Politics as Art: The Creation of a Successful Political Brand

Nataliia К. Kravchenko, Marianna Gennadiivna Goltsova, Iryna O. Kryknitska


The article identifies the functions of the archetypal semiotic resource, based on archetypal plots, situations, characters, and symbols, in political discourse signification and mythologization. The value framework of the discourse of the Ukrainian party “Servant of the People” was laid down by the similarly-named TV series narrative, involving archetypal patterns, consonant with the values and needs of TV viewers. The stages in the formation of the main character are associated with the Hero’s journey in Joseph Campbell’s Monomyth: the search for yourself; the "initiation" experienced both oneirically and in firm reality, in a form of imprisonment; and the "return" in a renewing capacity. Plotlines-associated archetypes encompass a battle of Good and Evil, the transformation from Rags to Riches, and the theme of the Hero’s Task related to a monomyth’s circular principle. The image of the protagonist incorporates a set of archetypal characters of the Hero, Caregiver, Innocent, Rebel or Destroyer, Ruler, Seeker, Creator, Sage, Everyman, and Jester, consonant with the individual viewer’s emotional and cognitive structures. Due to their correlation with basic human values, these archetypal patterns facilitate the development of a secondary level of signification or mythologization – that of discourse-forming values. These core discourse values are most closely related to the Caregiver archetype, ambivalently embodying either the need for belonging, concern, and assistance, as well as a confirmation of one’s own sense of worth. The multimodal social semiotic analysis shows a certain rearticulation of the party’s discourse values. Their main values are still associated with the Caregiver archetype, embodied in the party name itself, “Servant of the people”, as these values unite different people into the widest possible “inner group”. However, today the core functions in the construction of party discourse belong to the values associated with the Creator archetype, addressing the highest level in the hierarchy of needs – that of Self-Actualization.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Political discourse, archetypes, monomyth, mythologem, multimodality, signification, narrative.

Tam Metin:

PDF (English)


Barthes, R. (1973). Mythologies. London: Paladin.

Bell, P. (2001). Content Analysis of Visual Images. In T. van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.), Handbook of Visual Analysis, (pp.10-34). London: Sage Publications.

Brockmeier, J., & Carbaugh, D. (Eds.). (2001). Studies in Narrative. Narrative and Identity: Studies in Autobiography, Self and Culture. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Campbell, J. (1949). The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Dunn, K. C., & Neumann, I. B. (2016). Undertaking Discourse Analysis for Social Research. University of Michigan Press.

Faber, M., & Mayer, J. (2009). Resonance to Archetypes in Media: There’s Some Accounting for Taste. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(3), 307-322.

Hansen, A., & Machin, D. (2013). Media and Communication Research Methods. Oxford: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hodge, R. V., & Kress, G. (1988). Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Howard, W. L. (2010). Archetype. R. L. Jackson & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Identity, Vol. 1., (pp.29-32). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Indick, W. (2004). Movies and the Mind: Theories of the Great Psychoanalysts Applied to Film. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland Publishers, Inc.

Izod, J. (2001). Myth, Mind and the Screen: Understanding the Heroes of Our Time. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jewitt, C. (2014). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Jewitt, C., & Oyama, R. (2001). ‘Visual Meaning: A Social Semiotic Approach’, in T. van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (eds), Handbook of Visual Analysis, (pp.134-156). London: Sage Publications.

Jung, C.G. (1976). Psychological Types. Collected works. Vol. 6. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Kravchenko, N., & Zhykharieva, O. (2020). Sign-like Pragmatic Devices: Pro et Contra. Studies about languages, 3, 70-84.

Kravchenko, N., & Pasternak, T. (2020). Institutional Eco-pragmatics vs. Anthropo-pragmatics: Problems, Challenges, Research Perspectives. Cogito. Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 12(2), 24-39.

Kravchenko, N., Davydova, T., & Goltsova, M. (2020). Comparative Study of Fairy Tale and Rap Narratives: Spaces Specificity. Journal of History, Culture and Art Research, 9(3), 155-167. DOI: 10.7596/taksad.v9i3.2747

Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. Oxford: Routledge.

Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2002). Colour as a Semiotic Mode: Notes for a Grammar of Colour. Visual Communication, 1(3), 343-368.

Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.

Leech, G. (2013). Style and Foregrounding. London and New York: Routledge.

Lindenfeld, D. (2009). Jungian Archetypes and the Discourse of History. Rethinking History, 13(2), 217-234.

Lotman, J. (2005). On the Semiosphere. Trans. W. Clark. Sign Systems Studies, 33(1), 205-229.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396.

Myss, С. Appendixes: A Gallery of Archetypes. Available at: https://www.myss.com/free-resources/sacred-contracts-and-your-archetypes/appendix-a-gallery-of-archtypes/

Najafian, M., & Ketabi, S. (2011). The Words behind Images: A Critical Social Semiotic Approach toward Analyzing Advertising. International Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 1-21.

Pearson, С. (2015). Awakening the Heroes Within: Twelve Archetypes to Help Us Find Ourselves and Transform. HarperOne.

Propp, V. (1968). Morphology of the Folktale. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Shadraconis, S. (2013). Leaders and Heroes: Modern Day Archetypes. LUX: A Journal of Transdisciplinary Writing and Research from Claremont Graduate University, 3(1).

Silverman, K. (1983). The Subject of Semiotics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introduction to Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v9i4.2885


  • Şu halde refbacks yoktur.

Telif Hakkı (c) 2020 Journal of History Culture and Art Research

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.