Recent empirical research on citizen learning has produced a somewhat surprising finding. Political groups take shape and define their interests in response to communications and policy proposals that representatives initiate “from the top down”. This suggests that representing in politics functions more creatively and generatively--as theories of representation in culture, literature, and the arts would predict--than mimetically as normative political theories would prefer. It also poses a problem. That a fictional work has no direct material referent is both obvious and untroubling. By contrast, that a political claim has no origin in a constituency but, rather, participates in constituting the group or interest for which it purports to speak is disconcerting: How do we know when democratic representation is working well or badly if we can no longer assess it against the groups and demands it is supposed to “reflect”?
