ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
189
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical
ideologies: meanings gi en
by he audience
Abs ac
Specula i e ic ion is based on one main ques ion: wha i ? This
pape add esses he ques ion o how audiences in e p e such
in e oga i e. In pa icula , ou main in e es lies in knowing how
he di e en poli ical ideologemes ha may inhabi specula i e
ic ion a e signi ied. Thus, in his s udy we ha e ocused on he
gen e o dys opia. To his end, a o al o i e ocus g oups we e
ca ied ou . Speci ically, he ideologemes es ed in he ecep ion
s udy belong o socialism, conse a ism, neolibe alism, libe alism
and eligious undamen alism. The signi icance o hese
ideological alues is empi ically g ounded in ex ensi e quali a i e
esea ch.
Keywo ds
Recep ion, dys opia, audience, quali a i e, poli ics.
1. In oduc ion
This s udy is based on one speci ic in e es , which is o e eal how di e en poli ical
ideologemes ha dwell in specula i e ic ion a e unde s ood and in e p e ed. To his end, a
gen e especially known o being in used wi h ideology, which is he dys opia (Moylan, 2000),
has been chosen as he objec o s udy. The ele ision se ies in ques ion is pa o a la ge ilm
anchise o he same name, called The Pu ge (Amazon P ime: 2018-2019).
To o e a b ie desc ip ion, he se ies en isions he Uni ed S a es uled by The New
Founding Fa he s, a poli ical o ganisa ion ha has legally s ipula ed ha one nigh pe yea
all c ime, including mu de , is allowed. The se ies was selec ed based on he ele ance o he
socio-poli ical issues i add esses in i s na a i e, which can be ex apola ed o o he
Eu opean con ex s, such as neolibe alism (Sánchez-Gu ié ez & Pineda, 2021). Be o e del ing
in o he empi ical s udy, due o limi ed space we will b ie ly desc ibe he cha ac e is ics o
he gen e ha is he objec o analysis – he dys opia.
The de ini ion o desc ip ion o u opias and dys opias has gene a ed widesp ead academic
discussion, due o he ac ha wha is conside ed socially op imis ic o disas ous may a y
acco ding o he socio-cul u al con ex , as well as he di e en ideologies o he indi iduals
in ques ion (Claeys, 2022). The e o e, u opia may e e o an ideal socie y, as an example, ye he
ea u es ha comp ise such a socie y is s ill a poin o disag eemen (G eene, 2011). Acco ding
o Sa gisson (2011), as hese a e he meneu ical ex s, bo h u opian and dys opian ex s a e
use ul o poli ical wo kings, as hey a e ealms in which we can en ision al e na i e solu ions
o p oblems o he p esen : “The nega i e c i izes while he posi i e c ea es o imagines
some hing new” (pp. 41-42).
Con inuing his line o hough , Sa gisson (2011) and Le i as (2011) a gue ha dys opian
na a i es a e linked o poli ical ideology, because hey help us shape ou hopes o he u u e,
which occu s wi h u opian ex s as well: “socialism con ains u opias o egali a ism and
May e
Dons up
h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-6236-4967
mdons [email protected]
Uni e sidad de Se illa
Submi ed
July 7 h, 2023
App o ed
Decembe 6 h, 2023
© 2024
Communica ion & Socie y
ISSN 0214-0039
E ISSN 2386-7876
www.communica ion-socie y.com
2024 – Vol. 37(1)
pp. 189-203
How o ci e his a icle:
Dons up, M. (2024). Specula i e
ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience,
Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1),
189-203.
doi.o g/10.15581/003.37.1.189-
203
Dons up, M.
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience
ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
190
libe alism seeks a ious (economic, social, and poli ical) u opias o eedom. This aspec o
u opianism (and his aspec o ideology) b ings hope o poli ics: he hope and desi e ha
hings can be di e en ” (2011, p. 42). Thus, he e a e u opias and dys opias o di e en poli ical
ideologies, such as he ex eme igh , socialis s, and eminis s (Le i as, 2011; Rosen eld, 2020).
In a u opia we make he co ec poli ical and ideological choices and c ea e a ee and
p ospe ous socie y, while in a dys opia we a e dep i ed o hese bene i s (Claeys, 2013).
In he ollowing sec ions we will elabo a e upon he speci ic gen e o he dys opia. The
e m dys opia has adi ionally been a ibu ed o John S ua Mill (1868), ye he no ion had
al eady appea ed in a le e o he edi o in The Gen leman’s Magazine in Sep embe o 1748,
when he wo d was coined o sugges he in e ed and nega i e meaning o u opia in a poem
p aising Ches e ield’s adminis a ion in I eland, and wa ning abou he imminen socio-
poli ical diso de ha would ollow his depa u e (Budako , 2010). Along hese lines,
dys opian ic ion en isions an unce ain u u e based on con empo a y e en s: “dys opian
na a i es a e also his o ically awa e, esponding o p esen condi ions and in o med by
knowledge o his o ical e en s and aumas” (S ock, 2019, p. 2). In he au ho ’s iew, dys opian
na a i es a e poli icised discou ses which, as he o ical s uc u es, can help eade s
con empla e he poli ical issues o hei ime: “g ounded in anxie ies o hei p esen , hese
poli ical engaged na a i es mobilise knowledge o his o ic e en s and aumas o specula e
upon consequences o cu en ends and ac ions o he u u e” (2019, p. 3). Speci ically,
Rosen eld (2021) no es ha he alues denied by dys opias a e he humanis ic p ecep s o
eason and deba e.
