Stories of American democracy, whether critical or congratulatory, canonical or popular, feature “the public” as their recurring protagonist. “The public” is a rhetorical fixture of political campaigns and democratic theories, opinion polls and calls to action. Its influence is formidable: the very idea scores political speech, and calls citizens into being. Yet as many scholars have argued, “the public” is a moving target, and possibly even a total fiction. Perhaps the best-known challenge in recent decades has come from literary critic and social theorist Michael Warner. “Publics” he writes in hisPublics and Counterpublics,“have become an essential part of the social landscape, and yet it would tax our understanding to say exactly what they are.” If a public is difficult to describe, it is in part, Warner explains, because the idea hovers in modern imaginaries between the concrete and the abstract. “A public” can conjure at once: a bounded audience—“a crowd witnessing itself in visible space”; a more abstract “social totality” like the constituents of a nation; and a community conjured through shared texts or identities.

中文翻译：

---

The Phantom Public, the Living Newspaper：在联邦剧院项目的 1935 年重振公众（纽约，1936 年）

美国民主的故事，无论是批评的还是祝贺的，规范的还是流行的，都以“公众”为主角。“公众”是政治运动和民主理论、民意调查和行动呼吁的修辞手段。它的影响力是巨大的：这个想法本身就为政治演讲打分，并召唤公民。然而，正如许多学者所说，“公众”是一个移动的目标，甚至可能完全是虚构的。也许近几十年来最著名的挑战来自文学评论家和社会理论家迈克尔·华纳。他在他的著作中写道“公众”公众和反公众，“已经成为社会景观的重要组成部分，但要准确地说出它们是什么，我们的理解力会很差。” 华纳解释说，如果公众难以描述，那是部分原因，因为这个想法徘徊在具体和抽象之间的现代想象中。“公众”可以立刻变出：有限的观众——“在可见空间中目睹自己的人群”；一个更抽象的“社会整体”，例如一个国家的组成部分；以及通过共享文本或身份召唤的社区。