VISUAL SEMIOTICS OF FEMININE FASHION: A CONCISE ANALYSIS
DOI: 10.23951/2312-7899-2019-1-173-195
In the paper, the structure, composition and properties of feminine vestimentary fashion as a visual symbolic system, are studied. It is found out that the system of female fashion cannot be deduced as a simple derivative of the costume design either in synchronic or diachronic (historical) aspect. The methodology used in the work includes techniques and methods of semiotic analysis proposed by R. Barthes, Prince N. Trubetzkoy, L. Hjelmslev, A. Martinet and Ch. Peirce. It is shewn that throughout the history the semiotic potential of fashion has always been unevenly distributed between the two genders. The man has always considered clothing exclusively as an object of use and necessity, while on the basis of the costume design, the woman was able to create a complex visual semiotic system of fashion completely separate and unrelated to the costume design directly. The real clothing, conditioned by its goals and purposes, does not mean anything. Women’s fashion, by contrast, means and represents, encodes and transposes the meanings and denotes and connotes the signifiers. Feminine fashion simulates symbolic and social reality and builds a new world of the imaginary, drawing horizons of appearances and expanding the semantic foundations of the phænomenology of clothing. In general, female fashion system is as complex as the real clothes are simple. Even in the extreme case of nudity, female nakedness transforms to a semiotic system. An approach to the classification of visual signs of women’s fashion is proposed, according to which these signs with respect to mobility can be a) static, b) dynamic and c) static-dynamic. According to the message of meaning aimed at the recipient, the signs can be divided into: i) semantic signs, ii) signs-ciphers, which, in turn, are divided into ii, α) purely cryptographic signs and ii, β) simulacra, and iii) signs-imperatives. It is revealed that the semiotic chains built by women’s fashion can be of four levels: 0) the level of expediency, 1) main denotative level, 2) level of symbolic ritual tradition (level of initial connotation of meanings), 3) level of fashion mythology (an aggregate of many levels of subsequent connotation of meanings).
Keywords: fashion, feminine fashion, vestimentary code, visual vestimentary sign, semiotics of fashion
References:
Afonasina 2014 – Afonasina A. S. Ancient literary sources on painted statues. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics. 2014. 1 (1). P. 31–40. In Russian.
Afonasina 2018 – Afonasina A. S. The letters of the “Pythagorean” women Melissa to Kleareta and Myia to Phyllis. A commented translation into the Russian. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2018. 12. 1. P. 276–286.
Arkhangelskaya 2002 – Arkhangelskaya V. N. The interactions in the modern Russian family. The Inhabitants. 2002. 2. P. 33–52. In Russian.
Avanesov 2018 – Avanesov S. S. The body and the yarn. A visualization of a metaphor in the Annunciation iconography. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2018. 12. 2. P. 523–534. In Russian.
Barthes 1975 – Barthes R. Roland Barthes par Roland Barthes. Paris, 1975.
Barthes 2003 – Barthes R. Système de la mode. Transl. into Russian. Moscow, 2003.
Baudrillard 1980 – Baudrillard J. De la seduction: L’horizon sacré des apparences. Paris, 1980.
Baudrillard 1976 – Baudrillard J. L’échange symbolique et la mort. Paris, 1976.
Benhabib 2002 – Benhabib S. The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton, NJ, 2002.
Bernatonite 2016 – Bernatonite A. K. Andrzej Wajda and screen adaptation of Russian classics. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics. 2016. 4 (10). P. 93–108. In Russian.
Bernatonite 2017 – Bernatonite A. K. The semantics of the images of family members in their relations with the guest in the text of P. P. Pasolini’s script and in his film “Teorema”. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics. 2017. 2 (12). P. 125–145. In Russian.
Bourdieu 1975 – Bourdieu P. Le couturier et sa griffe: contributions à une théorie de la magie. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales. 1975. 1. P. 7–34.
Dogo 2015 – Dogo D. Building the image of Russian political conspirators in early Soviet cinematography. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics. 2015. 2 (4). P. 69–81.
Dulgheru 2014 – Dulgheru E. The sacred in the films of Andrei Tarkovsky. The archetype of the house. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics. 2014. 2 (2). P. 88–100. In Russian.
Eco 2006 – Eco U. La Struttura assente: introduzione alla ricerca semiologica. Transl. into Russian. St. Petersburg, 2006.
Goodman 1972 – Goodman N. Problems and Projects. Indianapolis, IN, 1972.
Hjelmslev 1959 – Hjelmslev L. Essais linguistiques. Copenhagen, 1959.
Hugo 2002 – Hugo V. L’Homme qui rit. Paris, 2002.
Irigaray 1984 – Irigaray L. Etique de la Différence Sexuelle. Paris, 1984.
Khitruk 2017 – Khitruk E. B. “Male issue” in the works of Andrei Tarkovsky. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics. 2017. 2 (12). P. 146–154. In Russian.
Kireeva 1976 – Kireeva E. V. The History of Costume. Moscow, 1976. In Russian.
Lacan 1953 – Lacan J. Fonction et champ de la parole et du langage en psychanalyse. Rapport du Congrès de Rome tenu à l’Istituto di Psicologia della Universitá di Roma les 26 et 27 septembre 1953. URL: http://aejcpp.free.fr/lacan/1953-09-26b.htm
Lévi-Strauss 2003 – Lévi-Strauss C. Anthropologie structural. Paris, 2003.
Lévi-Strauss 2002 – Lévi-Strauss C. Les structures élémentaires de la parenté. Paris, 2002.
Martindale 1990 – Ovid Renewed: Ovidian Influence on Literature and Art from the Middle Ages to the Twentieth Century. Ed. by Ch. Martindale. Cambridge, 1990.
Martinet 1960 – Martinet A. Eléments de linguistique générale. Paris, 1960.
Meeusen 2018 – Meeusen M. Aristotelian Natural Problems and Imperial Culture: Selective Readings. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2018. 12. 1. P. 28–47.
Myakin 2018 – Myakin T. G. De poetis Lesbiorum, de herma, deo fertilitatis, et de mysteriis Artemidis apud Mytilenaeos olim celebratis. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2018. 12. 2. P. 349–364.
Myakin 2019 – Myakin T. G. The goddess Venus in Lucretius’ poem “De rerum natura”. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2019. 13. 1. P. 153–179. In Russian.
Obraztsov 1978 – Obraztsov S. V. Relay Race of Art. Moscow, 1978. In Russian.
Panagiotarakou 2019 – Panagiotarakou E. Rational actors? Hippias and Aristogeiton. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2019. 13. 1. P. 19–31.
Protopopova, Garadja 2018 – Protopopova I. A., Garadja A. V. Reading a woman. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2018. 12. 2. P. 433–443.
Sharov 2019 – Sharov K. S. Ancient Rome and female administrators. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2019. 13. 1. P. 106–114. In Russian.
Thackeray 1992 – Thackeray W. M. Vanity Fair. London, 1992.
Troubetzkoy 1949 – Troubetzkoy N. S. Principes de phonologie. Paris, 1949.
Vedeshkin 2018 – Vedeshkin M. A. Bribe and Punishment: To the Question of Persistence of Pagan Cults in Late Antiquity. ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and Classical Tradition. 2018. 12. 1. P. 259–275.
Zborovsky 1988 – Zborovsky E. M. According to the Laws of Beauty. Moscow, 1988. In Russian.
( 2.07 MB ) 
( 2.03 MB )
Issue: 1, 2019
Series of issue: Issue 1
Rubric: ARTICLES
Pages: 173 — 195
Downloads: 1167