Along he same lines as S ock (2019), he mos ele an ea u e o dys opia, acco ding o
Moylan (2000b), lies in i s abili y o make us e lec on he causes o w ongdoing: “C ucial o
dys opian ision in all i s mani es a ions is his abili y o egis e he impac o an unseen and
unexamined social sys em on he e e yday li es” (2010, p. xiii). In sho , dys opian na a i es
a e an ou g ow h o he e o s o he 20 h cen u y (Moylan, 2000a, p. xi): “exploi a ion,
ep ession, s a e iolence, wa , genocide, disease, amine, ecocide, dep ession, deb , and he
s eady deple ion o humani y h ough he buying and selling o e e yday li e p o ided mo e
han enough e ile g ound o his ic i e unde side o he u opian imagina ion” (Moylan,
2000a, p. xi). Dys opia is p esen ed as he esul o human w ongdoing (Towe Sa gen , 2013).
Howe e , al hough he images o he u u e p esen ed in dys opias can lead he eade o
despai , he main pu pose o his gen e is didac ic and mo alis ic. In he same ein, S ock
a gues ha dys opias a e poli ically engaged na a i es and “mobilise knowledge o his o ic
e en s and aumas o specula e upon consequences o cu en ends and ac ions o he
u u e” (2019, p. 3). The u u e socie y is p esen ed as a eal possibili y because he aim o a
dys opia is o igh en he eade and make hem unde s and ha hings can go well o badly
depending on he mo al, social and ci ic esponsibili y o he ci izens (Vie a, 2010): “ hese a e
no jus ways o imagining he u u e (o he pas ) bu can also be unde s ood as conc e e
p ac ices h ough which his o ically si ua ed ac o s seek o eimagine hei p esen and
ans o m i in o a plausible u u e” (Go din, Tilley & P akash, 2010, p. 3).
Thus, he au ho s e iewed ag ee in poin ing ou he socio-poli ical, specula i e, and
ideological componen s o dys opias. In pa icula , T o a and Sad i de ine he gen e “as
ic ion ha explo es social o poli ical s uggle” (2020, p. 4). These au ho s no e ha he powe
s uc u es in hese s o ies con inue o unc ion, a imes in a way ha seems o de ly and
e icien , ye a imes hey appea o be on he e ge o collapse. Acco ding o Le i as (2011)
and Rosen eld (2020), he e a e dys opias o a ious poli ical ideologies. The e o e, he
undesi able powe s uc u e (o lack he eo ) will a y acco ding o he au ho ’s alues.
Ha ing men ioned he main p ecep s o he gen e, we will now de elop he me hodologi-
cal ins umen o da a collec ion ha will enable us o e eal how he dys opia unde s udy,
The Pu ge, is in e p e ed. Howe e , we will i s explain he concep ual amewo k o he wo
key concep s in ou s udy: poli ical ideologies, and ideologemes. Ideologies a e a se o deeply
Dons up, M.
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience
ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
191
oo ed a i udes h ough which di e se social g oups p opose, explain, and jus i y hei
objec i es, as well as he means hey use o achie e hem. Mo eo e , all o he abo e can also
be used o he pu pose o p ese ing, modi ying, o des oying a pa icula social o de
(Selige , 1976; Heywood, 2012). Ideologemes, on he o he hand, a e he di e en speci ic
p ecep s ha make up poli ical ideologies (Voloshino , 1986), such as he ee ma ke de ence
o neolibe alism.
2. Me hodology
Wi h he aim o de e mining he ideological meaning ha he dys opia The Pu ge ansmi s o
audiences, we ha e chosen o use one o he quin essen ial quali a i e echniques in ele ision
ecep ion s udies: ocus g oups. In his ega d, as Ki zinge and Ba bou (1999) poin ou , ocus
g oups a e ideal o explo ing people’s expe iences, opinions, desi es and conce ns: “a ga h-
e ing o a limi ed numbe o indi iduals, who h ough con e sa ion wi h each o he , p o ide
in o ma ion abou a speci ic opic, issue o subjec ” (Sa in-Baden & Howell Majo , 2013, p. 375).
