composing a civic arena: publics, projects, and social settings

ELSEVIER Poetics 27 (2000) 163-194

POETICS

www.elsevier.nl/locate/poetic

Composing a civic arena: Publics, projects, and social settings

Ann Mische a, Philippa Pattison b,*

Department of Sociology, Rutgers University, 54 Joyce Kilmer Avenue, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA b Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne,

Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze the sociocultural mechanisms by which diverse and contending actors construct a 'civic ' arena in a fractured, contentious, and multi-sectoral political field. We do this through a case study of the convergence of the 1992 Brazilian impeachment movement, which led to the impeachment on corruption charges of President Fernando Col- lor de Melo. First, we propose a conceptual reformulation of the notion of a 'civic arena', based upon the proposition that relationships within political fields are structured by discursive as well as organizational ties, as these are activated over time within particular social settings. Second, we introduce a formal methodology for analyzing the sociocultural structuring of this arena, building upon the algebraic technique of 'Galois ' or 'concept' lattices. We apply the simpler form of lattice analysis - bipartite lattices - to analyze the duality of relations among organizations and their projects. We then incorporate temporality into the analysis by using a new extension of lattice analysis - tripartite lattices - to show the three-way interpenetration among organizations, projects, and events. We argue that this analysis reveals three distinct stages involved in civic coalition formation, as organizations move from sectoral segmentation to cross-sectoral intermingling and finally, civic convergence. These stages, in turn, involve two interrelated sociocultural mechanisms, which we describe as the interanimation and suppression of projects at public events. © 2000 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

The authors are grateful for the thoughtful feedback presented at various stages of this project by Peter Bearman, Matt Bothner, Ron Breiger, Hannah Brueckner, Aaron Cicourel, Carlos Costa-Ribeiro, Mustafa Emirbayer, John Evans, David Gibson, John Krinsky, John Levi Martin, John Mohr, Garry Robins, Charles Tilly, Harrison White, and the participants in the Workshops on Contentious Politics and on Culture, Networks, and Social Dynamics at the Lazarsfeld Center for the Social Sciences at Columbia University. * E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

0304-422X/00/$ - see front matter © 2000 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 3 0 4 - 4 2 2 X ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 2 4 - 8

164 A. Mische, P. Pattison / Poetics 27 (2000) 163-194

1. Introduction

Broad-based political coalitions are complex, fractious, and fragile constructions. Relations in a political arena involve cross-cutting and often contending organizational sectors, which must overcome their routine political segmentation in order to forge joint actions. These may include not only non-state actors - including social movements, religious groups, community or professional associations, NGOs, research institutes, and universities - but also those actors that shade over into state and market, such as political parties, labor unions, and business associations. These organizational sectors are in tum associated with distinguishable (although often overlapping) sets of political projects, culturally structured by particular classifica- tory codes and narratives of social intervention. As actors slide in and out of alliances and disputes, they activate different dimensions of these projects according to the contingencies of local settings and events.

Given the heterogeneous, fluid, and contentious character of civic relations, the formation of consensus within a cross-sectoral coalition is a difficult and tenuous task. We contend that the process of coalition building cannot be explained simply as a result of cost-benefit calculation on the part of participating organizations, nor does it result from an idealized deliberation in pursuit of the common good. Rather, it involves a complex, path dependent process of negotiation within the public arena, the outcome of which cannot be predicted in any straightforward way from the starting positions of the participating actors. Because of this, it is not enough simply to map the interests and projects at play within a given political field; instead, we must investigate the sociocultural mechanisms by which diverse actors are able to overcome their political differences and construct a provisional common purpose in fractured, contentious multi-sectoral political field.

The problems involved in cross-sectoral coalition building can be seen in the convergence of the 1992 Brazilian impeachment movement. In September 1992, Brazil became the first country in the world to remove a president through impeachment proceedings, ousting its first democratically elected president in 30 years, Femando Collor de Melo, for his involvement in a multi-million dollar patronage ring. The Brazilian Congress voted to impeach President Collor following several months of a broad-based civic mobilization organized around the banner of 'ethics in politics'. This movement coalesced after an unexpected explosion of youth demonstrations in early August, which set off a dramatic flurry of rallies around the country. However, the movement also built upon months of prior articulation among diverse political actors, ranging from radical student activists, labor unions, and the partisan opposition to more mainstream religious, professional, and business groups.

Despite the sweeping nature of the social consensus that eventually formed regarding Collor's impeachment, the process of coalition building was by no means straightforward or unilinear. In the early stages, opposition to Collor tended to be articulated in sectorally segmented organizational settings - i.e., those dominated by one particular sector, such as events organized by the student or labor movements, or by groups of liberal professionals. As the movement progressed, however, organizations from different sectors began coming together in increasingly more broad-based

A. Mische, P. Pattison / Poetics 27 (2000) 163-194 165

public settings, in which diverse and often contending organizations had to establish some sort of common ground. In the final stages of the movement, even Brazil 's most conservative elites were jumping on the bandwagon, as right wing politicians, the mainstream media, and big business groups abandoned the sinking government.

Underlying this process of civic convergence, we find a more general analytical problem: as sectorally differentiated actors move from more segmented to less segmented social settings, what happens to the discourse of political intervention? For example, we would expect that in more segmented contexts, opposition to Collor would be articulated in relationship to the more particularistic projects of the organizations - e.g., to the anti-imperialist and anti-neoliberal projects of the radical student or labor groups, or to the more institutionalist concerns of the liberal professionals. But as the range of groups included in the anti-Collor movement expanded, what would happen? Would a discursive free-for-all result, in which all of the various actors could voice their contending claims and positions? Would the movement get reduced to a single-issue that everyone could agree on? Would there be a power struggle among actors as to the discursive terms of the movement? Or would there be some other means of negotiating what could and couldn't be expressed in an ostensibly 'civic' setting?

In this paper, we introduce a conceptual framework and a set of methodological tools that help to give us analytical leverage on these questions. First, we propose a conceptual reformulation of the notion of a 'civic arena', based upon the proposition that relationships within political fields are structured by discursive as well as organizational ties, as these are activated over time within particular social settings. Sec- ond, we introduce a formal methodology for analyzing the sociocultural structuring of this arena, building upon the algebraic technique of 'Galois' or 'concept ' lattices (Freeman and White, 1993; Duquenne, 1987, 1991; Wille, 1996a). Such lattices provide detailed representations of what Breiger (1974) has called the 'duality' of the affiliation relationship: e.g., how individuals are linked by the groups they belong to, and how groups are linked by the members they have in common. Lattices do this by showing the intersections and inclusions among dual subsets of any two mutually associated sets of elements (e.g., persons and groups, actors and events, objects and attributes, discourses and practices, to list some recent applications).

We apply the simpler form of lattice analysis - b i p a r t i t e l a t t i c e s - to examine the duality of relations among organizations and their projects. We then incorporate temporality into the analysis by using a new extension of lattice analysis - t r i p a r t i t e la t -

t i c e s - to show the three-way interpenetration among organizations, projects, and events. This allows us to explore the complex sociocultural composition of civic arenas, as well as how this composition changes over time. We argue that this analysis reveals three distinct stages involved in civic coalition formation, as organizations move from sectoral segmentation to cross-sectoral intermingling and finally, civic convergence. These stages, in turn, involve two interrelated sociocultural mecha-

In addition to applications within network analysis and categorical data analysis, lattices have recently been extended in interesting ways to cultural and historical analysis; see Mohr and Duquenne (1997); Schweizer (1993, 1996); Mische (1998).


nisms, which we describe as the interanimation and suppress ion of projects at public events. Finally, we discuss some of the broader theoretical implications of this case study for understanding the dynamics of political communication and coordination in complex public settings.

2. Alternative theories of coalition building and consensus formation

The Brazilian impeachment movement provides a very rich and interesting case with which to study the processes by which heterogeneous actors negotiate a sense of common purpose and direction in a fluid and contentious political arena. Two alternative clusters of theories have attempted to address these sorts of problems. The first can be found in the literature on civil society and the public sphere (Habermas, 1989; Cohen and Arato, 1992; Mansbridge, 1983). In this view, social consensus is formulated through a process of public deliberation, in which interested actors attempt to arrive at a working consensus regarding the nature of the 'public good' and the steps necessary to attain it. This perspective has been partially challenged by those who point to power differentials in the ability to communicate in such publics, given dis- parities in gender, class, race, ethmcity, cultural background, or network position (e.g., Fraser, 1992; Gilroy, 1993; Honig, 1992; Ryan, 1990, 1992; Emirbayer and Sheller, 1999). However, the core ideal of these theories is still one of normatively driven communicative action in pursuit of a jointly formulated common purpose.

In apparent opposition to this set of theories is the literature on coalition-formation coming from analysts of social movements and political process (Staggenborg, 1986; Tarrow, 1994; Rochon and Meyer, 1997). Here the focus is not upon norma- tive communication, but rather upon the actors' rational calculations of the costs and benefits of alliance-building in response to emergent tactical advantages. For example, Staggenborg (1986) has suggested that coalitions form in situations of increased environmental opportunities or threats, in which organizations are motivated to overcome ideological differences and competition over resources. In settings in which the political opportunity structure provides new openings or else urgent dangers, organizations build alliances by focusing on single-issue, 'least common denominator' strategies of institutional intervention (see Hathaway and Meyer, 1997; Kleid- man and Rochon, 1997).

