Journals / All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace / 2018 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2

Unpacking the Post-Soviet: Political Legacy of the Tartu Semiotic School

“Sovyet-sonrası”nın Ayrıntılı Bir İncelenmesi: Tartu Semiyotik Ekolün Siyasi Mirası

Pages
31–45
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Ultimately, we use cultural semiotic notions and approaches for problematizing the concept of the post-Soviet with its conflictual split between reproducing archaic policies and discourses, on the one hand, and playing by the rules of the post-modern society, with entertainment, hybridity and the spirit of deconstruction as its pivots.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article sketches out general approach to using cultural semiotics as a cognitive tool for analyzing international relations in general and in post-Soviet area in particular.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The authors discuss how the homegrown school of cultural semiotics associated with the University of Tartu can be helpful for IR studies.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Ultimately, we use cultural semiotic notions and approaches for problematizing the concept of the post-Soviet with its conflictual split between reproducing archaic policies and discourses, on the one hand, and playing by the rules of the post-modern society, with entertainment, hybridity and the spirit of deconstruction as its pivots.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This article sketches out general approach to using cultural semiotics as a cognitive tool for analyzing international relations in general and in post-Soviet area in particular. The authors discuss how the homegrown school of cultural semiotics associated with the University of Tartu can be helpful for IR studies. In this respect we place cultural semiotic knowledge in a multidisciplinary perspective and look for projections of its concepts into the vocabulary of foreign policy. Then we intend to discuss the Tartu school from a political perspective, thus claiming that its premium put on cultural issues renders strong politicizing effects. Ultimately, we use cultural semiotic notions and approaches for problematizing the concept of the post-Soviet with its conflictual split between reproducing archaic policies and discourses, on the one hand, and playing by the rules of the post-modern society, with entertainment, hybridity and the spirit of deconstruction as its pivots.

Özet

Bu makale kültürel semiyotiğin, genelde uluslararası ilişkileri özelde ise Sovyet sonrası dönemi analiz etmek için kavramsal bir araç olarak kullanımına yönelik genel yaklaşımın bir taslağını çizmektedir. Yazarlar, Tartu Üniversitesi ile ilişkilendirilen kültürel semiyotik yerli ekolünün Uluslararası İlişkiler çalışmalarında nasıl yararlı olabileceğini tartışmaktadırlar. Bu bağlamda, kültürel semiyotik bilgiyi çok-disiplinli bir bakış açısına yerleştirerek kültürel semiyotik kavramların dış politika söz dağarcığındaki yansımalarına bakmaktayız. Daha sonra Tartu ekolünü siyasi bir bakış açısıyla tartışarak bu ekolun kültürel meselelere ayrıcalıklı bakış açısının güçlü bir siyasallaştırma etkisi ortaya çıkardığını savunmaktayız. En nihayetinde ise kültürel semiyotik kavramları ve yaklaşımları, bir yanda arkaik politikalarin ve söylemlerin yeniden üretimi ile öte yanda eğlence, melezlik ve dekonstrüksiyon ruhunu eksen alan post-modern toplumun kurallarına göre oynamak arasında bir bölünmeye işaret eden “Sovyet-sonrası” kavramının sorunsallaştırılması için kullanıyoruz.

🔖

Cite This Article

MAKARYCHEV, A., YATSYK, A. (2022). Unpacking the Post-Soviet: Political Legacy of the Tartu Semiotic School. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2, 31–45. https://ajindex.com/articles/435016

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Albert, Mathias. “From Territorial to Functional Space: Germany and the Baltic Sea Area.” Working Paper 39, Copenhagen Peace Research Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2000. Arkhangel’skiy, Andrey. “Primirenie so zlodeistvom. Pochemu Patriarkh govorit ob uspekhakh pri Stalinizme.” Slon, November 9, 2015. https://republic.ru/posts/59277.
  2. Balzacq, Thierry. “The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency, Audience and Context.” European Journal of International Relations 11, no. 2 (2005): 171-201.
  3. Browning, Christopher, and Pertti Joenniemi. “Contending Discourses on Marginality: the Case of Kaliningrad.” Working Paper, Danish Institute for International Studies, Copenhagen, 2003.
  4. Chernomorsky, Pavel. “V Moskve vosstanovyat memorial’nuyu dosku na dome Brezhneva.” Slon, May 27, 2013. http://slon.ru/fast/russia/v-moskve-vosstanovyat-memorialnuyu-dosku-na-dome-brezhneva-946056.xhtml.
  5. Ciuta, Felix. “Security and the Problem of Context: A Hermeneutical Critique of Securitization Theory.” Review of International Studies 35 (2009): 301-26.
  6. Drulak, Petr. “The Problem of Structural Change in Alexander Wendt’s Social Theory of International Politics.” Journal of International Relations and Development 4, no. 4 (2001): 363-79.
  7. Gazarian, Karen. “SSSR v obiortke ot konfety.” Gazeta.ru, September 12, 2015. http://www.gazeta.ru/ comments/2015/09/06_a_7742285.shtm. Gottdiener, Mark. Postmodern Semiotics: Material Culture and the Forms of Postmodern Life. Oxford and Cambridge: Blackwell, 1995.
  8. Gray, Colin. “Inescapable Geography.” The Journal of Strategic Studies 22, no. 2/3 (1999): 161-77.
  9. Gudkov, Lev. “Derealizatsiya proshlogo: funktsii stalinskogo mifa.” Pro et Contra, November – December 2012. http://carnegieendowment.org/files/ProEtContra_57_108-135.pdf.
  10. Joenniemi, Pertti, and Marko Lehti. “On the Encounter Between the Nordic and the Northern: Torn Apart but Meeting Again?” Working Paper 36, Copenhagen Peace Research Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2001.
  11. Joseph, Jonathan. “Hegemony and the Structure-Agency Problem in International Relations: A Scientific Realist Contribution.” Review of International Studies 34, no. 1 (2008): 109-28.
  12. Kosterina, Irina, and Sergei Ushakin. “My u proshlogo ne uchimsia, my im zhiviom.” Neprikosnovenniy zapas 4, no. 102 (2015): 161-81.
  13. McDonald, Matt. “Securitization and the Construction of Security.” European Journal of International Relations 14, no. 4 (2008): 563-87.
  14. Medinsky, Vladimir. “Iz vsekh iskusstv vazhneishim dlia nas yavliaetsa