As such, he au ho s o he p esen s udy would like o unde s and wha he se ies The
Pu ge means o audiences, speci ically in Spain. Thus, al hough his s udy is based on he
heo e ical unde pinning o he ideologemes ha a e he objec o in e p e a ion, he cul u al
ac o becomes impo an , as we shall see in he esul s. To his end, as he pa icipan s we e
awa e o he impo ance o gen e a he ime o ecep ion (Jauss, 1988), hey we e ec ui ed
and g ouped acco ding o hei se ies p e e ences, as well as hei knowledge o he dys opian
gen e and amilia i y wi h The Pu ge anchise. The e o e, a e conduc ing a call on social
media and in uni e si y se ings, hose in e es ed we e asked o ill in an ini ial su ey in
which hey we e asked a ious ques ions abou hei ele ision p e e ences in o de o g oup
he pa icipan s acco ding o i e p o iles: G oup 1 was amilia wi h The Pu ge anchise;
G oup 2 was gen e-sa y, naming wo o mo e dys opias as a ou i es; G oup 3 had
conside able knowledge o audio- isual cul u e, and hey ollowed la ge numbe o se ies and
ilms, bu no any pa icula gen e; G oup 5 was no amilia wi h se ies o ilms in gene al,
as hey we e no a id spec a o s. In o de o c ea e a us ing a mosphe e, pa icipan s we e
assu ed o he con iden iali y o hei da a on he su ey o m. Al hough he pa icipan s o
hese g oups had di e se academic and p o essional backg ounds, such as lawye s, IT
specialis s, and o he s, he e was a ce ain p e alence o communica ion unde g adua es.
Finally, due o he socio-poli ical na u e o he gen e, wi h i s high heo e ical con en , we
c ea ed one inal g oup o expe s in communica ion, comp ised o uni e si y p o esso s o
jou nalism, ad e ising and audio- isual communica ion, which was designa ed as G oup 4.
In summa y, he g oups consis ed o i e o se en people, o alling wen y-eigh pa icipan s.
In addi ion o audio- isual p e e ences, in an a emp o es ablish possible pa e ns in
he esponses, he su ey included ques ions in which he pa icipan s we e asked abou hei
ideological leanings and he poli ical pa y hey o ed o in he las gene al elec ions in Spain.
The ideological labels we e aken om su eys conduc ed by he Cen o de In es igaciones
Sociológicas (CIS) [sociological esea ch cen e]. I should be no ed ha we a e awa e o he
di icul y o e ealing p ecise ideological a i udes. This was due o he ac ha he su eys
we e no comple ely anonymous, so al hough hei pe sonal in o ma ion would no be pub-
lished, i would be e ealed among he pa icipan s du ing in-pe son mee ings. Consequen ly,
he pa icipan s may ha e ended o espond acco ding o social desi abili y. Ne e heless,
we belie e i is impo an o ha e an ini ial image o he subjec s, om which mo e in o -
ma ion can be ob ained la e in he ocus g oups. Finally, i should be no ed ha ou aim is
no o es ablish co ela ions be ween ideologies and esponses, which is mo e app op ia e o
quan i a i e-expe imen al echniques, bu ins ead o p o ide mo e in o ma ion o he
analysis o he esponses.
To encou age con e sa ion in he g oups, a ques ion shee was designed in o de o lea n
mo e abou he di e en meanings o he gen e, ollowing he indica ions o K uege (1997a;
Dons up, M.
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience
ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
192
1997b), who ecommends sepa a ing he ques ions in o ou blocks: in oduc o y, ansi ional,
key, and closing, all p eceded by he p esen a ion o he g oup. Rega ding he speci ic objec-
i es o he s udy, he key and closing ques ions a e highly ele an , as mo e speci ic issues
a e add essed in hese blocks. Along hese lines, we began he discussion by asking ques ions
abou he pe cep ion o he dys opian gen e and hen mo ed on o mo e speci ic ques ions
abou he ideological hallma ks o he se ies. Fo his pu pose, i e scenes we e selec ed om
he se ies, one pe g oup, wi h di e en ideologemes: libe alism and neo-libe alism (G oup
1); e hnic and ci ic na ionalism (G oup 2); socialism (G oup 3); conse a ism, libe alism, and
na ionalism (G oup 4); and eligious undamen alism (G oup 5).
The in-pe son sessions wo ked as ollows: pa icipan s we e exposed o one o he scenes
wi h he ideologemes indica ed abo e, and once he scene was p esen ed, we ollowed
K uege ’s (1997a) ecommenda ion o complex issues, like poli ical ideologies, and p o ided
pa icipan s wi h a shee o pape whe e hey we e equi ed o w i e down he s ances o he
cha ac e s in he scene. A e he ac i i y, pa icipan s we e encou aged o sha e hei ideas
wi h he g oup and discuss he a i udes o he cha ac e s in he scene. Finally, he mode a o
ga e wo ideologemes, one o which pe ained o he scene in ques ion, and hen asked he
pa icipan s which one hey hough was mo e app op ia e based on wha hey had seen.
3. Resul s
To p esen he esul s, we ha e add essed he answe s acco ding o he g oups ha we e
c ea ed. Following he me hodological design, we ha e desc ibed he ideology ha was sel -
assigned by he pa icipan s in each o hei esponses.
