Double vision, double analysis: the role of interpretation, negotiation and compromise in the state–private network
Through a focus on the interaction between individuals and groups within the state-private network, it is possible to take advantage of the empirical research on the network, and concepts developed by Gramsci, whilst also moving away from reliance on the dialectic and the control/autonomy debate. Furthermore, by making the bloc formation and negotiation the nexus of the analysis, concepts such as autonomy and control can be freed from their fixed position to be reinvestigated. An examination of the methodology employed in the state-private network to develop a politicalcultural message can demonstrate that there is a more complex distribution of power within the network than is represented by a dialectical approach. For example, within a cultural initiative there is an evolution in content and emphasis rather than a directed, preordained vision that runs from inception to completion of the initiative. This evolution is pertinent when responsibility for production is divided between groups, and each group seeks to achieve its own goal through the initiative. As a result, rather than committing to a congruous ideology and purpose, the group prioritises an individual goal, thus preventing the formation of a united bloc. In these scenarios the vision for the initiative does not pass from the instigating group to the target audience unaltered by the interaction with groups that aid the dissemination of the message. Each group analyses the vision that it receives and, based on that analysis and with reference to the promotion of its individual group goal, passes on an interpretation of that vision. As a result there is a ‘double transmission’ of the vision, from one group to another prior to the transmission from the final producer to the target audience.