Despite the dramatically opposed character of these two sets of theories, they have a number of weaknesses in common. Both are based on overly static and cohe- sive conceptions of norms and/or interests, and how these compose action. They tend to see norms or interests as fixed and transparent, pre-given to a particular episode of interaction. They also tend to identify norms or interests in overly straightforward and singular ways with particular actors, thereby losing a sense of the multiplicity of projects any given actor is involved in, and how the salience of those projects shifts over time. Because of these weaknesses, both sets of theories are inattentive to how the sociocultural grounding of collective action changes over the course of a movement, as sets of projects emerge into the spotlight and begin to unify joint action, and then fade away again into the background as a coalition breaks apart.


The problem is that processes of coalition formation in complex political arenas are not based on coherent social norms, nor on rational efficiency. Rather, coalitions are composed of (1) multiplex and contentious relations among actors; (2) overlapping sectoral domains; and 3) fluid and changing sets of projects. These characteris- tics call for a reformulation of our theoretical understanding of such processes, in such a way draw on both of the above sets of theories, while avoiding the analytical problems that underlie them.

3. What is a civic arena?

We argue that successful cross-sectoral coalitions depend upon the formation of what we define below as a 'civic arena'. This conception draws upon the civil society literature by arguing that actors must forge some sort of common framework for communication and joint action, while also recognizing with the political process literature that this takes place within a contentious political arena characterized by changing structures of opportunity and constraint. There are several core concepts that are essential to the analytical framework developed here:

a. Collective projects: We define such projects as future-oriented narratives of proposed interventions by groups or collectivities. 2 Projects, we argue, do not func- tion solely in discursive space, but also help to structure concrete relationships in a changing political arena. Given greater or lesser degrees of overlap in their projects, actors construct horizontal relations across a field of interaction, as well as vertical relations forward in time. To say that one is working for the revolution, for an end to racial discrimination, or for the privatization of state-owned industries is as much a statement of position as of purpose, of one's identity within a current field as of one's vision regarding how that field should be reshaped in the future. An organization's position in this field is rarely constituted by single project; rather most are generally engaged in multiple projects simultaneously. The structure of the field is therefore determined by crosscutting sets of projects that are invoked and woven together over time amidst the ambiguities of local episodes of political interaction.

b. Social settings: We define social settings as local contexts characterized by short-term co-presences by particular sub-sets of actors and (some sub-set of ) their associated narratives and projects. Here we depart from the focus by most network analysts on specific types of ties, or relations, and instead focus upon the structure of the sociocultural conjunctures in which different sets of actors come together. In any given setting, actors might be connected by multiple sets of relations or common cul-

2 This discussion of 'projects' builds upon earlier work (Mische, 1998; Emirbayer and Mische, 1998) on how actors' projections about the future influence their actions, including their ability to coordinate those actions with others. Projects can be defined as "evolving, imaginatively constructed configurations of desired social possibility, accompanied by an implicit or explicit theorization of personal and~or collective capacity to act to achieve that possibility" (Mische, 1998). Here we are interested in collective projects as expressed in the public narratives of organizations, which help to embed those organizations in space and time (Somers, 1992).


tural forms; however only a restricted subset of their common ties and/or projects will be activated at a given time. Some sorts of settings can be characterized as sector-specific, in that they are restricted primarily to representatives of a particular sub- group or organizational domain. An example might be a political party congress, a religious assembly, or a professional conference. Other settings are more broadly cross-sectoral, in that they involve representatives from a number of different kinds of organizations.

c. Publics: We define publics as particular kinds of social settings characterized by the intermingling of sets of actors (and their projects) that are usually segmented from one another. Examples of such publics in a social movement context include coalition-building activities that contribute to the convergence of a broad- based civic alliance, in which customary forms of organizational and/or sectoral segmentation break down. Such settings are often characterized by a high degree of interpretive ambiguity, despite attempts to contain such ambiguity through the ritualized 'common ground' of publics (ceremonies, vigils, assemblies, rallies; see Mische and White, 1998; Alexander, 1988). While some particularistic ties and projects may be suspended in public settings, others may have new opportunities to intermingle, creating the potential for the formation of new kinds of cultural and organizational relationships. This in turn may create opportunities for a variation on what Padgett and Ansell (1993) have called 'robust action', i.e., multiply tar- geted (and elusively defined) activity on the part of strategically embedded actors. 3 Such actors may be able to make use of the multivocality of their positions in order to forge alliances and coordinate action, despite wide differences in projects and positions.

Building upon these concepts, we can define a 'civic arena' as a cluster of 'public' settings in which sectorally diversified actors provisionally suppress their particularistic projects in order to formulate and pursue an emerging common purpose. Such arenas are characterized by sectoral desegmentation as well as a fair degree of discursive ambiguity, in which actors with diverse projects and positions attempt to articulate some sort of common framework for action in response to an emergent situation, as tenuous and provisional as that may be. This conception raises a series of further questions regarding what happens when the sectoral segmentation underlying routine political relationships breaks down.

4. H o w are civic arenas formed?

We can conceive of two possible sociocultural mechanisms that might appear in settings characterized by sectoral de-segmentation. We can call the first interanimation, referring to a process by which actors interweave projects and narratives that

3 The difference in this case is that multivocality and opportunities for robust action are created by co- presences - e.g. the superimpositions of diverse sociocultural networks within a particular social setting - rather than network segmentation, as described by Padgett and Ansell (1993).


are usually expressed in segmented social settings. 4 Here projects become decoupled from the specific settings or organizational domains in which they may have origi- nated, allowing them to become intertwined with the narratives of other kinds of organizations. An example of this might be an event in which student groups are co- present along with human rights organizations, resulting in the interleaving of student narratives about university reform with other projects related to freedom of speech or treatment of political prisoners.

On the other hand, we can also hypothesize the opposite dynamic, that of suppression, in which actors refrain from expressing certain projects or narratives that they affirm in more segmented settings. 5 Here the tendency will be for actors to focus only on the area of overlap among projects, suppressing any claims or involve- ments that are not shared by the other participants in a given set of events. A good example would be a radical student organization that refrains from expressing its socialist and/or anti-imperialist projects when negotiating with professional or business groups.

While these two sociocultural mechanisms would appear to be in tension with one another, we argue that they are interrelated mechanisms in a temporally differentiated process. As we will demonstrate below, the analysis of the Brazilian impeachment movement reveals three different stages of civic coalition formation (see Fig. 1). The more or less normal state, in T1, is one of sectoral segmentation in terms of organizational co-presences (i.e., organizations tend to meet mainly with other organizations from within their own sector), even though there is still considerable overlap in projects across sectoral divisions. In T2, however, the situation changes to one in which organizations from different sectors are intermingling in public events. In this period, there is an increase in projective interanimation in that projects that were previously expressed only in segmented settings begin to be expressed together. Finally, in T3, a process of convergence occurs in which many of the projects previously expressed at public events in T2 are suppressed, as the organizations come together in a series of civic mobilizations.

This schematic overview begs the question of how we were able to locate this sort of pattern in a complex historical context such as the Brazilian impeachment movement. To do this, we employed a set of formal analytic techniques that are especially equipped for mapping complex associations among multiple sets of elements.

5. The duality of organizations and projects: 'Galois' lattices

Our first step in mapping the Brazilian political arena was to conduct a global analysis of how relations among organizations and their projects are mutually co- constituted, as abstracted from the particular local settings in which these relations are enacted or expressed. An analytical tool especially appropriate for the

4 The term 'interanimation' is borrowed from Bakhtin (1981 ), who uses it in his discussion of the inter- nally dialogic nature of discourse, by which "languages become mutually implicated in each other and mutually animate each other" (Bakhtin, 1981 : 410).


sectorial domains

sectoral segmentation

+ projective

overlap

public settings civic mobilization A

11 \ \

/ / \

, civic ",\ / convergence\\

/ / "1"

/" projective / suppression

/ /

TI T2 T3

Fig. 1. The three stages of civic coalition-formation.

\ \ \

\ \

\ \

\ \

exploratory analysis of overlapping relations is the algebraic technique of 'Galois' or 'concept' lattices. 6 Such lattices represent patterns of intersection and inclusion among dual subsets of two sets of discrete elements, i.e., persons and groups, actors and events, objects and attributes, discourse and practice. As such, they can serve as highly useful heuristic devices for locating patterns in complex data sets, such as those garnered from cultural, historical, and ethnographic analysis (Schweizer, 1996; Mohr and Duquenne, 1997; Mische, 1998).

Galois lattice analysis makes possible a simultaneous graphical representation of both the 'between set' and 'within set' relations implied by a two-mode data array. 7 In the case of the Brazilian example, this includes not only ties between organizations and their projects (as represented in an incidence matrix of organizations by projects), but also relations among different organizations (organizations by organizations) and among different sets of projects (projects by projects). Lattice analysis shows how relations among groups are constituted by patterns of overlap in their projects; and conversely, how sets of projects are connected by the subset of organizations that affirm them. Such an approach gives cultural extension to Breiger's (1974) discussion of "the duality of persons and groups"; rather than examine either organizational ties or discursive structures independently, we can see how two sets of elements are positioned by means of their relation to each other.