3.1. G oup 1: Familia wi h The Pu ge anchise
The scene displayed in ol es a mee ing o execu i es who a e b ains o ming possible ypes o
masks o be sold du ing Pu ge nigh . The hemes ha eme ge in he con e sa ion e ol e
a ound hose encoded in he scene: capi alism, social mino i ies, and libe alism. Acco dingly,
he ideologemes encoded in his scene a e as ollows:
Tole ance and di e si y (Libe alism): he willingness o accep iews o ac ions wi h which
one does no ag ee (Heywood, 2012).
De egula ion and he ee ma ke (Neolibe alism): o ob ain g ea e economic g ow h, no
s a e should in e ene in he p i a e ma ke , as en ep eneu s a e ully capable o
egula ing hemsel es and bene i ing he economy (An ón, 2020).
The discussion is opened by Pa icipan 3, who commen s wi h a one o ou age ha he
cha ac e s show alues ela ed o “capi alism, pa ia chy, and indi idualism... all o hem...”
(Ca ego y 3
1
, eminis ). Acco ding o wha is w i en in he no es, he pa icipan bases hese
assump ions on he alue o co po a e p o i s, as he ac ions o he cha ac e s in he scene
a e guided sel ishly by his single pu pose, e en o he poin o exploi ing social mino i ies.
Thus, o his pa icipan , he p e ailing indi idualism o he scene is ele an , because in
con as o he sea ch o he common wel a e o socie y, capi alism is seen as a cynical sys em
ha encou ages he pu sui o sel -in e es . In his way, “capi alis s, you know...” akes on a
pejo a i e conno a ion o he pa icipan , as capi alis cha ac e s, including e e yone in he
scene, “ e lec p i ilege and exploi he ma ke ” (ac i i y documen o Pa icipan 3). La e ,
she ea i ms he iew by adding ha he capi alis sys em i sel has c ea ed he Pu ge:
“They’ e li e ally c ea ing he Pu ge.” Fu he mo e, his commodi ica ion o he LGTBI
mo emen , a collec i e his o ically ili ied by he pa ia chy, implies ha he mo emen has
been non-ideologized o he bene i o he ma ke .
While Pa icipan 3 places all he cha ac e s unde he same capi alis banne , he o he
pa icipan s s a a deba e abou he ideological implica ions o he Employee in he scene,
1
This da a signi ies he ideological posi ion ha he pa icipan assigns o him/he sel .
Dons up, M.
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience
ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
193
who is a hesi an cha ac e . One example is Pa icipan 6, who changes his opinion a e
lis ening o Pa icipan 3: “In gene al, I had w i en a lo abou capi alism and so on, bu I
hough ha his Employee cha ac e didn’ eally ag ee, and hen I el ooled” (Ca ego y 6,
p og essi e). In his ega d, in his no es he conside s ha he Employee beha es acco ding o
mo e noble con ic ions han o he s: “He’s mo e socially awa e, wan s o dona e, and is
conce ned abou he p oblems o o he s” (Ca ego y 6, libe al). Mo eo e , Pa icipan s 1, 2 and
4 also change hei opinion abou he cha ac e , as hey w i e in hei commen s adjec i es
such as “sensible” (ac i i y documen , Pa icipan 1), as well as “sensi i e and conscien ious”
(Pa icipan 4). Howe e , in he con e sa ion a e he commen s made by Pa icipan 3, hey
a e con inced ha he cha ac e ac s jus like e e yone else: “Finally, e e yone ends up ha ing
same p e e ences, in a sense, and i he majo i y o he people hink his is he no mal hing
o do, hey jus ollow he c owd” (Pa icipan 5, Ca ego y 5, apoli ical). Thus, ma ke implica-
ions a e he common denomina o o he commen s made by all he pa icipan s. Along he
same lines, Pa icipan 1 (Ca ego y 6, libe al) explains ha she has based he e alua ions on
he emo ions con eyed by he scene: he ea o ha ing o con o m o he sys em ( he male
employee as a pe son who supp esses his own pe sonali y); i oli y ( he emale employee
who uses he LGTBI mo emen o inancial gain); and a sense o unease in he p esence o
powe .
In simila e ms, Pa icipan 5 desc ibes he scene as a “capi alis wo ld” (ac i i y
documen , Pa icipan 5) whe e businesspeople use he s anda dised as es o he “c owd” o
open up new ma ke s, ega dless o he messages hey deli e : “ hey say we’ e no going o
suppo a se ial kille and... [mocking laugh e ] hey’ e go a ace like Hi le ’s; I mean, come
on...” Pa icipan 6 adds in his no es ha he emale employee is po ayed as “g eedy” and
“only ca es abou money,” like he boss, (ac i i y documen , Pa icipan 6). Pa icipan 2 no es
ha he emale employee is depic ed as using “cold” and “manipula i e” echniques, while he
colleague jus i ies he means: “She doesn’ ca e wha means is used, as long as he goal is
achie ed” (ac i i y documen , Pa icipan 2). In sho , he capi alis sys em is collec i ely no ed
wi h nega i e adjec i es, such as i olous, dehumanising, and manipula i e. In he commen s
o Pa icipan 4, his consensus is b oadened, as he in oduces he e m “libe al” and “con-
se a i e.” In his ega d, al hough he does no exp ess i du ing he con e sa ion, he no es
ha he boss is “conse a i e, g eedy, and impa ial, as he only wan s p o i s” while he emale
execu i e is “ ansg essi e, p oac i e, and libe al” (ac i i y documen , Pa icipan 4). As s a ed
in he no es, Pa icipan 4 ela es conse a ism o he capi alis ma ke , seeing he o me as
based exclusi ely on co po a e p o i , and he la e on economic p o i plus inno a ion.
