Note | Structuralism

What is structuralism

Structuralism is a school of thought adopts a way of scientific method extracts social and human unconscious structure(s), is based on Saussurean linguistics or semiology. The concept of “structure” means a system composed of relations of things or elements. And structure is not only a set of plurality and unity, but also a whole can’t be separated and described as a system, relations and elements in a total relationship. There’s mutual effects among system, relations and elements. Structure obtains a characteristics through a process of changes. But exact concept of structure is various by authors. And structuralism has no proper manifesto and group.

This school and its movement swept over France and Europe in the 1960’s, still huge influence on humane studies and social science. The argument of structuralism led to be a criticism to rationalism, humanism and progressivism, Marxism and Sartre’s Existentialism. The viewpoint of structuralism still affects people in contemporary society.

A origin: Saussurean linguistic & semiology

A Swiss linguist, Ferdinand de Saussure create the general linguistic and semiology. These impact entirely changed the view point and the method of linguistic study.

Before de Sassure, linguists, especially comparative linguistics solely studied comparative and historical study of language. They compared and unraveled changes before and after of a language, differences among languages by phonology, syntax, lexicology and so on. And their ultimate aim is pursued the root and the entire history of the Indo-European language.

Also de Saussure is a great genius in comparative linguistics. But he felt he can’t grasp the truth of language and the true mechanism, mean and value of language forever by the study. So he was completely exhausted these endless study, and in a depressive state for a while. So he planned a study deals with general and universal system of language and human expression, as the general linguistic or semiology.

In “Course in General Linguistics” de Saussure pursued the general system of language, communication, and effects of meaning. This study brought about the school of structural linguistics. And he planned semiology, the general study of sign, precedes linguistics which got to be a major root of structuralism.

Levi-Strauss

Anthropologist, Claude Levi-Strauss applied linguistics of de Saussure and Roman Jakobson to analysis of structures of kinship or mythes in primitive societies, he proved a society composed by unconscious structures than subjective human will and decision. The rules in a structure of a society is an unconscious thing for the members of the society, so function of social structure has more important significance than subjective decision and intention of the world history.

Then Levi-Strauss showed a doubt for the idea of subjective decision by human of existentialism. He said human studies and social science should study the social structure that permits each men’s subjective decisions, the concept of a man as a subject must be resolved.

Roland Barthes

“Écrivain”, Roland Barthes rediscovered the Saussurean semiology, earnestly forwarded and applied it for analyses of literature, culture and the contemporary society. The aim of Barthes is solve the structure behind senses of which human, culture and nature form. Behind human expression and behaviour in a culture or society, there’s a certain invisible function or system.

In an essay “The Death of the Author” Barthes presented the concept of the death of the author, and criticize the author-centralism and the concept of “(grand) work” of classical literary criticism. By Barthes, an author is not the god or creator of the work, text should be read as a weaved fabric of various citations in a culture.

Louis Althusser

Philosopher, Louis Althusser re-read works of Karl Marx as a scientific epistemology or a structural relationalism analysis on economics and society.

Althusser thought, Marx’s theory must be structurally analysed, and the concepts such as “aliennation” and “reification” are eliminated by the method of epistemological break. He removed young Marx’s humanism and Hegel’s rationalism from Marx’s master-piece, The Capital.

Futhermore, Althusser made structural analysis the theory of Marx. He argued about “reciprocal effects between a superstructure and a basis”, “reproduction of relations of production”, and “ideological state apparatuses”. Then he proclaimed Marxism faces a crisis by becoming an ideological state apparatuses of the Communist Party.

Conclusion

Structuralism is a school or a method treat unconscious hidden system regulate thinking and acts of men, formed by relations of a relationship in a society or a culture.

I think structuralism is very important and still valid, and the thinking is still effective to analyse and think about a society, social movements, expressions and literature. And it’s an effective and potent way of thinking and a method of research, equal to phenomenology, existentialism, pragmatism and Wittgenstein’s language game, I think.

References

Akira Deguchi, Real Structuralism: Language, Power, Subject (NHK Publishing, 2013)

Graham Allen, Roland Barthes (Routledge, 2003)

Jonathan Culler, Roland Barthes (Oxford University Press, 2002)

Related Posts and Pages

Timeline of Philosophy

Philosophy / Philosophie

‘Introducing Barthes (A Graphic Guide)’ by Philip Thody and Piero, Icon Books

Barthes (A Graphic Guide)’ is a little introduction for french écrivain (writer) Roland Barthes. First half of this book takes up Barthes’s semiology and structuralism, second half of it explains Barthes’s literary critic. The former explains some semiological concepts and arguments giving some examples such as ‘all-in wrestling’, religion, fashion and ideology. The later explains Barthes’s literary critic to Jean Racine’s plays, Balzac’s ‘Sarrasine’, and logothetes (founder of launguage) of ‘Sade, Fourier, Loyola’.

This book attempt to critic and analysis of Barthes and his theory by his background and context the German Occupation of 1940-44, the student rebellion, the french petit bourgeois society and Marxism, Sartre’s existentialism, Freudianism, structuralism, post-structuralism. And the author described ‘Barthes as a kind of hedgehog, interested as a system whose understanding depends not upon its content but on the reactions which the signs it exploits evoke in the mind of the reader.’ Then cartoons of Barthes says ‘When I say or write something, I prevent something else from being said. I cannot help this. It is an inescapable property of language’ and ‘Texts are always open, always subject to being re-write in the mind of the reader. Literature is the proof and the assertion of human freedom.’ This kind of a post-structuralism or post-modernism view can apply Barthes’s works and this book. It’s a conclusion of this book and the thought of Barthes author of this book thinks.

A good point of this book is the graphical explanation such as ‘essential emptiness’ ‘Iganatius of Loyola’s combinatory’. And illustrations can consider the Barthes and his arguments objectively.

A problem of this book is the explanations of concept of sign in semiology. I have apprehension that beginners of semiology mistakes sign in semiology is the same as symbol, icon, characteristic or peculiarity, by the explanations and illustrations. But sign in semiology is all of artificial things and expressions includes unconscious ordinary things and phenomenons.

Introducing Barthes (A Graphic Guide)
Philip Thody, Piero
Icon Books, London, Jane 14 2011
176pp $9.95 £6.99
ISBN: 978-184831-204-3