FILM CONSTRUCT MODELING: A SYSTEM OF PRECEDENT-PERSONIFIED POLITICAL MARKERS
DOI: 10.23951/2312-7899-2020-3-41-58
The article offers an authorial model for studying film construct based on cognitive-pragmatic programs. The cognitive-pragmatic program (CPP) theory synthesizes various approaches and has a wide range of applications. CPP is a conceptual matrix of meaningful activity and a support system of cognitive-pragmatic sets. This is a universal concept linking the cognitive mechanisms of an individual/collective/people with the pragmatics of cognitively conditioned behavior/action. CPPs, unlike abstract models, are found in the most diverse areas and spheres of human activity: they are not abstract schemes, but everyday (in the case of daily actions) or, on the contrary, “strategic” (for example, for a politician or artist) programming and self-programming, a vital reflection of goals, means, and results accompanied by self-identification. In terms of this theory the author considers the film construct as a specific synthetic (creolized) form of embodiment and transmission (translation) of one or several CPPs that have received the status of the foundation of subjective reality (i.e., they determine the consciousness, self-consciousness, and behavior of the characters of the film). The article substantiates the typology of film constructs according to the type of the dominant CPP built on the principle of an “inverted pyramid” (from an abstract conceptual-semantic “peak” to broad specifics). The system of precedent-personified political markers—a special system of conceptual codes of political discourse that has a precedent status in this discourse—is studied in detail. These markers are actively involved in the plot formation, in the differentiation and segmentation of the entire space of the CPP dominating in the film; they are sharp psychological indicators of the consciousness of the subjective environment of the film construct. The roles of specific markers differ, but they all characterize the aggressive and destructive internal nature of the dominant industrial CPP (Soviet ideological model), the genetic and “strategic” homogeneity of its options, which equally require manipulations with consciousness, a permanent fight against “enemies” and total terror. In general, the system of precedent-personified political markers in the space of the political (ideological) film construct is capable of embodying multi-layer semantics and can set its defining properties.
Keywords: cognitive-pragmatic program (CPP), political (ideological) film construct, political identification marker, precedent-personified marker, modeling, mythologization, total terror, viral-manipulative nature of CPP
References:
Akhiezer, A. S. (1999). Mifologiya nasiliya v sovetskiy period (vozmozhnost’ retsidiva) [The mythology of violence in the Soviet period (The possibility of relapse)]. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost’, 2, 85–93.
Anisimova, E. E. (1992). Paralingvistika i tekst (k probleme kreolizovannykh i gibridnykh tekstov) [Paralinguistics and text (To the problem of creolized and hybrid texts)]. Voprosy yazykoznaniya, 1, 71–79.
Cassirer, E. (1990). Tekhnika sovremennykh politicheskikh mifov [The Technique of Our Modern Political Myths]. Translated from English. Vestnik MGU. Seriya 7: Filosofiya – MSU Vestnik. Series 7: Philosophy, 2, 58–65.
Eco, U. (1972). Towards a Semiotic Inquiry into the Television Message. Working Papers in Cultural Studies, 2, 103–121.
Fedorov, A. V. (2000). Terminologiya mediaobrazovaniya [Terminology of Media Education]. Iskusstvo i obrazovanie, 2, 33–38.
Fet, A.I. (2005). Instinkt i sotsial’noe povedenie [Instinct and Social Behavior]. Novosibirsk: ID “Sova”.
Ivanov, D. I. (2017). The specificity of functioning of the system “subject-source - subject-interpreter” within the framework of synthetic language personality. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki – Philological Sciences. Issues of Theory and Practice, 4–1, 98–102. (In Russian).
Ivanov, D. I. (2019). Teoriya kognitivno-pragmaticheskikh programm [The Theory of Cognitive-Pragmatic Programs]. Ivanovo: PresSto.
Mamonov, V. F. (1991). Vozvrashchenie Trotskogo [The Return of Trotsky]. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 1(1), 76–81.
Metz, C. (2013). Voobrazhaemoe oznachayushchee. Psikhoanaliz i kino [The Imaginary Signifier: Psychoanalysis and the Cinema] (2nd ed.). Translated from French by D. Kalugin, N. Movnina. Saint Petersburg: European University at Saint Petersburg.
Peirce, C. S. (2000). Logicheskie osnovaniya teorii znakov [Logical Foundations of the Theory of Signs]. Translated from English by V. V. Kiryushchenko, M.V. Kolopotin. Saint Petersburg: Aleteyya.
Slyshkin, G. G., & Efremova, M. A. (2004). Kinotekst: Opyt lingvokul’turologicheskogo analiza [Cinema-Text: A Linguoculturological Analysis]. Moscow: Vodoley Publishers.
Tsiv’yan, Yu. G. (1984). K metasemioticheskomu opisaniyu povestvovaniya v kinematografe [Toward a metasemiotic description of narration in cinema]. In Yu. Lotman (Ed.), Trudy po znakovym sistemam [Works on Sign Systems] (vol. 17, pp. 109–121). Tartu: Tartu State University.
Usov, U. N. (1980). Metodika ispol’zovaniya kinoiskusstva v ideyno-esteticheskom vospitanii uchashchikhsya 8–10 klassov [Methods of Using Cinematography in the Ideological and Aesthetic Education of Students in Grades 8 to 10]. Tallin: Ministerstvo prosveshcheniya.
( 330.97 kB ) 
( 323.69 kB )
Issue: 3, 2020
Series of issue: Issue 3
Rubric: ARTICLES
Pages: 41 — 58
Downloads: 709