Structuralism 2 De Saussure Q A Structuralist Anthropology

  • Slides: 45
Download presentation
Structuralism (2) De Saussure Q & A Structuralist Anthropology: Levi Strauss , Example 1,

Structuralism (2) De Saussure Q & A Structuralist Anthropology: Levi Strauss , Example 1, 安卓珍妮,“Should Wizard Hit Mommy” Structuralist Narratology: V. Propp, Examples 1, 2, 3 & “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” A. J. Greimas Example 1 & “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” Readings for next week

Structuralism (2) 1. Structuralism--Basic Concepts 2. Structuralist Reading of Narratives 3. Semiotics and "The

Structuralism (2) 1. Structuralism--Basic Concepts 2. Structuralist Reading of Narratives 3. Semiotics and "The Myth Today" 4. From Structuralism to Poststructuralism: Binary Opposition & Deconstruction

Q & A (1): de Saussure, Language and Reality • What does it mean

Q & A (1): de Saussure, Language and Reality • What does it mean to say that language system is arbitrary, conventional and differential? • Does our language shape or reflect our perception of the world? – Does it make a difference to call your mother’s sister 姨 媽, aunt or Jenny? – If we do not have the word, 緣, will we feel that meeting someone is a matter of fortunate predestination? – Is there any eternal or universal essence of “mother” or “maternal love”? Can we define them without using language (as a system of relations and difference)?

Q & A (2): de Saussure’s Major ideas? 1. The synchronic vs. the diachronic;

Q & A (2): de Saussure’s Major ideas? 1. The synchronic vs. the diachronic; langue vs. parole 2. Language is a system of difference. Meaning occurs in binary opposition between two signs. (e. g. toy, boy) 3. sign = signifier and signified; the connection between them is arbitrary.

Q & A (3): Form and Structure? Form is inseparable from meaning; (composed of

Q & A (3): Form and Structure? Form is inseparable from meaning; (composed of all the literary elements in a text) Structure is what makes meaning possible. (e. g. [b] vs. [p]; subj+predicate; cooked vs. raw, etc. )

Claude Levi-Strauss 1. Studies culture as a sign system; e. g. eating customs, taboos

Claude Levi-Strauss 1. Studies culture as a sign system; e. g. eating customs, taboos related to menstruation, initiation rites, kinship relations. (e. g. ring in Chinese society; 戒 指) 2. Kinship system: structures how things or people are “exchanged” within a culture. e. g. women in exchange for dowry. 3. We think in terms of binaries. (e. g. raw vs. cooked; good vs. bad) 4. Myth: basic units – mythemes, e. g. in Oedipus myth: overrelating and underrating of blood relations

Claude Levi-Strauss on Oedipus the King overrelating of blood relations: Oedipus marries his mother;

Claude Levi-Strauss on Oedipus the King overrelating of blood relations: Oedipus marries his mother; Antigone buries her brother, despite prohibition; native-born underrating of blood relations: Oedipus kills his father, Laios; escape being native-born The heroic: Oedipus kills the Sphinx The supernatural/pre-destined: Oedipus=swollen foot; prophecy

Claude Levi-Strauss on Myth “Mythical thought always progresses from the awareness of oppositions toward

Claude Levi-Strauss on Myth “Mythical thought always progresses from the awareness of oppositions toward their resolution. ” (Structural Anthropology 224) • His approach: not to find how men think in myths, but ‘how myths think in men, unbeknown to them’ (qtd. Hawkes 41) • Myth always works simultaneously on two axes. . . like an orchestral score “

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” The play (interaction) of genres and genders. Biological history

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” The play (interaction) of genres and genders. Biological history + romance feminist utopia Male lover, male authorities, masculinity; different forms of sex wars + female lover, femininity female androgyny The binaries need definition and they change positions.

