Abstract
In this book, Bhatia seeks to develop a comprehensive theorisation of ‘discursive illusions’, understood as subjective conceptualisations of reality that have been naturalised into social consciousness through recurring representation to the point that they become recognised as the default framework for understanding (p. 13). Drawing on the author’s previous research on the framing of socio-political constructs such as terrorism, revolution and climate change in public discourse, the book is both a convincing attempt at developing a theoretical framework for the analysis of the discourse of illusion and an investigation of how various contextual factors constrain the creation of discursive illusions.
The book comprises six chapters. Chapter 1 defines discursive illusions, arguing that our subjective conceptualisation of reality does not in itself create illusions; only when subjective realities are taken to be objective and gain the status of facts are illusions produced. It is worth noting that by emphasising the distinction between reality and representation in examining discursive illusions, Bhatia is taking a position long valued in the field of critical discourse analysis (CDA).
Chapter 2 provides a three-pronged framework for conceptualising the discourse of illusion, elaborated through three interrelated components: historicity, linguistic and semiotic actions, and the degree of social impact. Historicity is an important feature of the discourse of illusion since all subjective conceptions of realities are products of history, the results of past knowledge and experiences. Linguistic and semiotic actions provide the necessary means for these subjective conceptions to be objectified. Finally, the language and actions of an individual or group lead to various forms of social impact, engendering categories and stereotypes. These three components constitute important analytical dimensions. The integration of historicity follows the CDA paradigm led by scholars such as Wodak and Van Dijk, who hold the view that no discourse analysis should be isolated from its historical and social contexts. The consideration of social impact renders this framework particularly attractive as it suggests a new approach to dig into sources of some social problems – such as discrimination, injustice and hegemony – from a discourse-analytic perspective.
The following three chapters implement this framework in the analysis of various instances of public discourse. Chapter 3 focuses on the rise of discursive illusions resulting from the construction of terrorism in political discourse. A combination of rhetorical processes is found at work, including the construction of good versus evil, attack versus defence, law versus lawless and alliance versus opposition, realised through the use of metaphors, topoi, framing, category-pairing and parallelism. The strength of this chapter lies in its inclusion of a wide range of data for a close and detailed analysis, with two governmental documents (the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism by the White House and the Weapons of Mass Destruction Dossier by British Intelligence) as primary data, complemented by political leaders’ speeches and press conferences.
Chapter 4 moves on to activist discourse on the Arab Spring, dealing with the role of social media. Drawing on data from traditional and new media, this chapter describes the rhetorical strategies used to conceptualise the Egyptian revolution, realised through linguistic and pragmatic tools such as unification, criminalisation, metaphors, topoi, listing, temporal references and insinuation. The illusions constituted in the activists’ discourse serve the purposes of depicting the anti-revolutionaries as criminal, thuggish, satanic and barbaric, thus legitimising the young activists’ anti-government movements.
Chapter 5 applies the framework to a very different set of discourses, focusing on the construction of climate change in corporate social responsibility reports in different industries from different nations, drawing on various linguistic and pragmatic tools such as temporal references, complex sentences, topoi, genre-blending, interdiscursivity, repetition and recontextualisation. Three primary themes are found in these reports: self-promotion, goodwill and self-justification. Although different nations and industries vary to some degree in both the themes created and the linguistic and pragmatic tools used. Such a finding is quite valuable in that it makes salient the context-sensitivity of the discourse of illusion.
Chapter 6 summarises the findings of the book. The author brings to light a common feature of all discourses of illusion – the existence of clear us-versus-them polarisation, already noted as an important feature of ideological public discourses by Van Dijk. Bhatia’s contribution here lies in that she connects this polarisation to the formation of discursive illusions – it is both a rhetorical strategy for and a social impact of their creation.
The most attractive part of the book is the author’s illustration of the multidimensional framework of the discourse of illusion, which is persuasive and of practical use in the analysis of various public discourses, ranging from the discourse of politics and media to that of business. Nevertheless, the detailed analysis of data given in three empirical chapters also makes the book an insightful and interesting read, not only for discourse scholars but also for those interested in discursive pragmatics and mass communication.