To conduct this analysis, we first functionally grouped the principal kinds of actors involved in the Brazilian political arena into the six sectors described in Col-

5 For interesting ethnographic accounts of how certain aspects of political discourse and identity are suppressed in different kinds of public seuings, see Eliasoph (1996) and Lichterman (1999). 6 A very clear introduction to Galois lattices can be found in Freeman and White (1993). Techniques for examining 'dual orderings' were discussed by Birkhoff (1940); for recent developments in lattice theory, see Barbut and Monjardet (1970); Wille (1982, 1996) and Duquenne (1987, 1991). See also the special 1996 issue of Social Networks, edited by Douglas White and Vincent Duquenne, as well as Breiger, this issue. 7 While there have been several attempts to depict this duality in graphical form (including 'simplicial complexes' (Doreian, 1980; Freeman, 1980)and 'hypergraphs' (Seidman, 1981)), most of these have resorted to the use of two sets of images - e.g., one showing relationships between actors, the other between events.


umn 1 o f Table 1: youth organizations, political parties, ' c iv ic ' organizations (professional, religious, labor, NGO), business associations, media, and state actors. 8 These constitute the range o f organizations that were present at one or more o f the series o f events directly related to the pro- impeachment movement . From this list o f organizations, we constructed a condensed list o f the array o f projects (Column 2 of Table 1) expressed in the self-definitional statements of each group. These projects were gleaned f rom a collection of over 300 documents - e.g., public relations mate- rials, pamphlets, formal resolutions - that were produced by the organizations f rom 1990-1993. These are really only slogan-like caricatures o f the actual projective narratives, not expressing their temporal extension or relational complexi ty (for a richer discussion, see Mische, 1996); however they do help us to get an overall sense of the mapping of the field.

From this list, we constructed a two-mode binary matrix, recording associations between 22 organizations and 29 projects (entering a 1 into the matrix whenever a particular project appeared in the self-definitional statements o f an organization). The resulting matrix is depicted in Table 2. Project number 30, impeaching President Collor, was left out o f this initial analysis, since this was a emergent project that was relevant only to 1992, and therefore did not figure in the longer-term self-identifica- tions of the organizations. We then subjected this matrix to lattice analysis, including a lattice approximation procedure based on a two-mode Boolean clustering technique known as 'hierarchical class analysis ' , or H1CLAS. Lattice approximation is necessary because lattices o f this size quickly get out o f control in terms of size and interpretability; the approximation allows us to reduce complexity, while maintaining the major organizing patterns in the social structure being studied. 9

The basic lattice procedure applies two algebraic operations - intersection and inclusion - to a two-mode incidence matrix. First, all possible intersections between the rows of a two-mode matrix are calculated (generating all possible intersecting subsets of organizational projects in an OxP matrix). The complete set (the vector

8 The eight youth organizations were those with whom the first author was conducting longer term ethnographic research between 1994 and 1996. 9 The lattice approximation procedure does mean that there is some error in the final representation, i.e., a few organizations appear clustered together with unassociated projects (and vice versa). However, the approximation does give a remarkably good picture of the overall structure of cleavages and overlap in the Brazilian political field. The lattice was constructed in two stages. First, the complement of the 22x29 matrix was subjected to approximation through HICLAS (hierarchical class analysis), which uses an algorithm based upon Boolean matrix decomposition to determine clusters simultaneously on the two sets of elements in a rectangular affiliation matrix. HICLAS is an iterative procedure that produces different 'ranks' of solutions at increasing levels of complexity. Each solution is composed of two matrices depicting the inclusion of a row or column element in the set of (overlapping) bundles produced at each rank. The original matrix is the Boolean product of the two (row and column) matrices produced at each rank. When applied to the complement of the original matrix (i.e., a matrix in which zeros and ones are reversed), HICLAS allows us to derive a reduced matrix, the complement of which is an approximation of the original matrix, which can then be subjected to lattice analysis to produce a partial ordering of bounded size (see Van Mechelen, n.d.; Zaretskii, 1963). For this analysis, we selected the rank 5 approximation, with a goodness of fit measure of 0.829. This approximate matrix was then run through the LATTICE program designed by the second author.


Table 1 The Brazilian political arena (1992)

Organizations Projects

Youth organizations a. National Student Union (UNE) b. Law Students association (CAXI) c. Catholic Youth Pastoral (PJMP) d. Union of Socialist Youth (UJS) e. Agronomy Students group (FEAB) f. Black Students group (CONUN) g. Junior Enterprises (FEJESP) h. Business/NGOs (AIESEC)

Political parties i. Communist Party (PCdB) j. Workers' Party (PT) k. Social-democratic Party (PSDB) 1. Right-wing Party (PDS)

Civic organizations m. Bar Association (OAB) n. Bishops' Conference (CNBB) o. Research NGO (IBASE) p. Unified Labor Central (CUT)

Business associations q. Federation of Industry (FIESP) r. 'Modem' Business Association

(PNBE)

Mainstream media s. Mediate magnate (GLOBO) t. Liberal press (VEJA)

State actors u. State Government of S~o Paulo

(GESP) v. Military Police (PM)

1. Reforming university system (unirejO 2. Improving professional training (proftr) 3. Democratizing student movement (dem-sm) 4. Recruiting new participants (recruit) 5. Controlling student organizations (cont-sm) 6. Detonating revolutionary activity (rev) 7. Constructing socialist society (soc) 8. Empowering community organization (comm) 9. Defeating neo-liberal project (neolib)

10. Increasing social/anti-poverty programs (pov) 11. Protecting human rights (humrt) 12. Defending workers' rights (workrt) 13. Ending social discrimination (discrim) 14. Winning local/national elections (elect) 15. Strengthening democratic institutions (deminst) 16. Expanding civic participation (civpart) 17. Reconstituting civic organizations (civorg) 18. Stabilizing economy (econstab) 19. Deregulating economy (dereg) 20. Privatizing state industries (priv) 21. Expanding public ratings (ratings) 22. Consolidating institutional power (instpow) 23. Maintaining public order (pubord) 24. Fighting public corruption (corrup) 25. Defending national sovereignty (natsov) 26. Protecting the environment (ecol) 27. Conducting land reform (land) 28. Developing science and technology (scitech) 29. Improving education (educ) 30. Impeaching President Colior (imp)

containing all l 's) is then added to complete the array of subsets, which are then arranged in what is known as a partial ordering, showing which subsets are included in larger subsets, and where particular groupings come together. This dual ordering of sets of organizations and projects constitutes the lattice, which can be graphically depicted in a line diagram in which nodes representing subsets are linked to nodes representing the larger subsets in which they are included.

6. Mapping the Brazilian political arena

Fig. 2 presents a 20-node lattice diagram based upon the organization by project matrix (22x29). This lattice describes the global structure of overlapping relations

A. Mische, P. Pattison / Poetics 27 (2000) 163-194

Table 2 Organizations by Projects matrix

173

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 UNE 1 1 1 2 CAXI 1 1 1 3 PJ 0 0 1 4 UJS 1 1 0 5 FEAB 1 1 1 6 CONUN 1 1 1 7 FEJESP 1 1 1 8 AIESEC 1 1 0 9 PCDB 1 1 0

10 PT 1 1 1 11 PSDB 1 1 1 12 PDS 0 0 0 13 OAB 0 1 0 14 CNBB 0 0 0 15 IBASE 0 0 0 16 CUT 0 0 0 17 PNBE 0 0 0 18 FIESP 0 0 0 19 GLOBO 0 0 0 20 VEJA 0 0 0 21 GESP 0 0 0 22 PM 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 I 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

among organizations and their projects; as of yet, there is no temporality in the analysis, only an abstract mapping of discursively ordered relations in the multi- organizational field. The lattice diagram can be read in two directions, beginning at the top or the bottom. Organizations are represented by capital letters, while projects are represented by small letters. Each node represents a dual subset, that is, a subset of organizations, and a subset of projects that those organizations have in common. A given node contains all of the organizations at or above it (i.e., all of the organizations in those nodes linked by lines as one moves up the lattice), as well as all of the projects at or below it. The node at the top represents the set of all projects, while the node at the bottom is the set of all organizations. Organizations near the top of the lattice tend to have a greater number of associated projects, while projects near the bottom are affirmed by a larger number of organizations. ~°

From this lattice, we can make a series of substantive observations about the sociocultural structuring of the Brazilian political arena. Reading from the top down, we can tell which subsets of projects are associated with particular clusters of orga-

~0 Keep in mind that this diagram does not represent what is commonly known as a 'network', since the lines do not represent ties, but rather orderings among nodes, which represent dual subsets of both actors and organizations.

174 A. M i s c h e , P. Pa t t i son / Poe t i c s 2 7 (2000) 1 6 3 - 1 9 4

set of all projects

LAB(

(soc,

(corn( land,

rank 5 approximation g.o.f.: .829

~uem,nsq - . . " se t o f all organizations

Fig. 2. Bipartite lattice (organizations by projects - 22x29).

nizations. For example, by following the lines down from the organizational cluster containing the student groups and the moderate parties, in the center of the lattice, we can find the range of projects that these groups are co-associated with. These include not only projects specific to the student sector - such as (in the middle-left of the lattice) university reform, democratizing the student movement, control of student organizations, and (reading further down the lattice) professional training - but also several broader clusters of projects, which they share with other groups. Among these is a very broad-based cluster of democratic procedural projects and moderate reforms (on the lower-left side of the lattice) - including civic participation, civic organizations, corruption, poverty, education, human rights, discrimination, and ecology - as well as a cluster of deeper social reforms (moving up the left-hand side), such as community organization, workers' rights, land reform, and opposition to neoliberalism. These student groups and moderate parties also share with many other groups a commitment to democratic institutions (at the base of the lattice), as well as a concern with economic stability and science and technology (lower right).

On the other hand, the lattice also shows us which projects are NOT affirmed by each cluster of organizations. For example the student groups and moderate parties do not share many of the projects held by the business, media, and right wing actors


on the upper r ight-hand side o f the lattice, including those o f deregulating state industries, privatizing the economy, and maintaining public order. They also do not affirm the projects o f winning elections or gaining institutional (i.e. state) power, in the center-right of the lattice, or the construction of socialism and defense of national sovereignty, on the top right, which are held by the labor central and left parties.ll

Reading in the other direction, f rom the bot tom up, we can see which subset o f organizations are associated with each cluster of projects. For example, we see that socialism and national sovereignty, near the top-left o f the lattice, are shared by the labor central and the left parties, but not by any of the other organizations. Likewise, winning elections and institutional power, on the center-right of the lattice, are associated with both right and left wing political parties, which are otherwise fairly differentiated in the projects they affirm. Note that the project at the very base of the lattice, defending democratic institutions, is defended by A L L of the organizations in the lattice (including, in this period o f Brazilian history, the military police). The lattice also shows patterns o f inclusion within the sets o f organizations and projects; for example, we see that projects o f the bar association are completely included in the projects o f both the student groups/moderate parties, and the moderate business groups/liberal press.