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries (ref. 梅� : 1. Beginning of Quest 生物誌

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries (ref. 梅� : 1. Beginning of Quest 生物誌 羅曼史 Present love 男性(權威or ideal) Past love 安卓珍妮 男人vs. 我 丈夫vs. 我 我 我&安文 老人家&我 (masculine vs. feminine)

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 2. Conflict/Complication: 生物誌 羅曼史 Present love 男性(權威or ideal)

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 2. Conflict/Complication: 生物誌 羅曼史 Present love 男性(權威or ideal) Past 安卓珍妮、洋紫荊 男人vs. 我 我與 丈夫vs. 我 (categorization) 男人 我 老人家、康教授 &我 傳真機、

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 3. Intensification climax 生物誌 羅曼史 Present love 安卓珍妮

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 3. Intensification climax 生物誌 羅曼史 Present love 安卓珍妮 我與男人( 蟒蛇) Sex battle、相機 (vs. evolution) 我 安文& 我 男性權威(權威or love) Past 丈夫vs. 我 老人家、康教授 &我

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 4. 2 nd Quest; more struggle and battle

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 4. 2 nd Quest; more struggle and battle 生物誌 安卓珍妮 羅曼史 Present love 我與男人 男性 (權威vs. love) Past 我&安文 康教授&我 (debate on evolution) 我 丈夫vs. 我、老 人家vs. 我

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 5. resolution (death, writing and waiting) feminist utopia

Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 5. resolution (death, writing and waiting) feminist utopia 生物誌 安卓珍妮 (symbolic/waiting) 安文 我 (writing, waiting, suicide) 羅曼史 Present love 我 vs 男人 男性 (權威vs. love) 丈夫 安文

Levi Strauss: examples (3) “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” preliminary understanding: Setting: a nuclear family;

Levi Strauss: examples (3) “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” preliminary understanding: Setting: a nuclear family; Characters: Jack, Jo and Clare Story within the story: Roger, mother, owl, wizard and Roger’s friends. Two sets of relationship between Jack and Jo— father/daughter, author/reader Why is Jack caught in the middle? The middle of what?

Levi Strauss: examples (3) “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” Jack and Jo—father/daughter, author/reader Confirming kinship

Levi Strauss: examples (3) “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” Jack and Jo—father/daughter, author/reader Confirming kinship Denying kinship Reading story at Jo’s interruptions nap times; wants Jo to learn helping his wife The wife’s doing it herself defending his mother Wants the wizard to beat Mommy

Structuralist narratology: Vladimir Propp syntax as the basic model: Subject + predicate = Actor

Structuralist narratology: Vladimir Propp syntax as the basic model: Subject + predicate = Actor + function Propp: 7 actors, or "spheres of action" (villain, hero, false hero, donor[provider], helper, dispatcher, princess [and her father]) and 31 functions. * Actors are not characters; they are narrative functions, or types of actions of the characters. One character can be different “actors” at different moments. (e. g. Cinderella & Snow White, The Long Enchantment. )

Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • A family in lack • Queen (bathing) +

Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • A family in lack • Queen (bathing) + Toad (H) A princess • King in pride (False Hero; only twelve golden plates ) feast • the 11 Wise Women bless (donor) vs. the 13 th curses (villain), • 12 th Wise Woman “not death but 100 -year sleep” (helper) • 11 gifts fulfilled, 1 curse shunned

Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • The King and Queen’s absence (dispatcher) • the

Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • The King and Queen’s absence (dispatcher) • the 15 -year-old princess out looking into the rooms • old tower and the spindle The spindle’s sound ‘merry’ but brings the curse on the princess: she falls into sleep. • Every being in the kingdom sleeps too. (the princess + the kingdom)

Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • Only thorny hedges grow, which kill a lot

Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • Only thorny hedges grow, which kill a lot of princes (false heroes) in their attempts to rescue the princess; • 100 year pass, a king’s son comes and hears about the story; he is not afraid; he wants to “go and see the beautiful Briar-rose. " • “When the King's son came near to the thorn-hedge, it was nothing but large and beautiful flowers ”

Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • • • 1) There she lay, so beautiful

Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • • • 1) There she lay, so beautiful that he could not turn his eyes away; and he stooped down and gave her a kiss. But as soon as he kissed her, Briar-rose opened her eyes and awoke, and looked at him quite sweetly. Without the “helper” (the 12 th Wise Woman), prince cannot rescue Briar Rose. Is the princess Punished for her curiosity? 2) only waiting to be rescued? 3) just confirmed for her beauty?

