Structuralism

1. Introduction & Theoretical Applications Structuralism

2. Ferdinand de Saussure • 1857-1913 • Linguist • Granddaddy of semiotics • Swiss dude • moustachepioneer

3. 1. Meaning occurs through difference • “Concepts are purely differential and defined…by their relations with other terms of a system… In language there are only differences.” – Saussure • The meaning we give to signs is always relative: • Woman = NOT • Lady = NOT just or = NOT a gentleman man woman

4. 2. Binary oppositions • Binary oppositions (pairs of opposites) are particularly common ways we structure the world: • Some theorists (like Claude Levi-Strauss) even suggested that all human thought is structured by binary oppositions… • up/down • good/evil • just/unjust • friend/enemy • nature/nurture • civilized/primitive • life/death • win/lose

5. Binary Oppositions are everywhere… black / white body / soul pure / corrupted father / son male / female speech / writing sex / gender master / slave Mac / PC truth / fiction philosophy / myth sciences / humanities classical / romantic modern / postmodern poet / critic center / margins normal / deviant natural / unnatural straight / gay self / other high culture / pop culture base / superstructure waking / dreaming the library / the web

6. cave hovel tenement hut Tommy lives in a house. penthouse mansion palace coffin

7. Signifier & Signified

8. 3. Some signs are based on contiguity • Some signs are related somehow to what they signify: • Onomatopoeia: 쨍그랑, crash, boom, tick-tock • Or depend on their relation to other signs: • “The White House announced yesterday…” • “run the gamut” (not walk the gamut) • But even signs with some connection to reality are arbitrary as soon as we express them: Why write 쨍and not jjaengorЖ◊Ω?

9. 3. Most signs gain meaning by substitution • “The bond between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary,” not “motivated” (by natural resemblance). – Saussure • The meaning of signs is arbitrary • Why do ㄷand Drepresent similar sounds? • Does that sound actually have any ㄷness? D-ness? • Does a have any treeness?

10. Signs are arbitrary; many signifiers are possible for one signified

11. Signifiers are ambiguous & polysemic; one signifier can be associated with many things

12. Signs don’t depend on physical reality “We feel the 8:25 p.m. Geneva-to-Paris Express to be the same train each day, though the locomotive, coaches, and personnel may be different. This is because the 8:25 train is not a substance but a form, defined by its relations to other trains. It remains the 8:25 even though it leaves twenty minutes late, so long as its difference from the 7:25 and the 9:25 is preserved. Although we may be unable to conceive of the train except in its physical manifestations, its identity as a social and psychological fact is independent of those manifestations.” – Saussure

13. Signs power Obama • All language is signs—all words & letters are signs • Pictures can be signs (“iconic signs”) • ANYTHING can be a sign! • Signs have no inherent meaning; it can shift: • skinny jeans = cool  skinny jeans = stupid • (Remember: cool and stupid only make sense to us because of the usage context & their relation to other signs we know) • Many signs can be mythic: communicating large, often vague cultural meanings patriotism democracy hope greed Bourgeouis imperial capitalism

14. Signs & Culture • Signs are a product of culture • Meaning is assigned based on context & cultural codes • So the study of texts is actually a study of: • relations between signs • the cultural construction of meaning • Structuralism is the “study of cultural construction or identification of meaning according to the relations of signs that constitute the meaning-spectrum of the culture.” – GérardGenette

15. Gesture as Sign: Neo’s Finger

16. Why is it different from this finger?

17. Anything can be a sign! Do we make signs by mass agreement? By our intuition? By conventions established by those with greater power and influence?

18. Signs get meaning from culture and difference (relations with other signs) =

19. ∴ signs construct our reality! • The Iin “I am” is meaningless except as it relates to other signs. • All of those signs are defined by culture • Our sense of who we are is determined by culture • Even our specific desires are determined by culture

20. I’m hungry… pizza noodles I want to eat kimchi. tacos graham crackers boiled beets

21. Reality • Your unconscious isn’t your unconscious—it is just culture (and sub-culture) you’ve internalized • Thus, you are defined and constructed by culture • Reality is constructed by language & by culture: • That cross shape – God? Sign of the Infidels? • That raw fish – Something desirable? Something to be avoided? • That skinny girl – Beautiful? Sick-looking?

22. So Far… • We experience reality based on signs • Signs have no meaning by themselves—no neutral, absolute, or objective meaning • Signs gain meaning in: • the context of a culture • relation to other signs (often binary oppositions) • Our sense of ourselves is also based on signs • If everything is made up of signs (books, words, ourselves, reality)… • …everything can be viewed as a text!!

23. So what…? • We are surrounded by signs and don’t realize it • We don’t realize how arbitrary our sign systems are • We don’t realize that our sign systems define our reality • We don’t realize that our signs may encode and imprint on us power relations that may be problematic

24. If everything is a text… • “Literature” is no longer just a bunch of special, privileged works… • But literary methods can now be used to understand everything! • Examples: • Human lives as narratives with shifting, absurd, undetermined meanings • Religious beliefs and rituals as symbol systems that construct concepts of self

25. Structuralism Applied to Lit • Reality/normality and fantasy/absurdity/abnormality are all defined by cultural codes: Donald told Jenna he loved her. She glared, slapped him, then kissed him on the mouth, a long kiss that caught the attention of everyone in the church. • Structuralist reading: “There is a juxtaposition of cultural codes: a slap and glare, which in our culture tend signify hostility, and a kiss, which tends to signify affection.”

26. How does the text relate to culture? • In our culture, what are the dominant conventions/codes of behavior that define activity in a church? • Does the text subvert/deviate from or follow those cultural codes? • How does that subversion relate to the other elements in the text—the kiss and the slap? • How do these elements together (cultural codes & textual elements) function to create possible meaning?

27. Genre is another code • Cultural codes establish expectations in a text • Genre codes likewise establish expectations • Texts may be generic or may subvert expectations: There once was a man from Nantucket who ate all his meals from a bucket when asked ‘bout his style, he replied with a smile, “No more damn limericks. Alcoholism is no joke.”

28. How can we use this stuff? • To explain how a dominant meaning is created from the elements of a text • To explore the relationships among elements within a text • To explore the relationships between textual elements and expectations created by genre and by culture (or sub-culture) • To find possible polysemy (arising from ambiguity) in the text and in all the elements within

29. Exercise: Structuralist Reading of a Diet Coke Ad Areas to Focus on: • Cultural expectations as related to: • Gestures • Color codes • Technical codes • Music codes: genre, signification in lyrics • Intertextual readings (other ads) • Paradigmatic analysis • More…?

30. extras • "Structuralism and Literary Criticism“ • http://www.brocku.ca/english/courses/4F70/genette.php • Semiotics for Beginners • http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/semind.html • Notes on Saussure • http://group249.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-do-you-like-them-apples.html

31. Stuart Hall Stuart Hall • 1932-

32. Stuart Hall: Encoding/Decoding • A message is encoded with one meaning but may be decoded as another. • Based on Gramsci’s theory of Hegemony. • The reading of a text may be read (decoded) in three different ways: dominant, negotiated, and oppositional.