Article: PDF
DOI: 10.51762/1FK-2022-27-01-07
Abstract: The paper will explore Yurii M. Lotman’s uses of the concept of a ternary system. It is born as a response to the limitations of the semiotic models based on binary oppositions. At the same time, binaries for Lotman are closely connected to Russia’s cultural dynamic, and therefore, this seemingly “pure” theoretical concept appears heavily charged with political meanings. As B. M. Gasparov, V. Zhivov, and M. Waldstein demonstrated, Lotman’s dualist interpretation of Russian cultural dynamics revitalized the opposition Russia/West as the central for the interpretation of Russia’s cultural and historical dynamics (“Rol dual’nykh modelei…”). In the 1980s, Lotman has introduced the idea of a ternary system as an overlap of two binary systems; having embedded it in the everyday life (“byt”) and exemplified by Pushkin, Tolstoy, and Chekhov, he opened up the possibility to reveal the explosive political meaning hidden in late Soviet consumerist and everyday culture, yet, this direction has never been explored, even by the means of the Aesopian language. In the work of post-Soviet period Culture and the Explosion, the ternary model has been finally applied to political processes yet at the same time Lotman simultaneously declared it unrealizable. The paper will attempt to explain why Lotman’s concept of Russian culture has ejects ternary models, despite earnest attempts to embed them in cultural tradition, and how this “stutter” was reflective of internal limitations of the late Soviet self-conceptualization (meta-description) through the Moscow-Tartu semiotics.
Key words: The concept of Russian culture; cultural semiotics; binary and ternary models; “Culture and the explosion”

Для цитирования:

Липовецкий, М. Н. Tertium Non Datur: к проблеме тернарных систем в семиотике Ю. М. Лотмана / М. Н. Липовецкий // Philological Class. – 2022. – Vol. 27 ⋅ №1. – С. 63-67. DOI 10.51762/1FK-2022-27-01-07.

For citation

Lipovetsky, M. N. (2022). Tertium Non Datur: A Problem of the Ternary System in Yuri M. Lotman’s Semiotics . In Philological Class. 2022. Vol. 27 ⋅ №1. P. 63-67. DOI 10.51762/1FK-2022-27-01-07.

About the author(s) :

Mark N. Lipovetsky

Columbia University (New York, USA)

ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9402-6583

Publication Timeline:

Date of receipt: 10.02.2022; date of publication: 30.03.2022

References:

Bakhtin, M. M. (1994). Problemy tvorchestva Dostoevskogo [Problems of Dostoevsky’s Creativity]. In Problemy poetiki Dostoevskogo. Kiev.

Dyoring-Smirnova, R., Smirnov, I. P. (1980). «Istoricheskii avangard» s tochki zreniya evolyutsii khudozhestvennykh sistem [“Historical Avant-Garde” in Terms of the Evolution of Art Systems]. In Russian Literature. Vol. VIII. No. 5, pp. 403-468.

Dobrenko, E. (2001). Sotsrealizm i mir detstva [Socialist Realism and the World of Childhood]. In Gyunter, H., Dobrenko, E. (Eds.). Sotsrealisticheskii kanon. Saint Petersburg, Akademicheskii proekt, pp. 32-41.

Il’in, I. (2001). Postmodernizm: Slovar’ terminov [Postmodernism: Glossary of Terms]. Moscow, Intrada. 384 p.

Kristeva, Yu. (1997). Bolgariya, bol’ moya [Bulgaria, My Pain] / transl. by E. Bogatyrenko. In Inostrannaya literatura. No. 10. URL: https://magazines.gorky.media/inostran/1997/10/bolgariya-bol-moya-perevod-sfranczuzskogo-e-bogatyrenko.html (mode of access: 22.02.2022).

Kuritsyn, V. (2000). Russkii literaturnyi postmodernizm [Russian Literary Postmodernism]. Moscow, OGI. 286 p.

Lotman, Yu. M. (2001). Kul’tura i vzryv [Culture and Explosion]. In Semiosfera. Kul’tura i vzryv. Vnutri myslyashchikh mirov. Stat’i, issledovaniya, zametki. Saint Petersburg, Iskusstvo-SPB, pp. 12-148.

Lotman, Yu. M. (1997). O russkoi literature. Stat’i i issledovaniia: Istoriya russkoi prozy, teoriya literatury [About Russian Literature. Articles and Research: History of Russian Prose, Theory of Literature]. Saint Petersburg, Iskusstvo-SPB. 848 p.

Lotman, Yu. M., Uspensky, B. A. (2002). Rol’ dual’nykh modelei v dinamike russkoi kul’tury (do kontsa XVIII veka) [The Role of Dual Models in the Dynamics of Russian Culture (Until the End of the 18th Century)]. In Istoriya i tipologiya russkoi kul’tury. Saint Petersburg, Iskusstvo-SPB, pp. 88-115.

Paramonov, B. (1994). Ion, Iona, Ionych [Ion, Iona, Ionych]. In Opyty. Saint Petersburg, Paris. No. 1.

Shmitt, K. (2000). Politicheskaya teologiya [Political Theology] / ed. by. A. A. Filippova. Moscow, KanonPress-C. 336 p.

Van Baak, J. J. (1987). Avangardistskii obraz mira i postroenie konflikta [The Avant-Garde Image of the World and the Construction of Conflict]. In Russian Literature. Vol. 21. No. 1, pp. 1-10.