meanings. For the men in particular you can look at the lapel pins which they attached to their suits to decipher more about each candidate. Joe Biden wore a classic American flag pin on his suit, while Bernie opted for a congressional pin he received for his political service, even Andrew Yang had his own touch as opted not to wear a tie and chose a “math” pin to attach to his suit. Each candidate's choice of “costume” in Mast’s description of symbolic production carries a different meaning. Joe Biden’s costume and pin are an implicit message that he is a patriot, Bernie the dedicated social/political servant, and Yang the political outsider whose expertise comes from the more tangible world between the lines of politics.
            Mast also introduces us to the concept of Mise-en-scene or the ‘spatial and temporal choreography’ or dramatic components to the political performance. To start, the debate is introduced with a dramatic, yet inspiring score that highlights both the political urgency that our country faces with the upcoming 2020 election, but also the inspiration that these candidates hope to provide by debating how to best proceed for a better American future. Some of ABC’s choreographed components include: introducing the candidates in order by popularity and to different levels of live audience response, subsequent interaction and handshakes between opponents placed according to rank, dramatic camera cuts that move in and out and other cuts that put debating candidates directly into visual opposition with one another for the audience. Focusing more specifically on Biden and Bernie though, the two candidates both received a significant amount of the questions that were given to the candidates and therefore received larger portions of airtime relative to their counterparts, which only helps them build a rapport with audiences and build a better sense of candidate recognition across America. Where these two candidates’ Mise-en-scene differed was in how the camera cuts were choreographed for each. More often than not, when Joe Biden was talking the camera would remain fixed on him in a single candidate camera shot unless he directly attacked or was attacked mid-speech by another opponent; however, when Bernie was talking the camera had a tendency to zoom out and encompass the entire pool of candidates in the camera shot, so that the audience could see visible signs of disagreement whether it was disgruntled facial cues from other opponents or a lone finger raised in the air to indicate to the moderators that they disagreed with Bernie. This distinction in the Mise-en-scene might have been important, as a main topic of contention in this debate and throughout the democratic primary race was: could Bernie Sanders build, or rather unite, a democratic coalition that encompassed many demographics of voters and was inclusive of them. This camera angle habit during the debate could have been a way of implicitly pointing out what some viewers and voters already believed to be true about Senator Sanders: he was divisive and had few political adversaries. Whether this opinion regarding Sander’s inability to unite a nation is true remains to be seen.
           


Citations

Mast, Jason L. 2012. The Performative Presidency Crisis and Resurrection during the Clinton
Years. Cambridge, Ma: Cambridge University Press.

No comments:

Post a Comment