|
MAIN PAGE
> Back to contents
Culture and Art
Reference:
Vakhshtain, V. S.
City Metaphors and Metaphorics of Urban
Researches: Self-Description VS. Meta-Description
// Culture and Art.
2015. ¹ 1.
P. 32-49.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=65879
Vakhshtain, V. S. City Metaphors and Metaphorics of Urban
Researches: Self-Description VS. Meta-Description
Abstract:
Modern cities are endlessly heterogeneous and always changing. Culture experts, psychologists
and sociologists dispute with each other trying to win the right to talk about this changeability in terms of their science. This is probably the reason why discussions touching upon ‘urban culture’, ‘structure
of urban society’ and ‘urban everyday life’ usually have an interdisciplinary nature. The object of
research lies at the crossing point of the aforesaid sciences, too. The author of the article raises a question
whether taking into account such ‘interdisciplinary autism’ it is possible to make a theoretical statement
using sociology terms and this statement can be relevant to terminology of interdisciplinary sciences.
What acts as a ‘cross disciplinary bridge’ that can convey the theoretical content overcoming the disciplinary
borders between sociology, psychology and cultural studies? According to the author, metaphor
can serve as such a bridge. Therefore, the present article is devoted to the analysis of the two types of
metaphors, self-descriptive and meta-descriptive metaphors in urban ideologies and urban studies. The
research is based on the IPA methodology (Interpretative Policy Analysis), frame-analysis and analysis
of metaphoric grounds of sociological conceptualization. Metaphors can be coherent or consistent. For
example, metaphors of our country as a ‘rust-bucket in the ocean of world policy’ or a ‘train on a side
route of history’ are coherent metaphors, i.e. they agree with the general concept of ‘transport’, but these
metaphors are not consistent, i.e. they do not create a single image. On the contrary, metaphors ‘Our
country is a ship’ and ‘Party is our steersman’ are consistent but not coherent. Applying to the scope of the
present article, this means that epistemic metaphors (researher’s self-description) and theoretical metaphors
(meta-description of an object) are more consistent than meta-description of an object and selfdescription
of an object. The relationship between metaphors in the triangle ‘Self-description of cognition
– Meta-description of an object – Self-description of an object’ reflects the nature of contingency and
these metaphors are not precisely correlated. This conclusion allows to solve Ankersmit’s case. If Frank
Ankersmit is right, then the two key operations of a researcher’s mind, problematization and conceptualization,
are opposed to each other. Conceptualization is based on metaphoric mechanisms of reasoning
and is the process of presenting the unfamiliar as something familiar, i.e. describing an unfamiliar
object in terms of the existing system of categories and concepts. On the contrary, problematization is a
process of ‘defamiliarization’ or transformation of the familiar into the unfamiliar. Ankersmit establishes
that logically a metaphor cannot serve as a tool of problematization. If we follow his logic, we can tell
that problematization – i.e. defamiliarization of an object – creates some kind of ‘beyond transcendence’
grounds for cognition. However, the author of the article rejects such a thesis. According to the author,
‘comprehensibility’ or ‘incomprehensibility’ are not ontological properties of an object but an attribute
of the relation of an object to the above mentioned cognitive scheme. As the results of the research show,
inconsistency of metaphors of different orders, first of all, metaphors of self– and meta-description of an
object, is a source of such problematization.
Keywords:
Metaphor, self-description, meta-description, urban researches, sociologism, urbanicism, social urban studies, Ankersmit, Latour, Black.
This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article
This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here
.
References
1. Bremer F. John Winthrop: America's Forgotten Founder. NY.: Oxford University Press, 2003.
2. Curtis W. Le Corbusier: Ideas and Forms, NY.: Phaidon, 1994.
3. Gehl J. Cities for People. Copenhagen: Island Press, 2010.
4. Goffman E. On facework // Goffman E. Interaction Ritual. New York, 1967.
5. Hackworth J. The Neoliberal City: Governance, Ideology and Development in American Urbanism. NY.: Cornell University Press, 2000.
6. Holston J. The Modernist City: An Anthropological Critique of Brasilia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989.
7. James W. The Principles of Psychology. Dover, 1890.
8. Nicod J. La géométrie dans le monde sensible. Paris, 1924.
9. Robert Moses and the Modern City: The Transformation of New York // eds. Jackson K.T., Ballon H. NY.: Norton, 2007.
10. Rorty R. Method, Social Science and Social Hopes // Consequences of Pragmatism (Essays:1972-1980), Ch.11. Hassocks : Harvester Press, 1982.
11. Schon D.A., Rein M. Frame reflection: towards the resolution of intractable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books, 1994.
