symbolic elements of everyday culture - MTA Szociológiai ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

VISUAL SYMBOLS OF SYSTEM CHANGE IN HUNGARY A LONGITUDINAL STUDY In this presentation we would like to show the results of our longitudinal research. The first step of our research was taken in 1985. 1 The research was about visual messages (mainly symbolic ones) of cultural institutions. We used the term „cultural institution” in a broad sense, which means that we analyzed not only schools, nurseries, houses of culture, cinemas, libraries (cultural institutions in the traditional, narrow sense): but also institutions of power (party headquarters, local government buildings, council offices); as well as institutions of religion (churches, parishes), and institutions of consumption (restaurants, cafés, pubs, clubs, etc.). Thirty thousand photos were taken in 1985; and we analyzed the symbolic visual messages conveyed by three thousand institutions. The main aspects of the analysis were the following: symbolic signs of hierarchy “Potemkin-syndrome” (the difference between the front side and back side of the same institutions) aspects concerning the degree of civilization in the institutions (the hygiene, condition of lavatories, etc.) the gardens, natural surroundings of the institutions design, visual culture of the institutions proxemic analysis of the institutions symbolic signs of identities key values, transmitted by the institutions signs of dominant ideologies cultural patterns transmitted by the institutions social patterns transmitted by the institutions centre –periphery distinction signs of creativity in the institutions signs of intimacy In 2005 we repeated the research 2 ; at which time approximately five hundred institutions were analyzed, and twenty thousand photos taken. By comparing the two states, we can register similarities and differences. Between the two phases of the research there was a change of political system in Hungary, which caused a lot of essential changes even of the general visual impression of the institutions. For reasons of space, we next present only some results of the analysis. 1 The results of this research were published in 1989 (Kapitány and Kapitány 1989). 2 Kapitány and Kapitány 2006. 44
● KAPITÁNY ÁGNES – KAPITÁNY GÁBOR ● Visual symbols of system change in Hungary ● CHANGES IN SYMBOLIC (VISUAL) SIGNS OF HIERARCHY. Hierarchy of different types of institutions In 1985 we were able to rate the institutions based on differences in their condition. These differences generally reflected the formal and informal status of the institutions. The ones in the best condition were council houses in bigger cities and county towns; churches, restaurants and nurseries; the ones in the worst condition were village halls, rural primary schools, and cinemas. Council offices are symbolic institutions of political power; restaurants can be symbolic places of financial prestige; the good condition of churches was a manifestation of the compromise between the communist state and the churches in “late socialism”. The good condition of nurseries was a result of reigning attitude in the eighties, as the expression “investment in the future” shows. The very bad condition of village halls, small schools and cinemas expressed the submissive role of culture and education. In 2005 the hierarchy of different kinds of institutions was less definite; the differences were expressed more among different items of the same type of institution. While earlier the centralized power determined the possibilities of the institutions, after the system changes several factors of differentiation appeared, and the variability of the condition of institutions has increased. Internal hierarchy of institutions Another form of hierarchy is internal to institutions. We can recognize the symbolic signs of this hierarchy, if we register the dissimilarity between the level of comfort and the visual state of rooms used by managers, directors, bosses on the one hand, and on the other the rooms provided for white collar and other workers at the same institutions. a) A very important element of the symbolism of power is the wall behind the boss’s chair. The symbolic suggestion of this part of the space: who or what is behind, at the back of the manager (who or what is his/her supporter?) In 1985 this symbolism was determined by the one party system, by communist ideology. There were the portraits of the “Fathers”, the Marxist “Holy Trinity”: Marx, Engels and Lenin, or Lenin alone. Lenin as the embodiment of Soviet supremacy was indispensable. His portraits were rather varied. We could draw up a Lenin-iconography: the more bureaucratic bosses were drawn towards the stern official portraits of Lenin, the more liberal bosses used pictures of Lenin in a less official mode. (For example, crouching on a staircase). These portraits and the national coat of arms behind the boss suggested that his supporter was the political power, the dominant ideology itself. But there were also other signs of power behind the boss, with many symbolic signs of victory; the signs of successes of the institution (medals, cups, honorary diplomas). This “meant”: the power of this boss was also based on his successes; i.e., the authorities recognize his achievements. The bosses used some other symbols on this wall: mostly military symbols and symbols of cultural authority. 45
Page 1 and 2: Studies in Sociology • Szociológ
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS Introduction . . . . . . .
Page 5 and 6: First publications Changing World-V
Page 7 and 8: ● KAPITÁNY ÁGNES - KAPITÁNY G
Page 33 and 34: SYSTEM CHANGE - SYMBOL CHANGE IN HU
Page 35 and 36: ● Kapitány Ágnes - Kapitány G
Page 43: ● Kapitány Ágnes - Kapitány G
Page 89 and 90: REFERENCES ● KAPITÁNY ÁGNES - K
Page 91 and 92: INTRODUCTION SYMBOLS AND COMMUNICAT
Page 95 and 96:
● KAPITÁNY ÁGNES - KAPITÁNY G
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Introduction SYMBOLS AND VALUES OF
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
SYMBOLS OF HUNGARIAN NATIONAL IDENT
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
PROBLEMS OF INDIVIDUALIZATION IN EV
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
REFERENCES ● KAPITÁNY ÁGNES - K
Page 221 and 222:
A NEW APPROACH TO THE ANALYSIS OF M
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
show all

symbolic elements of everyday culture - MTA Szociológiai ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?