In terms o f the global structuring o f the Brazilian political arena, we can note the fol lowing important configurations. The lattice reveals three major groups o f organizations. On the left hand side, we see the major opposition groups, including the labor and student movements and the partisan opposition. On the right hand side are the business groups, the media actors, and the right wing partisan and state actors; note that both business and media groups are divided into more conservative and more progressive wings. In the center, we see a cluster o f more moderate non-state actors, including church groups, NGOs, and professional associations.

The lattice also allows us to make important distinctions between clusters o f projects. The left side o f the lattice contains clusters o f projects related to social and democrat ic reforms, while the right side contains projects related primarily to state and economic power. We see a movement up the left-hand side o f the lattice f rom broad, procedural projects and moderate social reforms, up through deeper social

H This is one instance in which there is a slight distortion due to the approximation procedure: many of the more radical student organizations did in fact include the defense of national sovereignty in their programs; it was certainly an important project of the National Student Union (UNE), a key player in the impeachment movement. However, by and large the student organizations tended to adopt a more moderate stance closer to the profile of the moderate parties (as well as the church groups and NGOs), which tended to critique neo-liberalism but fall short of the more anti-imperialist rhetoric of national sovereignty. Because of this general profile similarity, the student groups are clustered together with the moderate parties, despite the fact that many of their leaders belonged to left parties and adhered to their more radical projects. This led to some interesting discursive maneuvers on the part of student leaders as they attempted to appeal to a wider audience, such as the statement by Lindberg Farias, president of the National Student Union and militant of the Communist Party, that while he 'personally' defended socialism, "as president of UNE, I represent the interests of Brazilian students, and I have broader positions. UNE does not defend socialism, nor the armed revolution. I am a socialist by conviction, but at the congress of UNE, I was against the inclusion of the socialist banner in the program" (Folha de Sdo Paulo 8/31/92).


reforms and more radical systemic critique (e.g., socialism, national sovereignty). On the right-hand side, the projects move from broader-based projects of economic stabilization and modernization, up through more conservative projects related to neo-liberal reforms and state control.

The bipartite lattice analysis presented here gives us a very detailed picture of relationships among dual subsets of organizations and projects, thereby providing a representation of relations among organizations as well as among their narratives of political intervention. This analysis indicates the major cleavages in the Brazilian political arena, as well as the areas of significant overlap. It thereby provides a start toward understanding the areas of intersection in which these very diverse and contending actors might begin to formulate a provisional consensus regarding joint pur- poses in a 'civic' arena. For example, we might expect that a consensus might be built around the broad based project clusters near the bottom of the lattice, including moderate democratic and social reforms, democratic institutions, and economic stabilization. But how exactly would this happen, and in what specific combinations? By what mechanisms would some projects become salient, while other projects recede along the way?

7. Multiple interpenetrations: Tripartite lattices

The limitation of the bipartite analysis described above is that it presents only an abstract, detemporalized overview of the relations among organizations and their projects. It does not yet show us how these elements come together in shifting combinations across a sequence of events. To incorporate both temporality and local settings into the analysis, we develop a variation on Galois lattice analysis that allows us to move beyond simple duality to show the interpenetration among a plurality of sociocultural forms. This analysis allows us to see how the structure of relations between organizations and projects changes in relation to the co-presences of both of these at specific events.

The initial point of departure for the formalization proposed here is Fararo and Doreian's (1984) article on tripartite structural analysis. In this article, the authors propose an extension of the bipartite graphs and matrix equations developed by Wil- son (1982) and Breiger (1974), which is the basis for the Galois lattice analysis presented above. The duality relationship depicted by the lattices can be seen as the most basic representation of the interpenetration between two distinct sets of analytic elements (e.g., organizations, projects), as determined by each set's association with the other. The contribution of the Fararo and Doreian article is to show how such bipartite graphs and matrix equations can be extended to the tripartite case (in their examples, persons, groups, and organizations; or persons, cultural systems, and social systems).

We take their analysis a step further by proposing tripartite lattices (theoretically generalizable to the k-partite level), which are discussed more technically in the methodological appendix. Such lattices allow us to show the intersections and inclusions among three or more sets of interpenetrating social forms (e.g., actors, groups,


discourses, events). Together, the collection of such elements forms an interlocking system of multiple sets of entities, mutually co-constituted. Each node on a lattice can be seen as describing a par t icu lar relat ional conjuncture, ordered in relationship to all other possible intersections among the three (or more) sets of elements. Each conjuncture can in turn be understood as a potential local setting, located amidst a global patterning of such settings.

Most importantly for our analysis, the incorporation of events allows us to examine how particular subsets of projects are activated or deactivated within particular social settings, given the subset of organizations that are co-present in those settings. In this way, we move beyond an abstract mapping of a discursive field, toward an analysis of the fluid and changing composition of local arenas of interaction. This allows us to compare intra-sectoral settings - those dominated by organizations belonging to a given sector - to those that are more heterogeneous in composition, thus enabling us to locate the appearance of 'publics', characterized by the cross-sectoral intermingling described earlier. Finally, we can track the process by which a 'civic arena' is constructed over time, as diverse projects enter the discursive fray and are suppressed or withdrawn over the course of the movement. In this way, k- partite lattices serve as highly useful exploratory tools for describing and comparing the complex sociocultural compositions of political settings, as well as the changes in such settings over time.

Tripartite lattices show the interpenetration among three two-mode matrices: in our case, organizations by projects (OP), organizations by events (OE), and projects by events (PE). The arrays of organizations, projects, and events are stacked as both row and column elements, as depicted in Table 3. This constitutes a symmetrical matrix, with the three lower left blocks composed of transposes (reversals) of three upper right blocks. Note that there are no within-set relationships directly represented (hence the zeros on the diagonal). What the matrix shows us are the associations of each kind of element with each of the other two kinds of elements. A simple example of such a matrix is provided in Table 4.

Table 3 Matrix structure of a tripartite graph

O P E

O 0 ROF Ro E

P Rr, o 0 RpE

E REO REp 0

This tripartite matrix representation can then be subjected to the same sort of Galois lattice analysis as in the bipartite case. The lattice generated by the simple example in Table 4 is shown in Fig. 3. Tripartite lattices have certain distinctive features. Most notably, the lattice is self-dual, meaning that an exact mirror image of the top-down orderings appears in the bottom-up orderings. The diagram represents


Table 4 Sample matrix of a tripartite graph

O1 0 0 0 2 0 0

P1 1 0 P2 1 1 P3 0 1

E1 E2

t , / ~ n3

1 1 0 0 1 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 1 0 0 1 1

1 0 0 1

1 0 1 1 0 1

(all column elements)

P2

E2 / E1 / / ~ ~ O1 ~ 02

P1

(02)

(pl) ~ )

(el) / (e2)

ALL ROW ELEMENTS

Fig. 3. Sample tripartite lattice (organizations, projects, and events).

each element in a given set - in this case, organizations (O), projects (P), and events (E) - with a dual pair of nodes, one corresponding to the row label for the element in the original matrix, and one for the column label. For example, the first organization in set O is represented by two nodes, labeled O1 (row label) and ol (column label); these correspond to the row and column elements in the Table 4 matrix. If

A. Mische, P. Panison / Poetics 27 (2000) 163-194 179

you read down from O1, you can see the projects and the events associated with it; in this case, we see that this particular organization O1 is associated with projects p l and p2, and attends event e l . Likewise, we can see all the projects and organizations associated with each event, and the events and organizations associated with each project. We can also see the within-set orderings; for example, we can see that the organizations and events of both projects P1 and P3 are a subset of those of P2. Unlike the bipartite lattices, you only need to read the lattice from one direction - e.g., from the top down - to see all of the possible combinations of elements.

Because of the additional degree of complexity added by the tripartite lattices, they quickly become extremely large and unwieldy when dealing with any sort of real life data. To maintain their interpretability, we also propose a new Boolean method for symmetric lattice approximation especially adapted to k-partite lattices (see appendix). Like the bipartite approximations, this procedure first forms clusters of associated elements in order to generate a lattice of restricted size. This method gives us a graded set of representations of the interpenetration among sets, which maintains the symmetrical, self-dual qualities of the original k-partite lattice. For low rank approximations, only the major relational features of the interpenetration will be represented; as the rank of approximation increases, the level of representational detail reaches its maximum.

8. Comparing settings: Organizations, projects, and events

If we return now to the Brazilian case, the tripartite lattice representations provide us with the means to describe and compare the sociocultural composition of local political settings, as well as how the global structuring of such settings changed over the course of the impeachment mobilization. To conduct this analysis, we add an additional set of elements to the two sets analyzed earlier, in order to examine the 3- way interpenetration among organizations, projects, and events.

This second phase of the analysis incorporates a set of 27 events that were specifically relevant to the construction of a civic coalition against the Collor government, spanning the ten month period from November 1991 through the impeachment vote in September 1992. These were drawn from organizational documents, newspaper reports, and interviews with participants. The names, dates, and locations of these events are recorded in Table 5. These sources were then searched for evidence of the presence at these events of the 22 organizations listed in Table 1. They also were searched to find which of the 30 projects were formally represented at each event, through some sort of publicly recognized expression (e.g., appearance in a public document, manifesto, or speech presented either jointly by co-participants or by a formal representative of one or more participating organization). Note that the presence of an organization at an event does NOT necessarily mean that all of its projects were publicly represented or expressed at that event.