Like his pee s, i can be in e ed ha Pa icipan 4 associa es capi alism, and hus
conse a ism, wi h a i olous alue sys em. Rega ding libe alism, i he desc ibes he i s
cha ac e wi h adjec i es ha can be seen as posi i e in he business wo ld, such as being
p oac i e, he second pe sonali y is desc ibed in he ollowing way: “libe al, insensi i e, wan s
o be no iced” (desc ip ion o Jimmy, Pa icipan 4, ac i i y documen ); he e o e, Pa icipan
4 also links libe alism o a business ideology which, despi e being inno a i e, is s ill i olous.
Finally, he pa icipan s we e p esen ed wi h wo ideologemes, om which hey had o
choose he one hey hough was mos in line wi h he scene:
F eedom (Libe alism): he igh o e e y indi idual o pu sue one’s own in e es (choice
o eligious belie , p o ession, e c.) wi hou being pe secu ed (Heywood, 2012).
De egula ion and he ee ma ke (neolibe alism): o ob ain g ea e economic g ow h, no
s a e should in e ene in he p i a e ma ke , as en ep eneu s a e ully capable o
egula ing hemsel es and bene i ing he economy (An ón, 2020).
They all concu ed wi h he ee ma ke ideologeme, “since hey a y hei discou se un il
hey say, well, his is wha sells, and so on...” (Pa icipan 6, Ca ego y 6, libe al). In sho ,
compe i ion in he ee ma ke “is a compe i ion o egos, whe e e e yone is ying o cha m

Dons up, M.
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience
ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
194
he boss by selling wha he wan s” (Pa icipan 6). Ag eeing wi h Pa icipan 6, Pa icipan 1
makes he ollowing commen : “In he end, he pe son who seems mo e easonable is jus he
same; a he end o he day, wha he wan s is o suppo he in e es s o he company, and he
doesn’ ca e... a leas , ha ’s he eeling I ge ...” (Ca ego y 6, libe al). The impo ance o he
scene is he sup emacy o co po a e p o i s and economic g ow h wi hou any dec ee,
whe he legal o e hical, so companies a e allowed o accumula e weal h, e en du ing he
Pu ge.
3.2. G oup 2: e y amilia wi h he dys opian gen e
Nex , he second scene was shown o he pa icipan s o G oup 2 and he esul s ha e been
desc ibed in de ail. In his scene, Joe Owens is an ad oca e o e hnic na ionalism, and he ies
o pu ge Penelope Gue e o, who ad oca es ci ic na ionalis alues. The hemes analysed by
he pa icipan s a e close o he heo e ical pos ula es: acism, mul icul u alism, and
pa io ism. Be o e discussing he esul s, we would like o de ine he wo ideologemes in he
scene:
E hnic na ionhood (na ionalism): his indica es he impo ance o e hnic uni y and a
sha ed his o y, implying ha na ions a e cha ac e ised by a common ances y ha c ea es
powe ul bonds among he popula ion. The inhabi an s o a ce ain na ion sha e a se o
alues ha di e en ia e hem om o he na ions: a language, a eligion, and adi ions
(Heywood, 2012).
Ci ic na ionhood (na ionalism): his e e s o he impo ance o ci ic consciousness and
pa io ic loyal y. F om his pe spec i e, na ions can be mul i- acial, mul i-e hnic, mul i-
eligious, e c. Wha is impo an is he loyal y o he indi idual. Mo eo e , he dis inc ion
be ween na ion and s a e, o be ween na ionali y and ci izenship, is blu ed (Heywood,
2012).
Pa icipan 9 begins he con e sa ion in his block by desc ibing he opposing iews o he
wo cha ac e s in he scene: Penelope, desc ibed as a gi l who “belie es in a change in a
coun y h ough he econcilia ion o i s inhabi an s, ega dless o hei cul u e o in e cul-
u al backg ound” (Ca ego y 2, eminis ); and Owens, a man who p oposes a e u n o he
o iginal Uni ed S a es, wi h ci izens who sha e blood ies. Pa icipan 9 quickly g asps he wo
ideologemes in he scene and o e s a mo e de ailed explana ion. Mo eo e , she links Owens’
a i ude o pa io ism, social-Da winism, and he Ame ican d eam. As Owens is a cha ac e
whose pe sonali y is al eady no ed by his being d essed as a soldie , in he opinion o
Pa icipan 9, he pu sues “a egene a ion o he coun y and a e u n o a golden age by
emo ing he disco dan elemen s” (Ca ego y 2, eminis ) h ough he Pu ge, hus achie ing a
acially homogenous coun y.
