想象中的还是想象中的?相比之下,欧洲和美国。两种情况:英雄的回归和超级英雄的形象=想象力还是想象力?相比之下,欧洲和美国。两个案例:英雄归来与超级英雄形象

IF 0.2 Q4 COMMUNICATION
Fabio Tarzia, E. Ilardi, A. Ceccherelli
{"title":"想象中的还是想象中的?相比之下,欧洲和美国。两种情况:英雄的回归和超级英雄的形象=想象力还是想象力?相比之下,欧洲和美国。两个案例:英雄归来与超级英雄形象","authors":"Fabio Tarzia, E. Ilardi, A. Ceccherelli","doi":"10.1285/I22840753N17P157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the recent years, the exploration of the notion of 'social imagination' has been carried out by searching for the essence, for that archetypal collective deposits that are positioned along a line that goes from Jung to Bachelard to Durand. As a result, research has usually relied on the idea of a universal \"imagination\", which derives from disciplines such as – among others – psychology, anthropology, and neuroscience. And yet, due to the development of these studies, scholars have discussed the sociologists' task, questioning whether they have to search for the essential core of the symbolic system or to identify the particular historical and cultural meaning that this absolute system takes on from time to time. This paper intends to inspect the appropriateness of talking about the study of the \"imaginations\" rather than that of the \"imagination\". At first, we illustrate the causes of the historical-geographical differentiation of imaginaries. Then, we enquire into the role of the ideological structure and of the social, spatial, religious and economic contexts as preconditions for the construction of different and therefore specific archetypes. The investigation is performed by considering the American imagination system in contrast to the Catholic-European one. In particular, two main factors are taken into account: the re-functionalisation of Lotman's archetypal structure, i.e., the relationship between the space of consciousness and the outer space, which is expressed in the myth of the hero's return home; and the re-functionalisation of the archetype of the hero in the conception of the American superhero","PeriodicalId":40441,"journal":{"name":"H-ermes-Journal of Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immaginario o immaginari? Europa e America a confronto. Due casi: il ritorno dell'eroe e la figura del Supereroe = Imagination or imaginations? Europe and America in comparison. Two cases: the return of the hero and the Superhero figure\",\"authors\":\"Fabio Tarzia, E. Ilardi, A. Ceccherelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1285/I22840753N17P157\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over the recent years, the exploration of the notion of 'social imagination' has been carried out by searching for the essence, for that archetypal collective deposits that are positioned along a line that goes from Jung to Bachelard to Durand. As a result, research has usually relied on the idea of a universal \\\"imagination\\\", which derives from disciplines such as – among others – psychology, anthropology, and neuroscience. And yet, due to the development of these studies, scholars have discussed the sociologists' task, questioning whether they have to search for the essential core of the symbolic system or to identify the particular historical and cultural meaning that this absolute system takes on from time to time. This paper intends to inspect the appropriateness of talking about the study of the \\\"imaginations\\\" rather than that of the \\\"imagination\\\". At first, we illustrate the causes of the historical-geographical differentiation of imaginaries. Then, we enquire into the role of the ideological structure and of the social, spatial, religious and economic contexts as preconditions for the construction of different and therefore specific archetypes. The investigation is performed by considering the American imagination system in contrast to the Catholic-European one. In particular, two main factors are taken into account: the re-functionalisation of Lotman's archetypal structure, i.e., the relationship between the space of consciousness and the outer space, which is expressed in the myth of the hero's return home; and the re-functionalisation of the archetype of the hero in the conception of the American superhero\",\"PeriodicalId\":40441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"H-ermes-Journal of Communication\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"H-ermes-Journal of Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1285/I22840753N17P157\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"H-ermes-Journal of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1285/I22840753N17P157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,对“社会想象”概念的探索一直是通过寻找本质来进行的,寻找沿着从荣格到巴切拉德再到杜兰德的一条线定位的原型集体沉积物。因此,研究通常依赖于普遍的“想象”概念,这种概念来源于心理学、人类学和神经科学等学科。然而,由于这些研究的发展,学者们讨论了社会学家的任务,质疑他们是否必须寻找象征系统的本质核心,或者识别这个绝对系统不时承担的特定历史和文化意义。本文旨在考察研究“想象”而非“想象”的恰当性。首先,我们阐述了想象的历史地理分化的原因。然后,我们探讨了意识形态结构以及社会、空间、宗教和经济背景的作用,它们是构建不同的、因此是特定原型的先决条件。调查是通过考虑美国的想象系统与欧洲天主教的想象系统进行的。特别是,考虑了两个主要因素:洛特曼原型结构的重新功能化,即意识空间与外部空间之间的关系,这在英雄回家的神话中得到了表达;以及美国超级英雄概念中英雄原型的重新功能化
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Immaginario o immaginari? Europa e America a confronto. Due casi: il ritorno dell'eroe e la figura del Supereroe = Imagination or imaginations? Europe and America in comparison. Two cases: the return of the hero and the Superhero figure
Over the recent years, the exploration of the notion of 'social imagination' has been carried out by searching for the essence, for that archetypal collective deposits that are positioned along a line that goes from Jung to Bachelard to Durand. As a result, research has usually relied on the idea of a universal "imagination", which derives from disciplines such as – among others – psychology, anthropology, and neuroscience. And yet, due to the development of these studies, scholars have discussed the sociologists' task, questioning whether they have to search for the essential core of the symbolic system or to identify the particular historical and cultural meaning that this absolute system takes on from time to time. This paper intends to inspect the appropriateness of talking about the study of the "imaginations" rather than that of the "imagination". At first, we illustrate the causes of the historical-geographical differentiation of imaginaries. Then, we enquire into the role of the ideological structure and of the social, spatial, religious and economic contexts as preconditions for the construction of different and therefore specific archetypes. The investigation is performed by considering the American imagination system in contrast to the Catholic-European one. In particular, two main factors are taken into account: the re-functionalisation of Lotman's archetypal structure, i.e., the relationship between the space of consciousness and the outer space, which is expressed in the myth of the hero's return home; and the re-functionalisation of the archetype of the hero in the conception of the American superhero
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
9 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信