To provide a sense of how the sociocultural contexts of the impeachment movement changed over time, we subdivided the 27 events in this lattice into three time


Table 5 List of pre-impeachment events

# Abbreviation Name Place Type Date

1 MOB Movement Option for Brazil S~o Paulo Ceremony 1 l/nov/91 2 CONEB Council of Base Orgs./UNE S~o Paulo Council 4-8/dec/91 3 MIMS Less Salary and More Taxes Sao Paulo Ceremony 9/dec/91 4 FCJa Fora Collor Now Sao Paulo Rally 12/dec/91 5 VCR Vigil Against Recession S~o Paulo Vigil 12/dec/91 6 DNL National Day of Struggle/CUT National/SP Rallies 13/mar/92 7 ABR Day of Protest/Fora Collor Nati0nal/SP Rally 8/4/92 8 DT International Workers' Day National/SP Rallies 1/may/92 9 CONUNE 42st Congress of UNE Niteroi/Rio Congress 28-31/may/92 10 ECO Echo of the Oppressed Rio March 10/jun/92 11 VEP Vigil for Ethics in Politics Brasflia Vigil 23/jun/92 12 JUL Rallies against Collor National/SP Rallies 3-10/jul/92 13 SUPL Campaign raily/Suplicy-PT S~o Paulo Rally 5/jul/92 14 SBPC Annual conference-SBPC S~o Paulo Conference 12-17/jul/92 15 MEP Launching/Mov.Ethics in Pol. S~o Paulo Ceremony 13/jul/92 16 VPT Vigil for Land Sao Paulo Vigil 24/jul/92 17 AUG Rallies for Ethics in Politics National/SP Rallies jul-aug/92 18 ESTUD Students' Day March Sao Paulo March/rally 1 l/aug/92 19 RIO Fora Collor March Rio March/rally 14/aug/92 20 LUTO Battle of the Colors National/SP Protests 16/aug/92 21 IMP Impeachment rally Sao Paulo March/rally 25/aug/92 22 MET Metalworkers' march San Paulo March/rally 26/aug/92 23 CONG Congressional demonstrations Brasflia Rallies aug-sept/92 24 SET Impeachment demonstrations National/SP Rallies aug-sept/92 25 COR Rally Against Corruption S~o Paulo Rally 11/sept/92 26 UNIT Unified Act for Impeachment S~o Paulo Rally 18/sept/92 27 VOTE Impeachment vote National//SP Rallies 29/sept/92

periods, which are summarized in the timeline in Fig. 4. The periodization of these three stages is based upon major turning points in the development of the movement. The first period, which we call the ARTICULATION period, runs from November 1991 through May 1992. It begins with a surge of forums in late 1991 - some within sectors, some cross-sectoral - to discuss a growing sense of dissatisfaction with the Collor government. The second period, which we call the DENUNCIATION phase,

1" 2,3,4,5 6 7 9 10 11 12,14, 16 18,20,21,23,2S, 27 13, 15, 17 19 22 24, 26

• Ib Nov 91 D Jan 92 F M A M J J A S

L II II I I I E

ARTICULATION DENUNCIATION MOBILIZATION

* numbered events refer to the list in Table 5

Fig. 4. Impeachment timeline.


begins on June 1 with the installation of a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry to investigate accusations of corruption in the Collor government. The third phase, MOBILIZATION, ~2 begins on August 11 with the first major student rally that touched off the subsequent huge protest demonstrations across the country.~3

For each of the three time periods, we constructed a tripartite matrix of the form described in the previous section. Each matrix included 22 organizations, 30 projects (now including impeachment) and the events in that period (9, 8, 10, respectively). Each matrix was then subjected to the symmetric Boolean approximation procedure (see Appendix A), followed by lattice analysis. From this analysis we constructed the three tripartite lattices shown in Fig. 5. In this diagram we have included only the top-down clusters of organizations, events, and projects associated with the row elements of the original tripartite matrix. Reading down from each cluster, one would be able to find the corresponding column elements (i.e., bottom-up clusters) of each of the other two sets of elements (not pictured in this diagram).

Before going into a detailed examination of each lattice, it is helpful to gain a gestalt view of the changes in global structure across all three periods. Note that in TI , the clusters of elements are arranged in orderly stacks, in which subsets of elements are nested into larger sets, indicating the more or less normal discursive ordering of a sectorally segmented field. However, in T2, these orderly stacks are shaken up; there is much more cross-hatching, signaling a process of realignment among elements. Finally, in T3, there is a marked simplification in relation to each of the prior periods, indicating that subsets of elements that were previously differentiated have now converged. This would seem to point toward a more general historical pattern: before the discourse of coalition building simplifies into a common framework for action, it must f irst become more complex, as participating actors jockey over the discursive terms of the movement.

9. Civic and sectoral events

Rather than try to explain all of the associations that appear in the three lattices, we will focus the remaining analysis on changes in the clusters of elements across each lattice, as these are generated by the lattice approximation procedure. We will focus in particular on the changing composition of clusters of events, in order to see

~2 Although all three time periods were characterized by some degree of articulation, denunciation, and mobilization, I use these three names to signal the 'mode' of interaction that predominated in each period. ~3 According to official police estimates, the first major impeachment demonstration on August 1 l, 1992 (Brazil's historic 'Students' Day') mobilized 10,000 people in S~.o Paulo, mostly high school and university students. This was followed by a wave of demonstrations in various Brazilian cities, including rallies of 20,000 to 40,000 in Rio de Janeiro, Brasilia, Salvador, and other major centers. These led to series of major rallies in late August and September in S,~o Paulo, Rio, and other cities that mobilized 200,000-500,000 people, culminating in a national 'civic paralization' on the day of the impeachment vote in Congress, which was broadcast live on huge screens in public squares across the country.

TI: ARTICULATION o p

O P

E


34 nodes rank 7 approx. g.o.f ,851

T2: DENUNCIATION

O,P

P

P

P

34 nodes rank 7 approx. g.o.f..874

T3: MOBILIZATION O P

O

o i

O,P

Fig. 5. Tripartite lattices (projects, organizations, events)

26 nodes rank 6 approx. g.o,f..873


what the lattice tells us about which sectors were represented and what projects were expressed at different clusters of events during the three time periods.

In Table 6, we have a list of all of the event clusters generated for each of the three time periods. Recall that each cluster is a joint result of associations with each of the other two types of elements; hence the event clusters are a result of common- ality in both organizations present and projects expressed. What is not visible here are the orderings represented by the lattices. However, we have classified these event clusters according to the information gleaned from the lattices regarding the types of organizations (i.e. student, labor, professional, etc.) represented at each cluster of events.

Table 6 Event clusters from tripartite lattices (determined by common projects and organizations)

CIVIC/CROSS-SECTORAL SECTORAL General Specialized

T1 1. Mov. Option for Brazil 2. Anti-Tax Forum 3. Vigil Against Recession (labor, business, NGO) (professional ,religious, labor, business, partisan, 4. student)

T2

T3

1. Vigil Ethics in Politics Mov.Ethics in Politics July Rallies Early August Rallies (professional,religious, labor, business, NGO, partisan, student)

1. Students' Day March Rio March Impeachment Rally September Rallies Unified Rally Rally for the Vote (professional, religious labor, business, NGO, partisan, student)

2. Congress Lobby (same)

2. Science Conf. (professional, NGO, labor, business, partisan, student)

3. Ecology March (student, labor, partisan, NGO)

4. Land Vigil (labor, religious, partisan, NGO)

Student Congress (student) Workers' Day (labor)

Student Council Student Rally (student, partisan) National Day of Protest Anti-Collor Rally (labor) Campaign Rally (partisan)

3. Anti-Corruption Rally (labor, business)*

4. Metalworkers' March (labor)*

* small sectoral events focusing solely on the Collor denunciations


There are two main categories of events in this table: (1) CIVIC - by which we mean cross-sectoral events in pursuit of a common purpose; and (2) SECTORAL, meaning events attended predominantly by groups all belonging to a common sector. We have further divided the CIVIC events into two sub-categories:

General: Events focusing on broad procedural issues related to the general state of the polity, including democratic institutions, ethics, corruption, economic stability, etc, Special ized: Events with cross-sectoral participation, but focused on a specific substantive project area, such as taxes, science, ecology, or land.

The major pattern that appears in this table is the movement on the right-left diagonal: a movement from primarily sectoral event clusters in T1, to specialized as well as general civic events in T2, to primarily general civic events in T3. In T1, most of the opposition to the Collor regime was being articulated in the student and labor movements, including the annual Student Council (in December) and National Con- gress (in June) of the National Student Union, as well as several labor protests between December and May. In late 1991, however, there were also a few early civic forums that expressed mounting discontent with the Collor government, including the Movement Option for Brazil (a 'think group' spearheaded by professional, business, and labor groups) and the Vigil Against Recession (organized by labor, business, and, partisan, and religious groups, with some broader participation as well).

In T2, as the denunciations against CoUor's patronage ring hit the press, the situation changed. Not only was there an increase in general civic events - the Move- ment Option for Brazil transformed itself into the Movement for Ethics in Politics, staging several vigils and rallies - but also several previously scheduled, specialized civic events were turned into forums for denunciation of corruption in the Collor government. These included Brazil's annual Science Conference, which is tradition- ally a cross-sectoral forum that unites all of the major actors on Brazil's political scene, as well as an ecological rally at the 1992 United Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and a Vigil for Land Reform in S~o Paulo.

