Your search

This chapter first examines the history and role of the Bulgarian flag in the constitution of Bulgarian national identity, a process which began in the second half of the nineteenth century. It then proposes a semiotic model of the identity, one that centers its constructed character and flexibility while performing social interactions. A basic divide between the communicative resources of the self places a person’s individual characteristics in opposition to collective ones. The national flag and colors are interpreted among the expressive forms of the collective identity, in the subcategory of constitutive features for which an individual has no choice. An interpretation of the value flows for identity in social intercourse follows, modeled as an “ego economy” where the reception and production of recognition from and for others is seen as an “ego currency”. This model demonstrates that the particular efficacy of national symbols is amplified by the efficacy of the “nationalist libido”. The use of the nationalist flags, colors, symbols, and narrative in new media thus prepare a fertile ground for the emerging digital populism, one that is masterfully employed by right-wing figures with significant political results and disquieting prospects for the future.

This paper is a semiotics analysis of national symbols, especially national flags, seeking to insert its emergence in the context of the formation of the modern National States. The methodological approach is critical and interdisciplinary, capitalising on the contributions of Semiotics, History, Sociology and Philosophy. The flag of Brazil is analysed in a detailed manner, as a complex symbol, formed of shapes, colours, natural elements and words. From the historical point of view, the flag of Brazil is a symbol, which safeguards the past of the Brazilian Empire inside the symbol of the Republic of Brazil. From the semiotic point of view, one can see in the plan of expression a set of symbols, which allows us to realise the level of significance, there lying the dialectical conflicts of the history of Brazil. From the point of view of the current political scene, it seeks to analyse the new and main role played by the national flag, in its re-emergence among many demonstrations, and the rebirth of nationalism, within the context of economical, moral and political crises. This allows us to assess the meaning of Brazilian modernity and its future challenges.

This chapter explores philosophical and semiotic considerations pertaining to the relation between word and color and some of its social effects in four steps. 1. Flag. A first step concerns the flag as a social symbol made by fixed varieties of colors. Its colors refer to social patterns, in Occidental culture formatted along the classical theory of social contract and its individualistic, mechanistic and rationalistic features. Displacement and togetherness seem deeply engraved in the mind of the flagging individual(s), a mind often at far distance from any specific flag-event. 2. Colors. The second step is on colors and the slogan ‘colors like words’. The central question regards the words, which should serve as a parallel to colors. If a color depends on a linguistic expression, then the basis of that expression is important for color and color-experience. 3. Speech. The third paragraph emphasizes the study of the word by means of considering ‘speech’. Basic is the difference between langue and parole. ‘Word’ understood as langue functions in the slogan ‘colors like words’ whereas ‘word’ understood as parole is neglected. ‘Speech’ as the context for ‘word’ is therefore researched as a source of word–color semantics. 4. Digit. ‘From langue to parole’ is not a single static path amidst differing contexts. Recent mutations concern digital language as a future global context: (a) names play a new and different role in digital language structures, as the Internet and its multiple use of names and passwords daily demonstrates; (b) codes, in particular color codes, function like words and texts, as the website ‘electronic color code’ suggests; (c) communication unfolds beyond the limits of human will and attention; (d) the concept of O/other, the most vital component of human life and communication, does not remain unchanged in a life based on digits.

The chapter provides semiotic analysis of national flags in Russia in historical perspective and describes legal regulation of the use of flags as state symbols on federal and federal entities’ levels. Contemporary white-blue-red national flag, Soviet red flag and imperial black-yellow-white flag are analyzed in different contexts, as official state symbols and as unofficial symbols of different political movements; the evolution of their meaning with time is shown. Subjects of the Russian Federation also have their flags, which reflect their aspiration for self-identification and sovereignty within the limits of common political identity of the nation. The right to establish their own official symbols is a part of their constitutional status, and they realize this right for the construction of their regional identity within the semiotic space of Russia as a whole.There is no unity in approaches to the fixation of the legal status and description of flags on the level of federal entities, though main legal rules concerning the use of flags and subordination between the national flag and the flags of federal entities are stipulated by the federal law. Most of regional flags have been created since 1991, because these regions had no status of federal subjects before that. By their visual representation the flags differ depending on the cultural and historic characteristics of the regions. Some of them resemble the regional coat of arms, some of them try to follow the federal model by using bars of different color, some include religious symbols.Legal regulation of the use of flags includes constitutional standards, statutory standards and also provisions of criminal and administrative law on desecration of flags and on inappropriate use of the national flag, which may humiliate or publicly demonstrate disrespect for it. The judicial practice in application of these standards is, however, confusing, because the provisions lack legal certainty.

