Metamessage
ment and debate using metaphors of confl ict,
and the notion of argument as ‘war’ is built into
the culture we inhabit.
Even where peace is being referred to, the
media are more than likely to express it in
military terms: ‘War breaks out over classroom
peace plans’. Press language is riddled with the
bombast of confl ict: things are axed, chopped,
smashed, slashed; knives are constantly out;
prime ministers stick to their guns; oppositions
are routed.
We use metaphor to define the nature of
communication as transmission or as ritual.
We talk of homo narrens (see narrative
paradigm), casting the human being as the
storytelling animal; or, with Erving Goff man, we
may use the dramaturgical model, the metaphor
of life as a stage.
In An Introductory Guide to Post-Structural-
ism and Postmodernism (Harvester Wheatsheaf,
1993), Madan Sarap states ‘that metaphors deter-
mine to a large extent what we think in any fi eld.
Metaphors are not idle fl ourishes – they shape
what we do. Th ey can help make, and defend
a world view’. As well as being ‘productive of
insights and fresh illuminations’, metaphors,
according to Sarap, ‘can encapsulate and put
forward proposals for another way of looking at
things’. Th ey can serve as agents of change as well
as weapons of reinforcement (see stereotype).
‘Th rough metaphor,’ says Sarap, ‘we can have
increased awareness of alternative possible
worlds.’ Th e so-called mixed metaphor, beloved
of politicians seeking by their rhetoric to
attract media attention, contains in a statement
two or more ineptly linked images: ‘Lame ducks
will be barking up the wrong tree if they think
government is going to bail them out every time
profits take a hammering.’ Though the meta-
phorical allusions may be all over the place, the
statement’s underlying ideology is, however,
crystal clear.
Few contemporary media phenonema have
prompted so many and such varied metaphors
as the internet. In addition to the World Wide
Web (see web: world wide web (www)), the
Net has been described as an open prairie or a
superhighway of information, an ocean to be
surfed, a mail pigeon, an uncatalogued library,
an amusement park, a maze, a bottomless pit, a
collective nervous system and a global village,
each term attempting, constructively or destruc-
tively, to get a grasp of exactly what the Internet
is, and how we perceive it.
Because of the Net’s lack of physicality, we
translate its infi nite spaces into familiar imagery,a knowledge of the facts may not be enough to
facilitate the intended interpretation, because
this may only occur if the reader shares the
social, political or cultural values of the cartoon-
ist. In short, whether we ‘get our message across’
depends partly upon the context in which it is
received; and the values, attitudes, perceptions
and knowledge of the receiver at a crucial part
of that context. See dominant, subordinate,
radical; intervening variables (ivs);
metamessage; polysemy; preferred read-
ing.
Metamessage The underlying message in a
communicative act. Th is may diff er from what
on the surface appears to be the message.
The metamessage is conveyed both verbally
and, often more crucially, non-verbally. The
metamessage carries information about the
relationships of those involved in an encounter,
and the attitudes they have towards each other
and the topic in question.
The interpretation of the metamessage is
usually influenced by the way in which the
message is communicated; non-verbal commu-
nication thus plays a vital role in the sending and
receiving of metamessages. A simple question
such as ‘May I help you?’ asked by someone in
a higher-status role, for example, can be inter-
preted as a friendly gesture or as an accusation of
incompetence depending, in part, on the tone of
voice adopted.
Metamessages can also help to frame a conver-
sation, as they help to defi ne the nature of the
encounter by, for example, defi ning the serious-
ness of the conversation and the relationships of
those taking part.
Metaphor A fi gure of speech or a visual device
that works by transporting qualities from one
plane of reality to another: ‘the camel is the ship
of the desert’; ‘life for Mary was a bed of roses’.
Without metaphor there would be no scope
for the development of either visual or verbal
language; it would remain clinical and colour-
less.
Metaphor is not merely an expressive device
but an integral part of the function of language
as a defi ner as well as a refl ector of reality. As
a rhetorical device metaphor is central to the
way in which media define reality, structure,
maintain and monitor discourse, uphold (and
sometimes challenge) hierarchies, service (and
sometimes undermine) hegemony. Metaphor
provides us with the pictures by which we envi-
sion the world: we define time by metaphor
(‘time is money’); we view the public as inhabit-
ing a ‘space’ (see agora); we defi ne public argu-