Propp: examples (1 -2) The Long Enchantment • • How is this animation different

Propp: examples (1 -2) The Long Enchantment • • How is this animation different from the traditional tale? It is the horse but not the princess that falls asleep; villain? – wizard offers the pear for no reason; Rescuer: not a prince, but the horse first and then Flora “My spell would break if for your sake a friend would dare to eat a pear. ” The fairy godmother cannot help. Promises that the pony will survive and waken after 1000 years. But then the wizard will still return. The king—helpless; burning all the pear trees only building a memorial

Example I: “The Long Enchantment” 1. Structuralist • Sender of message: Pony Receiver: Flora

Example I: “The Long Enchantment” 1. Structuralist • Sender of message: Pony Receiver: Flora • Subject (Heroine) of a Quest: Flora Object: Pony • Helper: Flora & Pony Themselves • Opponent: Wizard? Not a Fairy Not a Prince

Example I: “The Long Enchantment” 2. Sociological/Ecological: • Flora’s class background? – Why is

Example I: “The Long Enchantment” 2. Sociological/Ecological: • Flora’s class background? – Why is the pear so important? • Who is the real villain? 3. Deconstruction: – The Wizard’s message. What does the pear represent in this text? A thing in nature? Delicious food?

Example 2: “Atlanta” Mytheme: marriage of a princess From Greek myth – • Undesirable

Example 2: “Atlanta” Mytheme: marriage of a princess From Greek myth – • Undesirable – forsaken and raised during her childhood by a bear. • Love hunting; does not love men; oracle—her marriage will end in disaster; wins a lot of contests; • Her father wants her back marry her • With Aphrodite’s help, Melanion runs his race with Atlanta carrying the apples with him and wins over her. But he forgets to thank A. • Zeus (the infuriated god) turns them both into lions.

Example 2: “Atlanta” Mytheme: marriage of a princess From Greek myth – the roles

Example 2: “Atlanta” Mytheme: marriage of a princess From Greek myth – the roles of the King and the Gods –not really helpers; have their selfish desires and prejudices.

Example 2: “Atlanta” Modern version: Neither of them wants to get married.

Example 2: “Atlanta” Modern version: Neither of them wants to get married.

Propp: examples (3) James Bond’s 007 films: actor: female helpers (usu. appearing in double,

Propp: examples (3) James Bond’s 007 films: actor: female helpers (usu. appearing in double, one from the enemy’s side and one as Bond’s comrade); 1 major function: sex (with which usu. the films begin and end). 楊紫瓊 in 明日帝國(TOMORROW NEVER DIES)) – helper but not a lover; rescued and becomes a lover at the end.

Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” villain, hero, false hero, donor[provider], helper,

Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” villain, hero, false hero, donor[provider], helper, dispatcher, princess [and her father] The story The father –provider, hero/false hero, Jo – Princess? Mother –dispatcher? The typical fairy tale in it Who’s the hero? False hero? Who is the dispatcher? Who is the helper? Opponent? * How are the roles in the two stories related to each other?

Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” The story The typical fairy tale

Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” The story The typical fairy tale in it The father – provider, hero/false hero, Jo – Princess? Mother –dispatcher? The hero –Roger, The dispatcher – owl The helper –wizard Opponent –”difficulties” -- no princess; friends & parents in the background (status quo)

Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” The story The last fairy tale

Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” The story The last fairy tale in it The father – provider, hero/false hero, Jo – Princess? Mother – dispatcher? Opponent? The hero –Roger/also false hero, The dispatcher – owl The helper (? ) –wizard Opponent (? ) –mother, friends -- father in the background (status quo)

Propp & Greimas (1) Propp's seven 'spheres of action‘ Greimas’s three pairs of binary

Propp & Greimas (1) Propp's seven 'spheres of action‘ Greimas’s three pairs of binary oppositions, including: six roles (actants) 1. Subject/Object, 2. Sender/ Receiver 3. Helper/Opponent- and three basic patterns: 1. Wanting (Desire, search, or aim), 2. Exchange (communication) 3. Contradiction (Auxiliary support or hindrance).

Propp & Greimas (2) Propp's 31 functions further abstracted into Greimas’s 3 structures; for

Propp & Greimas (2) Propp's 31 functions further abstracted into Greimas’s 3 structures; for example: Propp: “One member of a family either lacks something or desires to have something. ” Disequilibrium contract broken, disjunction or Performative (out for a task)

A. J. Greimas’s universal grammar three pairs of actants: Helper/Opponent, Sender/Receiver, Subject/Object three basic

A. J. Greimas’s universal grammar three pairs of actants: Helper/Opponent, Sender/Receiver, Subject/Object three basic patterns of action (or syntagm): contractive (breaking/setting contract, alienation, reintegration ), disjunctive (departure, arrival), and performative (trial, task). deep semantic structure of human thinking and narrative.