Rega ding Penelope, Pa icipan 9 unde lines he ac ha she is om he Uni ed S a es
and he pa en s a e immig an s, a ac ha d i es he cha ac e ’s ci ic na ionalis philosophy,
as she de ends a coun y whe e all ci izens, ega dless o hei o igin, ha e a place in he
wo ds, she seeks “ he imp o emen o he coun y by econciling i s in e cul u al and acial
di e ences [...] wi h a new gene a ion ha is commi ed o paci ism” (ac i i y documen ,
Pa icipan 9). Following he example, Pa icipan 11 highligh s e e y hing s a ed by
Pa icipan 9 and goes on o say ha he scene shows wo “ e y opposi e ideas” (Ca ego y 1,
p og essi e). While P9 de ends he possibili y o belonging o a na ion ega dless o o igin, P11
sees p og ess as an au ho i a ian ision. Thus, while Penelope is guided by dialogue and
concilia ion, Owens s ands ou o his use o iolence and exclusion, “belie ing ha in his
way he is helping he ad ancemen o he na ion o which he has swo n allegiance”
(Pa icipan 11, ac i i y pape ). Fu he mo e, he w i es ha Penelope “s ands o li e, suppo ,
and collec i ism in o de o os e gene al imp o emen ” so she “ us s in he will o he
people.” P11 also s esses ha o Penelope, eedom does no imply a h ea o o he people.
Dons up, M.
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience
ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
195
In sho , Pa icipan 11 po ays Owens as an au ho i a ian cha ac e who imposes his
na ionalis acial ision, while Penelope ad oca es an idea o ci ic coope a ion.
Pa icipan 7 sha es hese iews, al hough wi h sligh ly di e gen nuances. P7 iden i ies
Owens as a “ la e ing acis ” (ac i i y documen , Pa icipan 7), who is an ad oca e o he
sys em “ ha is imposed” (Ca ego y 2, p og essi e and eminis ), while Penelope’s ideological
ounda ion is socialism, as she is “a pe son who is p og essi e and non-con o mis .” In he
w i en documen , Pa icipan 7 desc ibes Owens as a Republican, o ex eme igh -winge ,
and Penelope as a Democ a . In he discussion, Pa icipan 7’s use o he e m “ la e ing”
spa ks a discussion be ween Pa icipan s 11 and 9, as hey easse hei ag eemen wi h he
indoc ina ion o Owens, who ins an ly hal s his Pu ge a emp a he sound o he si en
announcing he end o he nigh . Mo e lenien in e p e a ions a e ound in Pa icipan s 8 and
10. The la e commen s ha bo h cha ac e s ag ee on he idea ha imp o emen is needed,
o in o he wo ds, “ hey bo h ag ee wi h he idea ha change is needed, bu hey do no ag ee
wi h he di ec ion o ha change,” no wi h how o implemen i . Owens “seeks p og ess om
his own pe spec i e” (Pa icipan 10, ac i i y pape ), which implies aking jus ice in o one’s
own hands ega dless o he means used. Penelope, on he o he hand, “de ends eedom”
(Pa icipan 10, ac i i y pape ), as she ies o edeem he en o ce by con incing him o
emb ace a calme “and mo e conse a i e” demeanou like he s. Pa icipan 8 in e enes in
he con e sa ion by a i ming wha was s a ed by Pa icipan 10, and she me ely exp esses he
wo posi ions o he cha ac e s ega ding he Pu ge: Owens de ends i as eedom, while
Penelope belie es in helping he “despe a e people” (ac i i y documen , Pa icipan 8) who do
no wan o li e in he USA. Mo eo e , in he con e sa ion Penelope says ha “ ega dless o
he ac ha she is a ci izen o he coun y, she doesn’ eel like she belongs o i , and she
doesn’ ag ee wi h he Pu ge” (Ca ego y 5, apoli ical). The e o e, P8 has no in e p e ed ha
Penelope a gues in a ou o he US ci izenship wi h La ino ances y.
As can be seen, his scene has no aised any doub s and, o a g ea e o lesse ex en ,
bo h cha ac e s ha e been quali ied acco ding o he ideologeme p esen in he ex . In he
i s pa o he ac i i y, Pa icipan s 8 and 10 had a mo e lenien in e p e a ion o he con en .
Finally, he pa icipan s we e p esen ed wi h wo ideologemes in o de o discuss which
o he wo was mo e indica i e o he scene, an ac i i y ha was he second pa o he block:
E hnic na ionhood: his indica es he impo ance o e hnic uni y and a sha ed his o y,
implying ha na ions a e cha ac e ised by a common ances y ha c ea es powe ul
bonds among he popula ion. The inhabi an s o a ce ain na ion sha e a se o alues ha
di e en ia e hem om o he na ions: a language, a eligion, and adi ions (Heywood,
2012).