After an outline of the history, design and uses of the Australian flag, this paper considers the media frenzy and public outcry surrounding the publication of research findings identifying a relationship between the flying of Australian flags on cars for Australia Day and racist attitudes. While the findings did not surprise many social scientists, given the semiotics of the flag and its increasing use as a symbol of exclusion, they were apparently highly contentious for portions of the Australian public. This paper describes and analyses the public reaction using three case studies from among the hundreds of examples. An email, a blog discussion, and a newspaper article, are analysed to demonstrate overlapping themes focussed on racism, patriotism, and nationalism. The chapter concludes that the publicity flagging the relationship between flag use and exclusionary nationalism actually may have worked against the goal of producing a considered debate about appropriate forms of nationalism and flag use, delivering the flag into the hands of exclusionary nationalist.

This paper aims to find the commonness in tangible-intangible cultural heritage among the three flags (South Korea, North Korea, Unification) as a means for uniting Korea. Accordingly, theories of emotions, colours and shapes, including semiotic interpretations are its methodology. Semiotics offers flexibility in finding the commonness between the three flags in different situations and describes the process of encoding and decoding as an interpretative framework. Decoding interprets and evaluates the meaning concerning the relevant signs, which are systems of related conventions for correlating signifier and signified in specific domains. (i) The South Korean flag has three parts composed of a white rectangle, a red-blue circle, Taeguk, and four black trigrams. White is a traditional colour of representing peace and purity; the red-blue circle in the middle is the Yin-Yang philosophy of the universe. The red half is positive forces and the blue half negative ones. In 1882, King Kojong of the Joseon dynasty (1392–1910) instructed a circle which combines the red/king, blue/officer and white/people. (ii) The North Korean flag consists of a red panel, bordered by a white stripe and a blue stripe. The red panel contains a red star, a symbol of communism and socialism within a white circle. The red expresses revolutionary traditions; the blue for sovereignty, peace and friendship; the white for purity. (iii) The Unification flag represents a united Korea as one team in sports events. On the white background, a blue silhouette of the Korean peninsula appears in the centre.

In the passage of the Course in General Linguistics where Ferdinand de Saussure first foresaw the necessity to develop a new discipline called “semiology”, “nautical flags” are prominently listed among its objects of inquiry. Flags, indeed, are naturally interesting objects for semiotics, not only because they signify through a systematic display of forms and colors, but also because of the specific pragmatics of such display. A flag can be thought of abstractedly, as an array of symbols, but it features also a specific materiality, wherein two elements particularly stand out: (1) the flag is generally a textile; (2) this textile is meant to interact with a natural element, the wind. Flags are so symbolically important also because they seem to acquire an individual agency when they wave in the wind, and therefore to confer this autonomous agency to the cultural ideas which they stand for. The paper investigates this particular semiotics in relation to opposite ideological usages of the Italian national flag, meant to signify an either inclusive or exclusive identity.

The “circle of twelve golden stars on a blue background” initially adopted by the Council of Europe in 1955, was gradually embraced by the European Union (EU) institutions and now is a widely known symbol of the EU, both within and outside of its external borders. Its widespread use was supposed to support the construction of “European identity” in addition to the existing national identities of the peoples of Europe. The present chapter explores the history and semantics of the European banner in order to appreciate its reception by the European citizens. Drawing from the historical circumstances of its adoption, the chapter then proceeds with the discussion on the use of the “EU flag” in two non-EU countries: Moldova and Serbia. A brief overview of the historical and current political contexts in these jurisdictions explores whether the use of the European symbol in these countries contributed to the “unity in diversity” as the motto of the EU suggests.

The book deals with the identification of “identity” based on culturally specific color codes and images that conceal assumptions about members of a people comprising a nation, or a people within a nation. Flags narrate constructions of belonging that become tethered to negotiations for power and resistance over time and throughout a people’s history. Bennet (2005) defines identity as “the imagined sameness of a person or social group at all times and in all circumstances”. While such likeness may be imagined or even perpetuated, the idea of sameness may be socially, politically, culturally, and historically contested to reveal competing pasts and presents. Visually evocative and ideologically representative, flags are recognized symbols fusing color with meaning that prescribe a story of unity. Yet, through semiotic confrontation, there may be different paths leading to different truths and applications of significance. Knowing this and their function, the book investigates these transmitted values over time and space. Indeed, flags may have evolved in key historical periods, but contemporaneously transpire in a variety of ways. The book investigates these transmitted values: Which values are being transmitted? Have their colors evolved through space and time? Is there a shift in cultural and/or collective meaning from one space to another? What are their sources? What is the relationship between law and flags in their visual representations? What is the shared collective and/or cultural memory beyond this visual representation? Considering the complexity and diversity in the building of a common memory with flags, the book interrogates the complex color-coded sign system of particular flags and their meanings attentive to a complex configuration of historical, social and cultural conditions that shift over time.