In T3, almost all of the events were general civic mobilizations calling for Col- lot's impeachment, starting with the pivotal Students' Day march on August 11, which was followed by a string of rallies around the country. Note the convergence: six general civic events are clustered together, signaling that the same organizations and projects were present at all of these events. The only exceptions were two smaller events organized by rival labor groups, but even these were primarily focused on the impeachment movement, rather than on intra-sectoral affairs.

10. Projects expressed or suppressed at civic events

Given the organizational composition of the event clusters as presented above, the next task is to locate the subsets of projects that were being expressed or suppressed

A. Mische, P. Pattison / Poetics 27 (2000) 163-194

Table 7 Project clusters from tripartite lattices (determined by common events and organizations)

185

EXPRESSED AT CIVIC EVENTS

Most unifying cluster Additional clusters

SUPRESSED AT CIVIC EVENTS

T1

T2 1

T3

1. deminst, civpart, 2. humrt, econstab, educ civorg, corrup, pov

deminst, civpart, 2. uniref, proftr civorg, corrup, pov, 3. neolib, natsov econstab, scitech 4. humrt, discrim, ecol, educ

5. recruit 6. comm, workrt, land

deminst, civpart, 2. neolib civorg, corrup, pov, 3. scitech, educ, econstab, imp 4. uniref, proftr

5. natsov

3. comm, workrt, neolib, natsov, land

4. recruit, scitech 5. uniref, proftr, dem-sm 6. discrim 7. ecol 8. cont-sm 9. rev, soc, imp 10. elect, instpow 11. dereg, priv, ratings, pubord

7. dem-sm, cont-sm, elect, imp 8. soc 9. rev, instpow, priv, dereg,

ratings, pubord

6. humrt 7. dem-sm, recurit, comm,

workrt, ecol, discrim, land 8. cont-sm 9. dereg, priv, instpow,

pubord 10. rev, soc, elect, ratings

at these c ivic events. In Table 7, we have the comple te set o f project clusters generated by the lat t ice p rocedure in each o f the three t ime periods. Since the organiza- t ions only s l ight ly shift their project a l legiances over this t ime per iod - changing only in re la t ion to their success ive adopt ion of ant i -corrupt ion and impeachmen t projects - mos t o f the re-c lus ter ing effect is coming from the presence o f organiza t ions and projects at changing events.

W e have c lass i f ied these pro jec t clusters into two ca tegor ies : those expressed at civic events - inc luding both genera l and spec ia l ized civic events, as ca tegor ized p rev ious ly in Table 6 - and those suppressed at civic events (there is no informat ion here on which events these suppressed projects were in fact expressed at). By suppressed, we mean projects that d id not appear in the off ic ial d iscourse of the orga- nizers or par t ic ipants in the civic events, even though at least some of the participants did affirm some of those projects in their broader political profile. 14 W e have

~4 This analysis does not give us information on the dynamics by which these projects were suppressed at the civic events. We can imagine three different scenarios, all of which may have been operative to one degree or another. The first would be an intentional, tactical decision on the part of a given organi-


also subdivided the projects expressed at civic events into two categories: the most unifying project cluster at those events - i.e., the cluster of projects to which the greatest number of organizations adhered, which appears nearest the bottom of the lattice - as well as the other projects that were also expressed at civic events.

The major pattern here is the process of expansion and then contraction of project clusters expressed at civic events. Note: (1) how few projects are expressed at civic events in T1, limited to democratic procedural projects and moderate social reforms; (2) how the clusters of projects expressed dramatically expands in T2, to include deeper social reforms and systemic critique; and (3) how those project clusters con- tract again in T3, although there are still more projects expressed than at T1.

In T l , only two clusters of projects were expressed at the few cross-sectoral events during that period. These included procedural projects related to democratic institutions, civic participation and organization, ending corruption, and economic stability, as well as some moderate social reforms, such as poverty, human rights, and education. Note that in T1 the project of IMPEACHMENT (imp) was not only absent from civic events, but was also clustered together with revolution and socialism. This indicates that impeachment was only being defended at that time by the more radical student and labor groups, at events limited to those sectors.

In T2, many of the deeper social reforms - community organization, workers ' rights, land reform - as well as mild systemic critique, such as opposition to neo-liberalism and defense of national sovereignty - - intermingled with the critiques of the Collor regime at the cross-sectoral events. The most unifying cluster also expanded, to include economic stability and science and technology as well as the other procedural democratic projects. However, IMPEACHMENT was still excluded from the civic events, signaling that many of the actors at those events were not yet convinced at this point that Collor should be impeached. Instead, it appears grouped along with projects specific the student movement. At this point, however, the student movement was beginning to suppress its socialist discourse, adopting a more 'c ivic ' tone - which you see here signaled by the fact that socialism is its own, marginalized cluster.

In T3, many projects that were allowed into civic events in T2 were now excluded, including most of the deeper social reforms, as well as human rights, which had been expressed at civic events in T1. Anti-neoliberalism and national sovereignty still managed to wrestle their way in, due to the insistence of the student and

zation to refrain from expressing a given project within a particular setting, in the interest of fostering alliance-building with otherwise contentious partners (for example, the backstage decision of the left parties and labor unions to play down the socialist discourse). A second would involve an overt power struggle among coalition-members as to what could or couldn't be expressed in the formal joint statement of a vigil or rally, for example, in which some members make discursive claims and then lose out in a openly contested battle (this was certainly evident in accounts of events in the second stage, as the Movement for Ethics put out its first self-defining statements). The third possibility is a more Goffman- ian effect, a semi-conscious result of interaction, in which the situation itself defines what can or cannot be jointly expressed, given the presence or not of an echo, or a joint recognition, among co-participants. To compare these different internal dynamics within social settings would require a different sort of analysis from the topographical comparisons presented here.


labor groups, as did a few student projects related to science, education and university reform, which Collor was seen as attacking through his neoliberal reforms. Most importantly, however, IMPEACHMENT had joined the core civic cluster, having now been adopted by the vast majority of the actors at the anti-Collor rallies.

II. Negotiated suppression in public settings

If we return to the three-stage model described earlier (Fig. 1), what have we observed through this analysis of the shifting composition of events? We can sum- marize the main patterns analyzed above in the following set of findings:

1. The impeachment mobilizations in T3 were preceded by a series of prior articula- tions in 'public' settings, in which organizations that more commonly met in segmented settings began to intermingle;

2. The set of projects expressed at civic events expanded in T2, enabling a form of interanimation among the narratives of the participating groups, and then con- tracted over the course of articulation of the impeachment movement, as the terms of projective suppression in the civic arena were negotiated;

3. The set of projects expressed at the final impeachment mobilizations in T3 was less than the union set (i.e., it was not a discursive free for all) but more than the intersection set (i.e., not all of the projects expressed in the civic mobilizations were held by all of the participating organizations). While the movement did coa- lesce around a core cluster linking impeachment to procedural democratic projects and economic stability, other projects were still hovering around the edges; therefore it did NOT constitute a 'least common denominator' coalition, and certainly not a single-issue mobilization.

This analysis also suggests that there is a path dependency to the process of coalition building: we could not have deduced the outcome from the alignment of forces at the beginning of the movement. In T1, neither the elites nor the liberal opposition were yet in favor of the impeachment, which was being articulated by those with the least power, in terms of the Brazilian political scene (student and labor groups). Meeting in these more segmented settings, such groups did not have the contact with other kinds of organizations that would require them to restrain their particularistic projects and link their opposition to Collor to projects that would be amenable to more mainstream groups. And even those opposition groups who were involved in the early cross-sectoral civic forums did not feel that they had sufficient grounds or support to mount a frontal attack on the Collor government.

In T2, the denunciations against President Collor and the installation of the Parlia- mentary Commission of Inquiry brought about both a new set of political opportunities and a new configuration of the civic arena. The public intermingling in T2 following the corruption denunciations was important, in that it allowed the participating organizations (1) to articulate the denunciations against Collor by linking their particularistic projects to the unifying procedural cluster related to ethics and citizenship;


(2) to arrive at a c o m m o n understanding regarding what needed to be suppressed in order to achieve a tolerable level o f agreement among the range o f groups present at the time regarding what could and could not be said at the joint rallies.

By T3, the discursive terms of the movemen t had been set. When the more conservative elite groups entered the scene - motivated, to some degree by the massive turnouts at the rallies - those powerful actors had little effect on the terms of the movement . 15 In fact, when the leader of one o f the conservative labor unions attempted to force the coalit ion to link the condemnat ion o f Col lor ' s corruption to a continuation o f Col lor ' s neoliberal reforms, he not only was forced to split off f rom the coalit ion - holding his own rally together with the big business groups - but also was booed by the c rowd during the unified rally with a legendary 3-minute hiss.

