THEATRICALITY AS “AFFECTIVE REALITY” IN THE SOCIO-CULTURAL EXISTENCE OF HUMAN
Abstract
The presence of theatricality as an "affective reality" in the structures of a person's sociocultural existence is revealed. It is shown that the phenomenon of theatricality is inherent in social activity, and the desire to emulate and imitate confirms the readiness to reproduce and repeat certain actions that are rooted in human nature. The understanding of the socio-cultural space as artificial within the framework of the structural-semiotic approach is substantiated, its characteristics such as tension, brokenness, which reflect the features of theatricality in the perception of social reality, are revealed. Methods of creating social practices initiated by the characters of the social space, both deliberate and unnatural, have been studied. The communication level of theatricality is analyzed, in which the means of mass communication, which provide the affective reality of theatricality, become a source of increasing riskogenic situations in modern society. Dialogicity, as an essential characteristic of theatricality, consists in the possibility of the convergence of different points of view, the identification of their inherent features and the perception of the values of another social group as an equal element of the social space. It was revealed that the suggestive aspect of theatricality should be considered as a way of influence of a dominant social group on other social groups by creating ideologies and symbolic illusions that reduce the level of social tension. The meaning of rituals, which constitute the praxeological level of theatricality, is determined, since it is with the help of rituals that the government carries out its performative function, contributing to the production and reproduction of social practices. It is shown that the social space, according to the structural-semiotic approach, is constructed in such a way that characters occupying similar or neighboring positions are in a state of affectation, are subject to similar conditions, and can have similar dispositions and interests, and therefore conduct similar practice.
Downloads
References
Berger, T., Lucman P. (1991). The Social Construction of Reality. London: Penguin Books.
Debord, Guy. (1990). Comments on the Society of the Spectacle. London - New York: Verso.
Dux, G. (1991). Communicative Reason and Interest: on the Reconstruction of the Normative Order in Societies Structured by Egalitarianism or Domination. Communicative Action. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 74-90.
Encyclopedia of European Social History from 1350 to 2000. (2001). Detroit: Charles Scribner's Sons. Vol. 5.
Fischer-Lichte, Erika. (1999). Kurze Geschichte des deutschen Theaters. Tuebingen; Basel: Francke. https://doi.org/10.36198/9783838516677
Gazniuk, L.М. (2008). Filosofski etiudy ekzystentsialno-somatychnoho buttia: monohrafiia. Kyiv.: PARAPAN, 368. (in Ukrainian)
Gazniuk, L., Beilin, M. (2020). Transformatsiia bazhannia v suspilstvi «postspozhyvannia». Visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni V. N. Karazina. Seriia «Filosofiia. Filosofski perypetii», 63, pp. 59-70. https://doi.org/10.26565/2226-0994-2020-63-7. (in Ukrainian)
Gazniuk, L., Dyachenko, Y., Kovalenko, J., Semenova, Yu. (2020). Man In The Media Technology Industry. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 108, pp. 618-623. doi: 10.15405/epsbs.2021.05.02.76https://www.europeanproceedings.com/article/10.15405/epsbs.2021.05.02.76
Gazniuk, L.M., Semenova, Yu. A. (2020). Fashion industry as a representative space of human being. Research, challenges and development prospects in the area of social sciences: Collective monograph. Riga: Izdevniecība “Baltija Publishing”, pp. 89-106. https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-588-42-6/89-106
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gregory, D. (1994). Geographical Imaginations. Cambridge & Oxford: Blackwell.
Harvey, D. (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity. An Enquiry into the Origins Cultural Change. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hindess, B. (1977). Philosophy and Methodology in Social Sciences. New Jersey, Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press.
Kolisnyk, O. V. (2016). Teatr u sotsiokulturnii dynamitsi sohodennia. Aktualni problemy filosofii ta sotsiolohii, 11, pp. 56-58. (in Ukrainian)
Pfister, M. (1988). Das Drama: Theorie und Analyse. Munchen: W. Fink.
Prokopovych, L.V. (2019) Teatralnist v sotsiokomunikatyvnykh proiavakh kultury: sotsialno-filosofske doslidzhennia. Odesa: Ekolohiia. (in Ukrainian)
Copyright (c) 2024 Лідія Газнюк , Юлія Семенова
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication of this work under the terms of a license Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
3.gif){kind=logo}