Social Da winism: li e is a cons an con lic whe e he weak mus be e adica ed (Heywood,
2012).
A he beginning, Pa icipan 7 commen s ha Penelope is mo e associa ed wi h e hnic
na ionalism, based on he commen abou “na ionali y ega dless o o igin” (Ca ego y 2,
p og essi e and eminis ). When P7 co ec ly desc ibes Penelope as a guing ha na ionali y
should no depend on ances y, he mode a o epea s he de ini ions, leading o a ec i ica-
ion by Pa icipan 7 and a e lec ion by Pa icipan s 11 and 9, who commen on he pa adox
ha wo people bo n in he same coun y migh no be conside ed ellow na ionals because
hey ha e di e en ai s.
Fu he mo e, in line wi h he abo e, he P11 and 9 associa e Owens wi h he social
Da winis ideologeme, as he pu sues a acial pu ge, seeking o “elimina e wha e e is
necessa y” (Pa icipan 9, Ca ego y 2, eminis ), o build a na ion ha is simila o ha o he
golden age (Pa icipan 11, Ca ego y 1, p og essi e) by iolen means: “I hink in his sense, he
eally belie es ha hese people a e d agging he na ion down, and he hinks ha o he
coun y o e u n o he golden age, i has o be wi hou hem...” (Pa icipan 11). These
Dons up, M.
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience
ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
196
a gumen s pu o wa d by Pa icipan s 9 and 11 a e ea i med by Pa icipan 7, who elies on
he aming o he scenes o guide he in e p e a ion: “Also, e en he came a sho s, like he
high and low- angle sho s o Owen, gi e him mo e au ho i y...”
3.3. G oup 3: conside able knowledge o audio- isual cul u e
In his sec ion, we will analyse in de ail he pa icipan s’ commen s and hough s on he
lashback scene o Owens, who was a union wo ke in a ac o y be o e i was o sho ed o
ano he coun y. In gene al, he commen s poin o alues associa ed wi h communism o
ac o y wo ke s, while he boss, who appea s in he scene, has a mo e au ho i a ian pe sonal-
i y. As wi h he o he g oups, below is a eminde o he eade o he ideologeme p esen in
he ex :
Wo king-class communi y (socialism): he idea o he collec i e is mani es ed in a uni ied
ision o human beings as social c ea u es, capable o o e coming hei p oblems by
elying on he powe o he communi y a he han solely on indi idual e o (Heywood,
2012).
The discussion is s a ed by Pa icipan 16, who desc ibes he o eman Owens as “a bi like
he boss,” and as a pe son who displays b o he hood wi h he employees. P16 goes on o say,
“I see him as close ; he ca es abou o he s’ heal h; he eminds hem ha hey ha e heal h
insu ance, and ha he company will ha e o pay o i ” (Ca ego y 0, communis ). Thus, in line
wi h he ideologeme o he wo king-class communi y, Pa icipan 16 pe cei es Owens as a
ca ing pe son who os e s a bond among his ellow wo ke s. In ac , Owen ies o help one
wo ke in pa icula by eminding him ha he has he igh o ecei e medical se ices: “So
he seems mo e human. He is a he bo om wi h all he o he employees, and he woman is
he one who is always a he op” (Ca ego y 0, communis ). Pa icipan 18 conside s Owens o
be indoc ina ed by he co po a e discou se, belie ing ha his boss is looking ou o his
in e es s, while John ( he wo ke ) is mo e awa e o he alse p omises o indus y, endo sing
communis alues “because he appea s esigned, and de ea ed” (w i en documen Pa ici-
pan 18). As o he emale boss, she “ ep esen s capi alism, luxu y, and powe ” (w i en
documen Pa icipan 18). In his way, you could say ha Owens has a alse consciousness and
“seems obli ious o eali y” (Ca ego y 3-4, eminis ), as he is decei ed in o belie ing ha “ he
union and he company a e looking ou o his wel a e” (w i en documen Pa icipan 18). As
such, he pa icipan lumps oge he he union wi h he company, which is a lack o us ha
may be due o he con ex , because in he discussion she commen s ha communism in he
US mus be pu “in quo a ion ma ks.” Following on om he p e ious commen , Pa icipan
13 poin s ou ha Owens’ speech should be in alida ed because o he exis ing class inequali y;
howe e , she accuses John o being a con o mis .
In ac , Pa icipan 16 says ha John eminds he o he cha ac e o Ho se, om 1984,
because e en hough he has heal h p oblems, he is de e mined o con inue wo king, “saying
wha else can I do, his is he li e I’ e been des ined o ... and, well, i seems like he jus wan s
o con inue wo king and doesn’ wan o s op” (Ca ego y 0, communis ). In simila e ms,
Pa icipan 17 men ions ha John is a pe son who is de ea ed, and who accep s subo dina ion,
while Owens has a spi i o “cama ade ie and op imism” (Ca ego y 6, p og essi e libe al).