We might call this a case o f 'negot iated suppression ' : something is happening over the course of group interaction in T2 that results in the suppression of some subset of projects in T3. How this negotiation happens, we do not know from this analysis, since all we see is the changing topography resulting f rom a reconfigura- tion o f sociocultural alignments. But the implication of this analysis is that without this intermediate stage, the Brazilian impeachment would not have happened. While this counter-factual claim cannot be verified by this single case study, it does raise an interesting hypothesis for comparat ive research. If this pattern holds, we would expect to see other cases o f successful cross-sectoral coalitions mediated by an inter- vening stage o f organizational intermingling and projective interanimation, in which organizations wrestle over which of their particularistic projects can enter into play in the formation of a civic arena, and which need to be suppressed in order to construct a tenuous working consensus,

The broader theoretical implication here is that coalitions are not formed simply because organizations share c o m m o n interests and/or values. In other words, they are not based simply upon a tactically defined least c o m m o n denominator, nor are they the result o f rational deliberation in pursuit o f an idealized 'public good ' . Rather, coalitions form through a negotiated combination of discursive positioning with civic restraint, as mediated by organizational co-presences in public settings. While this process allows the participating organizations to work together to achieve a short-term objective, there may in fact be considerable ambiguity regarding the

15 This is not to say that the late-joining elite actors did not have a determining role in the ultimate success of the impeachment movement; there is a fair amount of agreement among Brazilian analysts that the Brazilian elite had decided to abandon Collor, given his somewhat maverick, personalistic style and his perceived untrustworthiness in regards to the more established interests of the country's patrimonial- ist elite. However this ultimate abandonment was slow in coming and was by no means guaranteed up to the September 29 impeachment vote, in which movement leaders were still anxiously counting votes and vigorously lobbying congressional representatives (the final vote was transmitted live on national television, often screened in front of huge crowds gathered in public squares, adding to the public pres- sure on the delegates). Our point here is that when these powerful conservatives actors came on board in a final bandwagon effect, they could not demand any reformulation of the discursive focus of the movement, which would have been the case in a straightforward log-rolling scenario of coalition-building. The core projects of the impeachment coalition had already been worked out in the previous time period in the public interactions among radical and mainstream opposition groups.


meanings and implications of the common project(s) on which the participating organizations have based their collaboration. This analysis also indicates that we would expect such coalitions to be fragile and short-lived, as was indeed the case in the Brazilian episode; despite its rather spectacular success, the Movement for Ethics in Politics disintegrated shortly after President Collor's impeachment.

12. Conclusion

We believe that this analysis has implications beyond merely exposing the complexity of the Brazilian case, but can also shed important new light on processes of political communication and coordination in complex public arenas. The configurational analysis developed here has enabled us to examine the sociocultural mechanisms operating within the concrete social contexts in which such interaction takes place. This approach thus lays the basis for a more dynamic and multi-dimensional understanding of political culture as the interpenetration of organizational and discursive relations, which are both sustained and transformed by cultural processes of communication and debate.

We have also sought to demonstrate the usefulness of applications of mathematical modeling techniques to the analysis of richly layered historical, cultural, and ethnographic data. The bipartite and tripartite lattices presented here are flexible heuristic tools for mapping complex associations among multiple sets of elements. They can therefore be applied to many different kinds of research, as aids to organizing and exploring detailed empirical material. This approach can in turn allow us to move beyond merely descriptive analysis, in order to develop more sophisticated causal explanations based on complex configurations and the dynamic mechanisms that underlie them.

Finally, we believe that the framework developed here is part of a broader theoretical challenge, as social research moves beyond static and unidimensional accounts of social life, toward approaches that incorporate temporality, culture, and agency into historical explanation. In this context, we hope to break new ground in exploring the sociocultural dynamics of social settings, as an emerging frontier in both network and cultural analysis.

Appendix A: Notes on approximations for tripartite lattices

Tripartite graphs

Let O, P and E denote the sets of organizations, projects and events, respectively. We denote the number of entities in the set X by nx (where X can stand for O, P or E). We assume that the interdependence between any pair of these sets is represented by a binary matrix whose rows and columns are indexed by the two sets. In particular, we let Rxv denote the nx ( nv matrix in which Rxv(ij) = 1 if the ith element of X is linked to the jth element of Y, and Rxv(id') = 0, otherwise. We note that the matrix specifying the relationship between sets X and Y is the transpose of that representing the relationship between Y and X: that is, Rxv = Rvx'. In the case we consider here, Rxx = 0, for each X.


As Fararo and Doreian (1984) observed, we can regard the entire set of between-set relations as a k-partite graph structure. In the case of the sets O, P and E, k is equal to 3 and the tripartite graph is defined on the node set S = O u P u E of size n = no + np + n E. The (symmetric) n x n incidence matrix R for the tripartite graph has the form shown in Table 3. In this tripartite graph, each organization is linked to the projects which it claims and the events at which it is formally represented; each project is linked to the organizations who articulate it and the events at which it is publicly proclaimed; and each event is linked to the organizations and projects for which it provides public representation.

The lattice o f a tripartite graph

We can define a lattice to represent the direct structure of overlap in this tripartite system. The lattice is constructed from the matrix of the tripartite graph in the same way as the lattice of a bipartite graph (e.g., Wille, 1996a; Freeman and White, 1993). 16 That is, nodes of the lattice correspond to distinct row vectors of the matrix R, to distinct intersections of the row vectors of R, or to a row vector of unit entries. The row vectors are partially ordered and form a lattice. Each row vector of the matrix R thus corresponds to some node in the lattice and row labels can be assigned to these nodes accordingly. In addition, a label for each column can be assigned to the minimal lattice node for which the corresponding row vector has a unit entry for the column. The lattice diagram with row and column labels assigned to lattice nodes is termed the line diagram of the lattice. We note that each node can be regarded as corresponding to a subset of row elements and a subset of column elements: the row subset is the set of rows with labels at or below the node; and the column subset is the set of nodes with labels at or above the node.

In the case of a tripartite graph, the lattice is self-dual and its line diagram represents each element in S with a dual pair of nodes, one corresponding to the row label for the element, and one to the column labelJ 7 The lattice of the tripartite graph represents the between-set interpenetration of organizations, projects and events, as well as the within-set relationships implied by the overlaps in these between-set connections. There is some redundancy built into the representation, in that the interpenetration between sets is portrayed in the same way both 'up ' and 'down ' the lattice: that is, organization A lies above project p and event e if and only if a lies below P and E.

Approximating the lattice o f a tripartite graph

The size of the lattice of a tripartite graph places bounds on its value as a representational device. As a result, it is useful to construct ' lower rank' approximations of its incidence matrix, prior to lattice construction. Van Mechelen (n.d.) has observed that a result of Zaret- skii (1963) establishes that if an n x m matrix can be expressed as a Boolean product of a pair of n × r and r × m matrices, then the lattice constructed from the complement of the matrix has no more than 2 r nodes. (The min imum value of r for which such an expression can be found is termed the (Schein) rank of the matrix.) He pointed out that the HICLAS algorithm

16 A lattice is a partially ordered set L in which, for any two elements x, y there exist unique elements x Ay, xVy, such that: (1) x Ay ~_x, x Ay <y; (2) x < xVy, y < xVy; (3) if x _< z and y ~z, then xVy~; and (4) if z _< x and z <y, then z< x Ay. The elements x Ay and xAy are termed the greatest lower bound, or meet, and least upper bound, or join, of x and y. 17 A lattice L is self-dual if there exists a 1-1 mapping f: L --~ L such that, for any pair of elements x, y ~ L, q)(x) < cp(y) if and only if y <_ x.


(de Boeck and Rosenberg, 1988) can therefore be used to provide lower-rank representations of the complement of an incidence matrix of interest, and so to yield a lattice of bounded size. We have adapted the approach underlying the HICLAS algorithm to obtain lower rank approximations adapted specifically to the case of k-partite graphs. These approximations express the complement of R as a Boolean product of the form QQ', where Q is an n x r binary matrix and the column dimension r of Q is the rank of the approximation. Since the matrix QQ" is necessarily symmetric, so is the approximation of R. The algorithm for constructing approximations of this form is described below.

A rank r approximation of the complement of R as a Boolean product of the form QQ" leads to an approximation of R with two important properties. First, it yields a tripartite lattice of bounded size (that is, a lattice with no more than 2 r elements). Second, the lattice has the same properties as those described above, namely, self-duality and a dual-node representation of each of the elements in the combined set S.

Algorithm to construct a symmetric rank r approximation to the complement of a symmetric binary matrix

Let T be the complement of the symmetric n x n binary matrix R, that is let Tjk = 1 - Rjk, for all j , k ~ S. If r is the required rank of the approximation, then we can characterize the goal of the algorithm as identifying an n x r matrix Q such that d = Y~jk I Tjk -- (QQ'o)j k I is as small as possible. The statistic d is a count of the number of discrepancies in the approximation, that is, the number of entries in the matrix T that are mis-fitted in the approximation. The problem of determining the matrices Q for which d is a global minimum is a difficult combi- natorial one, and here we have adopted the same heuristic approach underlying the BMDP Boolean factor analysis algorithm (Mickey et al., 1990) and de Boeck and Rosenberg's (1988) HICLAS algorithm. That is, beginning with an estimate P of Q, we have used an alter- nating approach for estimating the rows of Q by solving the Boolean regression problem

• Tl k r2k

T(k-l)k T(k+ 1 )k

e l l P21

= P(k-l)l P(k+l)l

Pnl

Pl2 "" P l r P22 " - P2r

P(k-l)2 . . . P(k-l)r e(k+l)2 "" e(k+l)r

en2 "'" P~

Okl Qk2

for row k of Q, given the (fixed) kth column of T (excluding the entry at row k) and assum- ing that all but the kth row of P is fixed. Mickey et al. 's (1990) Boolean regression algorithm is used to obtain an estimate of the kth row of Q. After each estimation step, the estimate of row k of Q is substituted for row k of the estimate P of Q; the estimation cycles through the rows until no improvement in discrepancy is obtained for an entire set of row cycles (that is, for n estimation steps). Two different starting matrices were used in all of the approximations reported here - they were the n x r matrices Pl and P2 obtained from the HICLAS approximation matrices P1PS of T.


References

Alexander, Jeffrey C., 1988. Culture and political crisis: 'Watergate' and Durkheimian Sociology. In: Jeffrey C. Alexander (ed.), Durkheimian sociology: Cultural Studies, 197-224. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press.

