Статья 'Концептуальные подходы к изучению феномена власти в семиотике культуры: ретроспективный методологический обзор' - журнал 'Человек и культура' - NotaBene.ru
по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > Editorial board > Peer-review process > Peer-review in 24 hours: How do we do it? > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Publication in 72 hours: How do we do it? > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

Публикация за 72 часа - теперь это реальность!
При необходимости издательство предоставляет авторам услугу сверхсрочной полноценной публикации. Уже через 72 часа статья появляется в числе опубликованных на сайте издательства с DOI и номерами страниц.
По первому требованию предоставляем все подтверждающие публикацию документы!
MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Man and Culture
Reference:

Conceptual approaches to examination of the phenomenon of power in semiotics of culture: retrospective methodological overview

Sannikov Sergey

PhD in History

Head of the International Relations Department, Governor’s Administration of Novosibirsk Region

630000, Russia, Novosibirskaya Oblast' oblast', g. Novosibirsk, ul. Krasnyi Prospekt, 18

sannikov_s@ngs.ru

DOI:

10.25136/2409-8744.2018.2.25821

Review date:

24-03-2018


Publish date:

26-04-2018


Abstract.

This article attempts to fill the gap associated with the insufficient knowledge on the existing approaches to examination of the phenomenon of power within the framework of semiotics of culture. The subject of the research is the cognitive problems of examination of the phenomenon of power in the works of representatives of the Western European School of semiotics of culture and relevant conceptual approaches to their solution. The object is the oeuvres of the classics specialized in semiotics of culture (semiology) of the XX century: E. Cassirer, R. Barthes, M. Foucault, J. Derrida, G. Deleuze, and J. Baudrillard. Methodological pivot from the positivist paradigm, within the framework of which “power” was studies as a political legal institution, towards postmodernist interpretation of power as a global system of the formation of reality, category of knowledge, and overall subordination to the discursive practices led to substantial expansion of methodological boundaries of the studies of the phenomenon of power. Power becomes an object of research in the context of broad range of disciplines, such as philosophy, history, sociology, linguistics, political anthropology, and culturology. In the conditions of such significant disciplinary diversity, special meaning attains the semiotics of culture as a methodological foundation for further disciplinary synthesis. The conducted analysis allowed detecting the key cognitive issues in examination of the phenomenon of power within the framework of the oeuvres of the indicated authors, and specify the relevant conceptual approaches to their solution. The result explicated the methodological prerequisites for emergence of the modern discipline of the semiotics of culture, which is capable of becoming a theoretical foundation for further analysis of the semiotic algorithms of power relations.

