Theoretical gesture, political gesture. Semiotics versus Cultural Studies

Abstract

Principle of pertinence, plane of immanence, objectifying distance: these are rules of semiotics perfectly integrated into the researcher’s methodology. These rules are presented as evidence in the face of relatively “neutral” objects from an ethical and political point of view. However, within the cultural phenomena that semiotics can consider as a “corpus”, there are some that challenge us directly, and in such a radical way that our first impulse would be to develop a militant discourse, far (far, really?) from the possibilities that this discipline offers us. Mass murders, crimes against humanity: how to refer to such “objects”, so axiologically marked, without breaking with the rules of analysis and at the same time without producing a “stiff”, cold, “dehumanized” discourse? To what extent is it possible in these cases to resort to the “theoretical gesture” characteristic of semiotics? Cultural Studies have tackled the problem head-on: motivated by a “political gesture”, the researcher builds his legitimacy around his direct involvement in the issues he is working on. In this context, the semiotician can only question the basis of his position, asking himself what he can contribute from his discipline, while respecting (or not) the principles that define it. This is the aim of this contribution, which presents a comparison between the semiotic perspective and the Cultural Studies’ approach, taking up previous reflections developed in collaboration with Raphaël Horrein. On this basis, I intend to address the challenges facing our discipline, as well as its possible contributions, in the face of “extreme” cultural phenomena linked to political violence.