24.01.2002, Analysis
|
The perception of any sign or symbol is not indirect and intuitive. A sign or a symbol in itself has no content, their perception is always contextual, connected with a whole network of more or less reliable, stable and conscious interpretations and meanings. A symbol or symbolic form is a metaphor connecting two worlds: the world of expression and the world of knowledge. Therefore, talk about the perception of the coat-of-arms, anthem, flag or any other symbol of Russian statehood means for researchers turn to the network of memories, opinions, ideas and sensations that are tied to this or that symbolic form by means of associations.
A short note: As we already said, any sign is part of a whole system of relations: relations of meaning, status, activity, etc. However, this web has several levels:
- first, the sign itself, the symbol;
- second, its meaning, content, expressed through a concept or system of concepts;
- third, the volume of a concept, the sign's relation to an object, which allows for full or partial extrapolation of the meaning to several objects;
- and finally, a personal meaning, subjective reality, subjective, semantic context, in which our sign is identified with personal experience (if any).
From the point of view of such a scheme, a sign is the object that is being determined, whose semantic content is determined by a) definitions accepted in society (validated interpretations), b) by the person's associations involving these interpretations, and c) by the «flow of experience,» the flow of personal experience on which an individual's inductive inferences are based.
It is important for us to note that symbols are markers that refer us to some categorized semantic field, whose components (ideally) are organized with the help of clear normative rules, to their context-semantic representation and particular interpretations.
By the text that follows we would like to outline the nature of the relations between the perception of state symbols, perception of «the state» as a concept and the people's attitudes on the state as a specific historical fact.
One of the initial premises of the poll was the assumption that attitudes towards the official symbols of the Russian state (coat-of-arms, anthem and flag) are connected with the person's attitude to the state, with the personal meaning that this concept holds for each person.
It turned out that the respondents tend to associate the words «the Russian state» with positive emotions and experiences (55% of those polled). A relatively low number of respondents (11%) appear to associate these words with negative emotions and experiences. Nine percent of those polled said they have mixed feelings about these words. Most of the positive things (36%) that people associate with the expression «the Russian state" are related to patriotic experiences: attachment to the Motherland, to their birthplace, the wish to see their fatherland happy.
- «It is my Fatherland that I love»
(open-ended question).
- «All of my family lives honestly in our country» (open-ended question).
- «No matter what Russia is like, it is still ours»
(open-ended question).
- «I was born in Russia, I grew up here, I live and work here»
(open-ended question).
At the same time, it turned out that the political feelings are not unconditional: along with the "patriotic» statements that the respondents made to support their arguments, they also used «critical» statements. Such interpretations were used even by those who said their experiences are generally positive.
- «I was born here, I am very attached to Russia, although there is a feeling of resentment against our country»
(open-ended question).
- «I am proud of Russia, but not today's Russia»
(open-ended question).
- «It is my state, but it is not as good as I would like it to be»
(open-ended question).
- «Such a rich state, with natural resources and with such people, but there are no good rulers»
(open-ended question).
- «My country is very weak, practically everything is decided by the criminal world, there is no human rights protection"
(open-ended question).
- "State officials think only about themselves, and so do the heads of enterprises, while everything should be different"
(open-ended question).
Thus, the attitude towards the Russian state is mostly determined by patriotic experiences, because for many Russians, "Russianness" is a component of their social identity. At the same time, the nature of negative and critical statements makes it possible to say that the object of patriotic experiences is distanced or differentiated. The state in its concrete and contextual expression – "the state-for-me" – as a rule, always includes statements about decline, low living standards, lawlessness and disorder (See: Rossiiskoye Gosudarstvo: Dominants. Opinion Field 2002 ¹ 001-002. )(http://www.fom.ru/survey/dominant/343/853/2772.html). On the other hand, the Russian state as a foundation for building one's own identity – "the state-is-me" – is connected with the intimate-personal variety of patriotic experiences (See: Patriotism i Patrioty: Dominants. Opinion Field 2001. ¹ 045. )(http://www.fom.ru/survey/dominant/320/777/2584.html)..
