StructuralismIntroduction & Theoretical Applications

Ferdinand de Saussure

1857-1913LinguistGranddaddy of semiotics

Swiss dudemoustachepioneer

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

manwoman

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

Binary Oppositions are everywhere…black / whitebody / soulpure / corruptedfather / sonmale / femalespeech / writingsex / gendermaster / slaveMac / PCtruth / fictionphilosophy / mythsciences / humanitiesclassical / romantic

modern / postmodernpoet / criticcenter / marginsnormal / deviantnatural / unnaturalstraight / gayself / otherhigh culture / pop

culture base / superstructurewaking / dreamingthe library / the web

cave

hovel tenement

hut

Tommy lives in a house.

penthouse

mansion palace coffin

Signifier & Signified

All signsconsist of two parts:

Signified (signifié):

a concept

Signifier(signifiant): a sound-image or a written mark

(often iconic or expressed in an alphabet)

arbor木

tree

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 쨍 and not jjaeng or Ж◊Ω?

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 ㄷ and D represent similar

sounds? Does that sound actually have any ㄷ

ness? D-ness?

Does a have any treeness?

equus “Mimi” horse

มาperd

atngựa

马koń

Signs are arbitrary; many signifiers are possible for one signified

woman woman woman woman

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

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

Signs 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

power

patriotism

Obama

democracy

greedhope

Bourgeouis imperial capitalism

Signs & CultureSigns 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.”

– Gérard Genette

Gesture as Sign: Neo’s Finger

Why is it different from this finger?

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?

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

=

∴ signs construct our reality!

The I in “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

I’m hungry…

pizza noodles

I want to eat kimchi. tacos graham

crackers boiled beets

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?

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!!

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

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

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.”

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?

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 Nantucketwho 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.”

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

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…?

extras

"STRUCTURALISM AND LITERARY CRITICISM“

http://www.brocku.ca/english/courses/4F70/genette.php

Semiotics for Beginners http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Docum

ents/S4B/semind.html Notes on Saussure http://group249.blogspot.com/2010/

10/how-do-you-like-them-apples.html

Stuart HallStuart Hall

1932-

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.