Bakhtin, Mikhail M., 1981. The dialogic imagination. Trans. Carl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Barbut, Marc and Bernard Monjardet, 1970. Ordre et Classification. Paris: Hachette Universit6. Beidermann, K., 1996. Triadic concept analysis through data concerning three gospels. Paper presented

at the Ordinal and Symbolic Data Analysis Conference, Darmstadt, March 19-21. Birkoff, Garret, 1940. Lattice theory. Providence, RI: American Mathematics Society. Breiger, Ronald, 1974. The duality of persons and groups. Social Forces 53, 181-190. Breiger, Ronald, this issue. A tool kit for practice theory. Poetics 27. Cohen, Jean and Andrew Arato, 1992. Civil society and political theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. De Boeck, Paul and Seymour Rosenberg, 1988. Hierarchical classes: Model and data analysis. Psy-

chometrika 53: 361-381. Doreian, Patrick, 1980. On the evolution of group and network structure. Social Networks 2: 235-252. Duquenne, Vincent, 1987. Contextual implications between attributes and some representation principles

for finte lattices. In: Bernard Ganter, Rudolph Wille and Karl Erick Wolf (eds.), Beitraege zur Begriffsanalyse, 213-239. Mannheim: Wissenschaftsverlag.

Duquenne, Vincent, 1991. On the core of finite lattices. Discrete Mathematics 88: 133-147. Eliasoph, Nina, 1996. Making a fragile public: A talk-centered study of citizenship and power. Socio-

logical Theory 14: 262-289. Emirbayer, Mustafa and Ann Mische, 1998. What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, in press. Emirbayer, Mustafa and Mimi Sheller, 1999. Publics in history. Theory and society 28: 145-197. Fararo, Thomas J. and Patrick Doreian, 1984. Tripartite structural analysis:. Generalizing the Breiger-

Wilson Formalism. Social Networks 6: 141-175. Fernandez, Roberto and Doug McAdam, 1988. Social networks and social movements: Multiorganiza-

tional fields and recruitment to freedom summer. Sociological Forum 3: 257-382. Fraser, Nancy, 1992. Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing

democracy. In: Craig Calhoun (ed.),Habermas and the Public Sphere, 109-142. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Freeman, Linton C. and Douglas R. White, 1993. Using galois lattices to represent network data. Socio- logical Methodology 23: 127-145.

Freeman, Linton C., 1980. Q-analysis and the structure of friendship networks. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 12: 367-378.

Freeman, Linton C. and Douglas R. White, 1993. Using galois lattices to represent network data. Socio- logical Methodology 23: 127-145.

Gilroy, Paul, 1993. The Black Atlantic: Modernity and double consciousness. London and New York: Verso.

Gould, Roger, 1991. Multiple networks and mobilization in the paris commune, 1871. American Socio- logical Review, 56: 716-729.

Habermas, Jurgen, The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Trans. Thomas Burger, with assistance by Frederick Lawrence. Cambridge, MA: M1T Press.

Hathaway, Will and David S. Meyer, 1997. Competition and cooperation in movement coalitions: Lob- bying for peace in the 1980s. In: Thomas R. Rochon and David S. Meyer (eds.), Coalitions and political movements: The Lessons of the nuclear freeze, 61-79. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

Honig, Bonnie, 1992. Toward and agonistic feminism: Hannah Arendt and the politics of identity. In: Judith Butler and Joan W. Scott (EDS.), Feminists theorize the political, 215-235. New York: Rout- ledge.

Kleidman, Robert and Thomas R. Rochon, 1997. Dilemmas of organizations in peace campaigns. In: Thomas R. Rochon and David S. Meyer (eds.), Coalitions and political movements: The lessons of the nuclear freeze, 47--60. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.


Leenan, Iwin, Iven Van Mechelen and Paul De Boeck, 1995. A generic disjunctive/Cconjunctive model for n-nary relations. Research Group on Quantitative Methods, Catholic University of Leuven, Report nr. 95(1).

Lehmann, F. and Wille R., 1995. A triadic approach to formal concept analysis. In: G. Ellis, R. Levin- son, W. Rich and J. G. Sowa (eds.), Conceptual structures: Applications, implementations and theory. (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 954.) Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Leifer, Eric M., 1988. Interaction preludes to role setting. American Sociological Review 53: 865-578. Lichterman, Paul, 1999. Talking identity in the public sphere: Broad visions and small spaces in sexual

identity politics. Theory and Society 28: 101-141. Luhmann, Niklas, 1995. Social systems. Trans. John Bednarz, Jr. with Dirk Baecker. Stanford, CA:

Stanford University Press. Mansbridge, Jane J., 1983. Beyond adversary democracy. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Meyer, David and Nancy Whittier, 1994. Social movement spillover. Social Problems 41: 277-298. Mickey, M.R., Mundle, P. and Engelman, L., 1990. Boolean factor analysis. In: W.J. Dixon (ed.),

BMDP statistical software manual, vol. 2, 849-860. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Mische, Ann, 1996. Projecting democracy: The construction of citizenship across youth networks in

Brazil. In: Charles Tilly (ed.), Citizenship, identity, and social history, 131-158. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press.

Mische, Ann, 1998. Projecting democracy: Contexts and dynamics of youth activism in the Brazilian impeachment movement, Doctoral dissertation, New School for Social Research.

Mische, Ann and Harrison White, 1998. Between conversation and situation: Public switching dynamics across network-domains. Social Research, 65: 695-724.

Mohr, John and Vincent Duqenne, 1997. The duality of culture and practice: Poverty relief in New York City, 1888-1917. Theory and Society. 26: 305-356.

Padgett, John F. and Christopher K. Ansell, 1993. Robust action and the rise of the medici, 1400-1434. American Journal of Sociology 98: 1259-1319.

Rochon, Thomas R. and David S. Meyer (eds), 1997. Coalitions and political movements: The lessons of the nuclear freeze, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner,

Rosenthal, Naomi, Meryl Fingrutld, Michele Ethier, Roberta Karant and David McDonald, 1985. Social movements and network analysis: A case study of nineteenth-century women's reform in New York State. American Journal of Sociology 90: 1023-1054.

Ryan, Mary P., 1990. Women in public: Between banners and ballots, 1825-1880. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Ryan, Mary P., 1992. Gender and public access: Women's politics in nineteenth-century America. In: Craig Calhoun (ed.), Habermas and the public sphere, 259-288. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Schweizer, Thomas, 1993. The dual ordering of actors and possessions. Current Anthropology 34: 469-483.

Schweizer, Thomas, 1996. Actor and event orderings across time: Lattice representation and boolean analysis of the political disputes in Chen Village, China. Social Networks 18: 247-266.

Seidman, Steven B., 198 I. Structures induced by subsets: A hypergraph approach. Mathematical Social Sciences l: 381-396.

Somers, Margaret, 1992. Narrativity, narrative identity, and social action: Rethinking english working- class formation. Social Science History 16(4) 591~530.

Staggenborg, Suzanne, 1986. Coalition work in the pro-choice movement. Social Problems 33: 374-389. Staggenborg. Suzanne, 1998. Social movement communities and cycles of protest: The emergence and

maintenance of a local women's movement. Working Papers in Social Behavior 98-02, Mc Gill Uni- versity.

Tarrow, Sydney, 1994. Power in movement: Social movements, collective action, and politics. Cam- bridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Von Mechelen, Iven, n.d. Approximate Galois lattices of formal concepts. Unpublished paper. Van Mechelen, Iven, Paul De Boeck and Seymour Rosenberg, n.d. The conjunctive model of hierarchi-

cal classes. Forthcoming in Psychometrika. White, Douglas R. and Vincent Duquenne (eds.), 1996. Social network and discrete structure analysis.

Social Networks 18 (special issue).


White, Harrison, 1992. Identity and control. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. White, Harrison, 1995. Network switchings and bayesian forks: Reconstructing the social and behavioral

sciences. Social Research 62: 1035-1063. Wille, Rudolf, 1982. Restructuring lattice theory: An approach based on hierarchies of concepts. In: I.

Rival (ed.): Ordered sets, 445-470. Dordrecht-Boston: Reidel. Wille, Rudolf, 1995. The basic theorem of triadic concept analysis. Order 12: 149-158. Wille, Rudolf, 1996a. Introduction to formal concept analysis. Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, Fach-

bereich Mathematik, Preprint-Nr. 1878. Wille, Rudolf, 1996b. Conceptual structures of multicontexts. Paper presented at the International Con-

ference on Conceptual Graphs, Sydney, September, 1996. Wilson, T.P., 1982. Relational networks: An extension of sociometric concepts. Social Networks 4:

105-116. Zaretskii, K.A., 1963. The semigroup of binary relations (in Russian). Sbornik 61 : 291-305.

Ann Misehe is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at Rutgers University. She is currently working with Harrison White, Philippa Pattison and others on an NSF funded project to develop relational method- ologies for studying the sociocultural dynamics of social settings. Part of this project involves the appli- cation of lattice analysis and random graph models to the dynamics of political mediation among Brazil- ian youth organizations. She is also at work on a book on the 'relational dynamics of political culture formation', which combines network analysis, discourse analysis, and ethnographic observation of Brazilian youth politics in the 1990s.

Philippa Pattison is a Reader in the Department of Psychology at the University of Melbourne and an Adjunct Visiting Professor in the Center for the Social Sciences at Columbia University. She has a long- standing interest in algebraic representations for relational data, particularly for social networks. The work on networks is summarized in Algebraic models for social networks, published by Cambridge Uni- versity Press in 1993. More recent interests include the development of relational representations for interdependent social forms (with Ann Mische) and a general stochastic framework for relational data (with Stanley Wasserman and Garry Robins).

composing a civic arena: publics, projects, and social settings

Documents