National Identity in the Light of Imagology

Author

Diedush Oleksiy – a third-year postgraduate specializing in Ethnology at the NASU M. Rylskyi IASFE

National Identity in the Light of Imagology

Abstract

An impact of imagology methods on the investigation of national identity in ethnology is considered in the article. The categories image and stereotype, that form the basis of the research subject of imagology and structurally integrated national identity as a process of human consciousness are examined separately.

Images, and especially stereotypes, are an integral part of human mentality. But the impression on sooner a negative nature of stereotypes and images they generate is common for science. Although such researchers as for example Walter Lippmann pointed out to the positive role of stereotypes as the mechanisms for generalization and systematization of large amount of specific information for a separate individual and a group of people. Experience and the level of intelligence are the means of the reliability of stereotypes checking, although not always protect from their negative influence in the case of their deliberate and constant supply, for example through media. Thus stereotype is widely used by means of propaganda and information war.

In the area of national relations and national identity the image and stereotype play the role of the communicational architect. Each person creates expectations to the representatives of other ethnic groups due to stereotypical images received from various sources. Also the research of mentality is possible through the images. In Ukrainian science it was done by M. Kostomarov and V. Antonovych, who actively used imagologian approaches in the study of Russian, Polish and Ukrainian mentalities.

Descriptive or uncritical approach in imagology can be used to collect data on the number of abstract phenomena, in particular, national identity, for further critical processing by specialists.

Keywords

imagology, national identity, stereotypes, images, theory of nation.

References

1. ALIYEVA, Z. A Native or Stranger Opposition in Modern Imagology. Philological Sciences at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations, 2014, pp. 189–197 [in Russian].
2. BUDNYY, Vasyl. Unravelling Circe’s Sorcery: Ethnic Slurs and Stereotypes Spotlighted by Literary Ethno-Imagology. Word and Time, 2007, 3, 52–63 [in Ukrainian].
3. VASILIEVA, T. Stereotypes within Public Conscience: Social and Philosophical Aspects: A Scientifical and Analytical Review. Moscow, 1988, 36 pp. [in Russian].
4. VOZNIUK, Olha. Stereotype as a Factor of Formation of a Vision of the Other. In: I. PAPUSHA, compiler. Studia Methodologica: An Almanac. Ternopil: TNPU, 2008, 25, 62–66 [in Ukrainian].
5. GOLUBEV, Aleksandr. The 1930s Soviet Society. In: Aleksandr GOLUBEV, ed.-in-chief. Russia and Europe in the XIXth–XXth Centuries. Problems of Mutual Perceptions of Peoples, Societies, and Cultures. Moscow, 1996, pp. 86–102 [in Russian].
6. KASYANOV, Heorhiy. Nationalization of History and an Image of the Other. Critique, Kyiv, 2006, № 9–10, 22–24 [in Ukrainian].
7. KUTSYY, Ivan. Imagology as a Research Strategy of Civilizational Images in Ukrainian Historiography. In: Research Notes of the Volodymyr Hnatiuk Ternopil National Pedagogical University. History Series, 2012, 2, 1, 240–246 [in Ukrainian].
8. LOHVYNENKO, K. Formulation of Mentality Problems in Imagology as a Historical Discipline [online]. Available from: http://history-pages.kpi.ua/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/27_17_Logvinenko.pdf [in Ukrainian].
9. MALTSEVA, Kateryna. The Self / Other Opposition as a Cultural Universality. In: NaUKMA Research Papers. Theory and History of Culture, 2002, 20–21, 6–10 [in Ukrainian].
10. 10.MELNIK, Stereotype and Stereotype Formation When in Use of Mass Communication [online]. Available from: http://psyfactor.org/lib/stereotype1.htm [in Russian].
11. MORENETS, Nadiya. Image of the Other – From Preliminary Narcissism to the Argument of Ideological Rhetoric. In: NaUKMA Research Papers. Theory and History of Culture, 2002, 20–21, 10–16 [in Ukrainian].
12. NALYVAYKO, Dmytro. Theory of Literature and Comparative Literary Research. Kyiv, 2006, 347 pp. [in Ukrainian].
13. PAPILOVA, Elena. Imagology as a Discipline of the Humanities. Rhema [online]. 2011, 4. Available from: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/imagologiya-kak-gumanitarnaya-distsiplina [in Russian].
14. SENIAVSKIY, Aleksandr, Elena SENIAVSKAYA. Historical Imagology and the Problem of «Demonizing the Enemy» (Based on Materials of the XXth-Century Russian History). Bulletin of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Journal of Russian History, 2006, 2 (6), 54–72 [in Russiaan].
15. KHOREV, Viktor. Imagology and the Studies on Russian-Polish Literary Contacts. In: Slavonic Languages, Literatures, and Cultures: Ethnic Groups in the Light of History and Modern Times. Hrodna, 2003, pp. 15–24 [in Russian].
16. BELLER, Manfred. Perception, Image, Imagology. In: BELLER, Manfred, Joep LEERSSEN, eds., Imagology. The Cultural Construction and Literary Representation of National Characters: A Critical Survey. Studia Imagologica, 13. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2007, pp. 3–16 [in English].
17. LEWIS, Charlton Thomas, Charles SHORT. A Latin Dictionary [online]. Oxford, 1879. Available from: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0059:entry=imago [in English].
18. CHERVEL, Yves. La littérature comparée. Paris, 2006, 128 pp. [in French].
19. LIPPMANN, Walter. Public Opinion [online]. Available from: https://openlibrary.org/works/OL42346W/Public_opinion [in English].