Keywords: Deleuze, Derrida, Foucault, Barthes, Cassirer, political imagology, semiotics of power, cultural semiotics, Baudrillard, Poinsot
This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
Avtonomova N.S. Fuko // Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya: v 4 t. M., 2001. T. 4. S.361.
2.
Alasaniya K.Yu. Kontseptsiya politicheskogo prostranstva v teorii vlasti M. Fuko // Kaspiiskii region: politika, ekonomika, kul'tura. 2015. №4.-C. 141-144.
3.
Bart R. Aktovaya lektsiya, prochitannaya pri vstuplenii v dolzhnost' zaveduyushchego kafedroi literaturnoi semiologii v Kollezh-de-Frans 7 yanvarya 1977 g // Izbrannye raboty: Semiotika. Poetika. M., 1994. S.545-569.
4.
Bart R. Izbrannye raboty: Semiotika. Poetika.-M., 1989. — 616 s.
5.
Bodriiyar Zh. Zabyt' Fuko. – SPb.: Vladimir Dal', 2000. — 96 s.
6.
Bodriiyar Zh. Simulyakry i simulyatsiya / Zh. Bodriiyar ; [per. s fr. A. Kachalova]. — M.: POSTUM, 2017. — 320 s.
7.
Volkov V.N. Kontsept «distsiplinarnoi vlasti» v sovremennom kul'turologicheskom diskurse // Vestn. Kemer. gos. un-ta kul'tury i iskusstv. 2012. Ch. II. № 19. S. 10-17.
8.
Delez Zh. Razlichie i povtorenie. — TOO TK «Petropolis», 1998.— 384s.
9.
Derrida Zh. Polya filosofii / Per. s fr. D.Yu. Kralechkina. — M.: Akademicheskii Proekt, 2012. — 376 s.
10.
Zekrist R.I. Kontseptsiya vlasti Mishelya Fuko // Izv. Ural. feder. un-ta. Ser. 3: Obshchestv. nauki. 2012. № 2. S. 40-46.
11.
Il'in M.V. Politicheskii diskurs kak predmet analiza. // Zhurnal «Politicheskaya nauka», №3, M.: 2002. S. 7-19.
12.
Kassirer E. Tekhnika sovremennykh politicheskikh mifov // Vestn. MGU. Ser. 7, Filosofiya. 1990. № 2. S. 58-65.
13.
Kassirer E. Filosofiya simvolicheskikh form. Tom 1. Yazyk. M.; SPb.: Universitetskaya kniga, 2002. 272 s.
14.
Malinovskii B. Nauchnaya teoriya kul'tury. M., 1998. - 208 s.
15.
Mikhel' D. Vlast', upravlenie, naselenie: vozmozhnaya arkheologiya sotsial'noi politiki Mishelya Fuko // Zhurnal issledovaniya sotsial'noi politiki. 2003. T. 1. № 1.-S. 91-106.
16.
Nizovtsev D. B. Problema vlasti v rabotakh Mishelya Fuko // Vestn. Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) feder. un-ta. Ser. Gumanitarnye i sotsial'nye nauki. 2015. № 4. S. 49–57.
17.
Pavkin L.M. Gosudarstvo, pravo, vlast' v postmodernistskoi kontseptsii M. Fuko // Severo-kavkazskii yuridicheskii vestnik. 2014,№4. – S.31-36.
18.
Semiotika: Antologiya. Sostavitel' Yu.S. Stepanov M., 2001. - 702 s.
19.
Skripnik K.D. K istorii semioticheskikh idei: tri «Znakovykh» traktata Avgustina // Nauchnye vedomosti Belgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Pravo Seriya Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Pravo. 2011. №8(103). Vypusk 16. S.5-12.
20.
Tampsoba E. Problema vlasti v trudakh Mishelya Fuko: dissertatsiya na soiskanie stepeni kandidata politicheskikh nauk: 23.00.01. – Rostov n/D, 2001.
21.
Tarlygin E.I. Interpretatsiya «vlasti» M. Fuko v pole rossiiskoi istoriografii // Vestnik RUDN. Seriya «Istoriya Rossii». 2006. №3.- S.269-274.
22.
Flier A.Ya. Kul'tura kak repressiya // Fundamental'nye problemy kul'turologii: v 4-kh tt. Tom I: Teoriya kul'tury. SPb., 2008. S. 242-250.
23.
Fuko M. 1996. Volya k istine. Po tu storonu znaniya, vlasti i seksual'nosti. — M.: Kastal'. S.191–192.
24.
Fuko M. Nuzhno zashchishchat' obshchestvo. Kurs lektsii, prochitannykh v Kollezh de Frans v 1975-1976 uchebnom godu. SPb.: Nauka, 2005. - 312 s.
25.
Eko U. Otsutstvuyushchaya struktura. Vvedenie v semiologiyu. SPb., 2006.- 540 s.
26.
Shatin Yu. V. Tri vektora semiotiki // Diskurs. 1996. № 2. S. 41-47.
27.
Ahonen P. Semiotic aspects of political science: Political semiotics (Semiotische Aspekte der Politikwissenschaft: Politiksemiotik) // Semiotics. T.3. Ed. by Posner R., Robering K., Sebeok T.A. 2003. P.2919-2925.
28.
Barthes R. Le mythe, aujourd'hu // Barthes R. Mythologies. P.: Seuil, 1957. P.179-233.
29.
Barthes R. Rhétorique de l'image // Communication, n°4, 1964.
30.
Ding E. 2010. “Cassirer in the Context of Saussurean Semiotics.” Chinese Semiotic Studies 3: 56–67. doi: 10.1515/css-2010-0107.
31.
Dreyfus H. Being and Power: Heidegger and Foucault // International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 1996. Vol. 4, №1. P. 1-16.
32.
Foucault M. Histoire de la sexualité. T.I: La volonté de savoir, Paris, 1976.
33.
Keenan T. The “Paradox” of Knowledge and Power: Reading Foucault on a Bias // Political Theory, 1987. Vol. 15, №1. P. 5-37.
34.
Murphy J.B. Nature, Custom, and Stipulation in the Semiotic of John Poinsot.-1991-Semiotica 83 (1-2):33-68.
35.
O’Neil Spady J. Reconsidering Theory: Power, the Learning Body, and Cultural Change during Early American Colonization // Journal of Early American History 1 (2011). P.191-214.
36.
Oesterle J.A. Another approach to the problem of meaning. The Thomist 1, 1944. P.233-263.
37.
Philp M. Foucault on Power: A Problem in Radical Translation? // Political Theory, 1983. Vol. 11, №1. P. 29-52.
38.
Posner R. Basic Tasks of Cultural SemioticsBasic Tasks of Cultural Semiotics. In: Gloria Withalm and Josef Wallmannsberger (eds.) (2004), Signs of Power – Power of Signs. Essays in Honor of Jeff Bernard. Vienna: INST, p. 56-89. P.56
39.
Selg P., Ventsel A. An Outline for semiotic theory of hegemony // Semiotica, 2010, 182[1/4], pp. 443 – 473.
40.
Siefkes M. Power in society, economy, and mentality: Towards a semiotic theory of power // Semiotica 181 (1/4). 2010. P. 226, 230-231.
41.
Signs of change: premodern, modern, postmodern / ed. Barker S. International Association for Philosophy and Literature. Meeting Université de Montréal) State University of New York Press, 1991. 440 p.
42.
Tractatus de Signis: The Semiotic of John Poinsot. Ed., Deely J.N. Publisher, University of California Press, 1985. 607 p.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website