In order to get a picture of the current situation in Russia, the respondents were offered a "word game." They were asked to answer two questions (which we viewed together as specifying connotations of the concept of the state):
- "Which of these words is closest in meaning to the concept of the state: "country," "people," "power," or none of these words?;
- "And what other words that are close in meaning to the concept of the state would you name?"
Most of the respondents chose the word "people" (42%). Then came the words "country" (30%) and "power." The respondents' self-produced associations made it possible to determine the "immediate" (in the field of subjective meanings) environment surrounding these three concepts.
- In response to the second question, those who chose the word "people" as a response to the first question named words that we have referred to the categories "Fatherland, Motherland" (16%), "country, territory" (7%), and also "power, strength" (5%) (The percentage of those who chose the word "people" when answering the previous question.).
- Most of those who chose the word "country" named words that we have put in the categories "Fatherland, Motherland" (17%) and "a community of people (people, family, my friends)" (13%) (The percentage of those who chose the word "country" when answering the previous question.).
- Most of those who chose the word "power" named words that we have referred to the categories "Fatherland, Motherland" (9%), "country, territory" (7%), and also "lawlessness, corruption) (7%) (The percentage of those who chose the word "power" when answering the previous question.).
It is necessary to give an explanation here. The respondents used various words to name power and its various aspects: "government," "president," "institution of power," "authority," "strength of the authorities, might," "suppression machine," "bureaucracy," "lawlessness and corruption," etc. (See: Rossiiskoye Gosudarstvo: Dominants. Opinion Field 2002. ¹001-002.)(http://www.fom.ru/survey/dominant/343/853/2772.html). All these options account for 1% to 4% of the responses. To conduct another analysis, we decided to include them in one category ("Mention of power") and calculate the number of such responses for each of the three typological groups of respondents that chose the words "people" or "country" or "power" when they answered the first question.
Question: "And what other words that are close in meaning to the concept of the state would you name?"
| |
Question: "Which of these words is closest in meaning to the concept of the state: "country," "people," "power," or none of these words?" |
| country |
people |
power |
|
Percentage of groups (%) |
30 |
42 |
18 |
|
Mention of power |
9 |
9 |
20 |
|
Fatherland, Motherland |
17 |
16 |
9 |
|
Country, territory |
4 |
8 |
7 |
|
Community of people |
13 |
5 |
5 |
|
This table shows that the first two typological groups still fairly fully reflect each other: the respondents who chose the word "country" when they answered the first question, in response to the second question chose the community of people, and those who chose the word "people" when responding to the first question mentioned the country and territory when answering the second question. The same number of people in these two groups mentioned the "patriotic" aspect ("Fatherland, Motherland"). As to the group of respondents that chose the word "power" when answering the first question, in response to the second question most of them mentioned concepts that specify the word (i.e., this group to a considerable extent reflected itself). Moreover, it is interesting that the respondents of this group mentioned the patriotic aspect ("Fatherland, Motherland").
The following generalization can be made on the basis of the information analyzed above. The respondents who consider the concept of the state synonymous to the concept of people and country tend to tie this concept with the complex of patriotic experiences, in which "power" is mentioned less frequently and often has a negative connotation (This matches the results of the poll (although a fairy superficial one) devoted to the problem of patriotism and patriotic feelings in Russians. See: Patriotism i Patrioty: Dominants. Opinion Field ¹ 045.)(http://www.fom.ru/survey/dominant/320/777/2584.html). When the concept of the state is connected with the categories of power and administration, the complex of patriotic experiences are pushed to the periphery of the system of meanings, yielding its positions to the "power" component.