12. Swaminathan R., Goyal J. Mumbai vision 2015: agenda for urban renewal. Macmillan India, 2006.
13. Ankersmit F.R. Istoriya i tropologiya: vzlet i padenie metafory / per. s angl. M. Kukartseva, E. Kolomoets, V. Kataeva M.: Izdatel'stvo: M: Progress-Traditsiya, 2003.
14. Blek M. Metafora // Teoriya metafory. M.: Progress, 1990.
15. Burd'e P. Za ratsionalisticheskii istorizm // Sotsio-Logos postmodernizma. Al'manakh Rossiisko-frantsuzskogo tsentra sotsiologicheskikh issledovanii Instituta sotsiologii RAN. M.: Institut eksperimental'noi sotsiologii, 1996.
16. Burd'e P. Sotsiologiya politiki / Per. s fr. N.A. Shmatko. M.: Socio-Logos, 1993.
17. Vakhshtain V. S. Po tu storonu postsovetskoi sotsiologii: paradoksy i tavtologii // Puti Rossii. Sovremennoe intellektual'noe prostranstvo: shkoly, napravleniya, pokoleniya. M.: Universitetskaya kniga, 2009.
18. Vakhshtain V.S. Metaforika universiteta. Dostup cherez , 2013.
19. Vakhshtain V.S. Peresborka goroda: mezhdu yazykom i prostranstvom // Sotsiologiya vlasti. 2014. ¹2.
20. Vakhshtain V.S., Zhelezov B.V., Larionova M.V., Meshkova T.A. Sistemy vysshego obrazovaniya stran OESR. M.: ID GU-VShE, 2005.
21. Gofman I. Predstavlenie sebya drugim v povsednevnoi zhizni / Per. s angl. i vstup. stat'ya A.D. Kovaleva. M.: Kanon-Press-Ts, Kuchkovo pole, 2000.
22. Grats R. Gorod v Amerike: zhiteli i vlasti / Per. s angl. V. Glazycheva. M.: Lad'ya, 1995.
23. Gudkov L.D. Abortivnaya modernizatsiya. M.: ROSSPEN, 2011.
24. Dekart R. Sochineniya: V 2 t. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 1989.
25. Zaslavskaya T.I. Sotsietal'naya transformatsiya rossiiskogo obshchestva. Deyatel'no-strukturnaya kontseptsiya. M.: Delo, 2002.
26. Kolkhas R. N'yu-Iork vne sebya // Per. s angl. A. Smirnovoi. M.: Strelka-press, 2013.
27. Korbut A. Na chto mozhno ukazat' pal'tsem? Freim, praktika i koe-chto eshche // Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie T. 8. ¹ 1. 2009.
28. Lakoff Dzh., Dzhonson M. Metafory, kotorymi my zhivem: Per. s angl. / Pod. red. A. N. Baranova. M.: Editorial URSS, 2004.
29. Latur B. Politika ob''yasneniya // Sotsiologiya vlasti. 2012. ¹ 8.
30. Lefevr A. Idei dlya kontseptsii novogo urbanizma // Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie. 2002. T. 2. ¹3.
31. Luman N. «Chto proiskhodit?» i «Chto za etim kroetsya?». Dve sotsiologii i teoriya obshchestva // Teoreticheskaya sotsiologiya: Antologiya / Pod red. S.P. Ban'kovskoi. T. 2. M.: Knizhnyi dom «Universitet», 2002.
32. Luman N. Obshchestvo kak sotsial'naya sistema. / Per s nem. A. Antonovskii. M.: Logos, 2004.
33. Luman N. Real'nost' massmedia / Per. s nem. A.Yu. Antonovskogo. M.: Praksis, 2005.
34. Marks K., Engel's F. Nemetskaya ideologiya // Marks K., Engel's F. Sochineniya. M.: Gospolitizdat, 1955.
35. Ortega-i-Gasset Kh. Dve glavnye metafory. M.: 1991.
36. Papernyi V.Z. Kul'tura Dva. M.: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 1996.
37. Puzanov K. Territorial'nye granitsy gorodskikh soobshchestv // Sotsiologiya vlasti. ¹3. 2013.
38. Khaidegger M. Veshch' // Khaidegger M. Vremya i bytie. M.: Respublika, 1993.
39. Shyuts A. O mnozhestvennosti real'nostei // Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie 2003. T. 3. ¹2.
40. Shyuts A. O mnozhestvennosti real'nostei // Sotsiologicheskoi obozrenie. 2003. Tom 3. ¹2.
41. Shyuts A. Razmyshlenie o probleme relevantnosti // Shyuts A. Izbrannoe: Mir, svetyashchiisya smyslom. M.: ROSSPEN, 2004.
42. Yanou D., Khul'st van M. Freimy politicheskogo: ot freim-analiza k analizu freimirovaniya // Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie. 2011. T. 10. ¹1-2.
Link to this article
You can simply select and copy link from below text field.
|
|