Finally, a mo e indica i e in e p e a ion is ound in Pa icipan 15, who says he ollowing:
“The woman has a mo e dis an au ho i y, bu he o he cha ac e has a close ype o
leade ship, so he la e cha ac e eels disdain...” (Ca ego y 5, social democ a ). E en hough
his pa icipan exp esses doub , we ind a mo e elabo a e in e p e a ion o John in he
w i ing o P15, because she c osses ou igh wing and eplaces i wi h communism, p esuma-
bly as a esul o he commen s made by he colleagues. In his ega d, she no es a ce ain
“mis us ha he company will p o ide he wi h heal h insu ance” (w i en documen ,
Pa icipan 15). We also ind an opinion ha has no been men ioned so a , which quali ies
Dons up, M.
Specula i e ic ion and poli ical ideologies:
meanings gi en by he audience
ISSN 2386-7876 – © 2024 Communica ion & Socie y, 37(1), 189-203
197
John as sexis because o his ejec ion o he emale boss. Finally, we mus poin ou a
comple ely con adic o y opinion gi en by Pa icipan 14, who w i es “ ascism” on his shee
(w i en documen Pa icipan 14). Al hough he mode a o asked o u he de ailed eed-
back on he ac i i y documen , he pa icipan did no wan o con inue wi h his explana ion.
A his poin , he las pa o he ocus g oup was ca ied ou wi h he ollowing
ideologemes being p esen ed o he pa icipan s:
Fiscal coun e - e o m (neolibe alism): linked o he abo e, neolibe alism ad oca es he
aboli ion o axes. The economy, and by ex ension socie y, p og ess p ope ly when
ci izens ha e mo e money in hei pocke s o spend in he p i a e ma ke (An ón, 2020).
Wo king-class communi y (socialism): he idea o he collec i e is mani es ed in a uni ied
ision o human beings as social c ea u es, capable o o e coming hei p oblems by
elying on he powe o he communi y a he han solely on indi idual e o (Heywood,
2012).
Pa icipan s 13 and 17 pe cei e he alue o he wo king-class communi y. P13 ela es i o
John, because o “his a i ude, al hough he doesn’ encou age people o ake ac ion...”
(Ca ego y 0, communis ), while P17 in e p e s i in bo h cha ac e s: “I do see a bi o commu-
ni y among he wo ke s. I see a ela ionship o leade ship and eam spi i , o cama ade ie...”
(Ca ego y 6, p og essi e libe al). On he o he hand, Pa icipan s 16 and 14 in e p e he iscal
coun e - e o m as “ ela ed o he insu ance issue” (Pa icipan 16, Ca ego y 0, communis ).
Thus, P16 belie es heal h insu ance is men ioned in o de o make i known ha wi hou he
company, he employee would no ha e such bene i s. In a b oade sense, Pa icipan 14
makes a pe sonal judgemen on he ax collec ion sys em. Speci ically, P14 ag ees and
conside s ha lowe axes a e equi alen o g ea e equali y: “Wha i ’s saying is ha we’ e all
in he same boa ... and he issue o all he money in you pocke ; and na u ally, he e e e yone
has he eedom o spend ha money on wha e e hey wan , and no one can be abo e i ”
(Ca ego y 3, social democ a ). Finally, Pa icipan 15 emains dis an om he a o emen ioned
ideologemes and exp esses ha he woman seems o be libe al “in economic e ms, belie ing
ha he ma ke is abo e social wel a e, and ha e e y hing should ake second place o he
economy.”
3.4. G oup 4: communica ion expe s
In his sec ion we de ail he esul s conce ning he scene, which is se on he adio p og amme
o he seconda y main cha ac e Bobby She idan, who is one o he s onges suppo e s o
he Pu ge. In gene al, al hough he ideologemes ha e been in e p e ed, his was done wi hou
much explana ion, as pa icipan s ocused hei a en ion on he issue o he media and social
media. I bea s men ioning ha his may ha e been due o he limi ed ime a ailable o he
pa icipan s, as well as he ac ha mo e ideologemes came in o play han in p e ious cases.
As men ioned abo e, he las pa ha in ol es choosing be ween wo ideologemes was no
done in his g oup. He e a e he ideologemes o he scene in de ail:
T adi ion (conse a ism): his e e s o eligious belie s o o accumula ed knowledge
om he pas . The ins i u ions and p ac ices o he pas ha e s ood he es o ime and
should he e o e be p ese ed o he bene i o u u e gene a ions (Heywood, 2012).
Reason (libe alism): he abili y o humans o de ine hei own in e es s a ionally and suc-
cess ully (Heywood, 2012). Reason, in libe alism, makes he alue o educa ion pa amoun ,
and con lic s a e esol ed h ough dialogue and he ejec ion o iolence (Ri e o, 2008).
E hnic na ionhood (na ionalism): he deno es he impo ance o e hnic uni y and a sha ed
his o y, implying ha na ions a e cha ac e ised by a common ances y ha c ea es
powe ul bonds among he people. The inhabi an s o a ce ain na ion sha e a se o alues
ha di e en ia e hem om o he na ions: a language, a eligion, and adi ions
(Heywood, 2012).