And another important thing: judging by the poll conducted on January 12-13, 2002, when people describe their reactions to the state symbols (anthem, coat-of-arms and flag) (See: Rossisky Gimn, Rossiisky Gerb, Rossiisky Flag: Dominants. Opinion Field 2002. ¹ 001-002)(http://www.fom.ru/survey/dominant/343/), they tended to mention their patriotic experiences and feeling of pride for their country. At the same time, Russians believe that respect for the state symbols to a great extent depends on people's living standards, on confidence in the authorities and the government, and their prestige in the eyes of common people (See: Rossisky Gimn, Rossiisky Gerb, Rossiisky Flag: Dominants. Opinion Field 2002. ¹ 001-002)(http://www.fom.ru/survey/dominant/343/). Thus, the attitude to state symbols is determined by "socialized," ideologically-normative experiences, as well as the intimate-personal patriotic experiences connected with the individual's personal experience and identification structures. This attitude is also influenced by the fact that people see the state as an administrative structure, with which they have some experience and about which they have certain expectations, demands and views.
The distribution of Russians' responses to the question about their attitude to the anthem, coat-of-arms and flag, depending on what words they chose as close in meaning to the concept of the state, confirms that what we said above may be true. If we consider the interpretations given by the three typological groups, we will gain a much better understanding of the motives underlying the responses to questions about the modern Russian symbols. The table given below shows us that the people that chose the word "country" as a synonym to the word "state" are more inclined to give positive responses to questions about their attitude to the Russian symbols, and the attitude to them that they assume predominates in society in general. Their opponents are those who tend to associate the concept of the state with the word "power."
|
|
All |
Question: "Which of these words is closest in meaning to the concept of the state: "country," "people," "power," or none of these words?" |
| Country |
People |
Power |
|
Percentage of groups (%) |
100 |
30 |
42 |
18 |
|
Question: "Do you like the current Russian national anthem or not?" |
|
I like it |
66 |
70 |
69 |
64 |
|
I don't like it |
11 |
10 |
10 |
13 |
|
Undecided |
23 |
19 |
21 |
23 |
|
Question: "What kind of attitude do you think predominates in society today on the Russian national anthem: respectful or disrespectful?" |
|
Respectful |
61 |
67 |
65 |
51 |
|
Disrespectful |
14 |
12 |
12 |
23 |
|
Undecided |
25 |
21 |
23 |
27 |
|
Question: "Do you like the current Russian coat-of-arms or not?" |
|
I like it |
53 |
61 |
53 |
51 |
|
I don't like it |
20 |
14 |
20 |
28 |
|
Undecided |
27 |
25 |
27 |
21 |
|
Question: "What kind of attitude do you think predominates in society today on the Russian coat-of-arms: respectful or disrespectful?" |
|
Respectful |
49 |
58 |
49 |
43 |
|
Disrespectful |
16 |
11 |
15 |
22 |
|
Undecided |
36 |
31 |
37 |
34 |
|
Question: "Do you like the current Russian flag or not?" |
|
I like it |
64 |
70 |
64 |
65 |
|
I don't like it |
16 |
13 |
17 |
19 |
|
Undecided |
19 |
17 |
19 |
16 |
|
Question: "What kind of attitude do you think predominates in society today on the Russian flag: respectful or disrespectful?" |
|
Respectful |
63 |
69 |
64 |
59 |
|
Disrespectful |
10 |
10 |
9 |
13 |
|
Undecided |
27 |
21 |
27 |
28 |
|
State symbols are formalized symbolic forms, behind which there is a vast, weakly formalized or non-formalized area of meanings, situational and contextual interpretations, personal symbols, knowledge and impressions. The perception of symbols is largely determined by the people's attitude to the set of phenomena, events, etc., which these symbols reflect. Those interpretative schemes, associations and semantic moves that are mobilized in the peoples' consciousness regarding all of the components of the area that is symbolized (i.e., reflected with the help of some system of symbols) are ways of categorizing certain symbols, ways and methods with the help of which and on the basis of which people form their own attitude to them. The perception of the state symbols cannot be formed without semantic relations with the images of the state, the country and the people's life in the country.
|
|