"the semiotic rectangle” elementary structure of signification a binary opposition & their negation A

"the semiotic rectangle” elementary structure of signification a binary opposition & their negation A -A Presupposi (e. g. hetero- marriage) tion -B (e. g. incest taboo/homophobia) contradiction (Adultery) B Simple negation (e. g. incest/homosexuality)

"the semiotic rectangle” elementary structure of signification a binary opposition & their negation Neutralized

"the semiotic rectangle” elementary structure of signification a binary opposition & their negation Neutralized by divorce A -A Presupposi (e. g. hetero- marriage) tion -B (e. g. incest taboo/homophobia) (Adultery) B Complicated by Platonic love (e. g. incest/homosexuality)

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm • Story • 1. Father (Sender)

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm • Story • 1. Father (Sender) + Jo (Receiver) • 2. Father (Performative) (Contractual) + Jo (O) • 3. Father (S) + Jo asleep (O) • Typical S within the story: • 1. Roger (S) + ? (Opponent/Sender) • 2. Roger (Disjunctivedepart)(Performative) + Owl/Wizard (H) • 3. Roger (S) + ? (O) • 4. Roger (S)(Disjunctivereturn)+ Mother/Home (O) Father (Disjunctive-return)

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (2) • Story • Last S

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (2) • Story • Last S within the story: • 1. Father (Sender) + Jo (Receiver) • 2. Father (Performative) (Contractual) + getting Jo to sleep (Ob) • 3. Father author (S) + Jo reader (Opponent)(Contractual) • 4. Father threatens (Performative)/+ Jo quiet • (Ob) 5. Father going downstairs (Disjunctive)(Contractual –with both the past mother and the present wife) • 1. Roger (S) + smell (Opponent) • 2. Roger (Disjunctivedepart)(Performative) + Owl/Wizard (H) • 3. Roger (S) + Rose(O) • 4. Roger (S)(Disjunctive-return)+ Mother (not Object, but Opponent) • 5. Mother (S Helper) + old Roger (O) Wizard (Helper) old Roger (O) • 6. Jo’s – Roger (S) + Mother (Opponent) Wizard (Opponent) new Roger (S)

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (3) • Patriarchal authority (through storytelling)

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (3) • Patriarchal authority (through storytelling) Presupposition Story-engaging Contradiction Daughter’s growth contradiction (through having her opinions Simple negation story -- boring

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (4) • Patriarchal authority (through storytelling)

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (4) • Patriarchal authority (through storytelling) intensified by the Daughter’sdaughter Contradiction growth (through having her opinions Complicated by the Mother & the Wife’s Story-engaging story -- boring

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (5) • Stopped by threat Patriarchal

“Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (5) • Stopped by threat Patriarchal authority (through storytelling) Contradiction Daughter’s growth (through having her opinions) Complicated by the Mother & the Wife’s Power and Control Wife’s work, Mother’s control

Suggestions • 1. Usually interesting analysis happens when the characters break these categories or

Suggestions • 1. Usually interesting analysis happens when the characters break these categories or confuse them. 2. You can set up your own categories. 3. This kind of structuralist analysis is more useful on popular cultural products or shorter texts than novels—though the latter is not an impossible choice.

Issues for Discussion • Do we always think in terms of binaries, or two

Issues for Discussion • Do we always think in terms of binaries, or two pairs of binaries? • What else do we do after finding out the patterns?

Reading for next week 1. Textbook -- chap 4 15 -41

Reading for next week 1. Textbook -- chap 4 15 -41

References • Greimas: Major Ideas http: //www. eng. fju. edu. tw/Literary_Criticism/structuralism/Greimas_q uotes. html •

References • Greimas: Major Ideas http: //www. eng. fju. edu. tw/Literary_Criticism/structuralism/Greimas_q uotes. html • Greimas: General Introduction http: //www. eng. fju. edu. tw/Literary_Criticism/structuralism/Greimas. ht ml • Semiotic Square: http: //hypertext. rmit. edu. au/singing/essay/greimas. html