Abstract
The study is the first to analyze mythology associated with the death of the tourist group of Igor Dyatlov in February 1959. The event caused considerable public excitement which contributed to the emerging of a specific “Dyatlov's mythology”. The authors do not pay special attention to the circumstances of the death of Dyatlov's group, since the focus is on the study of semiotics, dynamics and structuring of Dyatlov`s mythological discourse. The authors analyze the influence of conspiratorial and nostalgic myth on the shaping of modern Dyatlov's mythology. An analysis of its specificity allows concluding that Dyatlov's mythology is transforming into a para-religious phenomenon similar to the civil religion. At the same time, Dyatlov's artifacts serve as relics, excursions to Dyatlov pass become similar to pilgrimages, and various mystical versions of events are gaining popularity among researchers. The community investigating the death of this group is strictly structured. It includes leaders — keepers of the information, “initiated ones”, “large audience of concerned” at the bottom of the pyramid, and 'heretics' outside the structure. The study is performed in line with semiotic and hermeneutic approaches using the apparatus of the theory of semiotic drift.
Highlights
The study is the first to analyze mythology associated with the death of the tourist group of Igor Dyatlov in February 1959
The event caused considerable public excitement which contributed to the emerging of a specific “Dyatlov's mythology”
The authors do not pay special attention to the circumstances of the death of Dyatlov's group, since the focus is on the study of semiotics, dynamics and structuring of Dyatlovs mythological discourse
Summary
Разновидностью технологической мифологии являются различные предположения о том, что группа пострадала в результате технологической аварии (падение ракеты) [13] или даже «секретного атомного взрыва» [21] Анализ динамики мифосферы «дятловского мифа» позволяет сделать вывод о наличии тематического семиотического дрейфа: если в первые годы общественного интереса к «дятловской теме» (начальный этап формирования мифосферы) доминировали природные версии объяснения трагедии, прежде всего связанные со сходом лавины, то на более поздних этапах развития дискурса наиболее популярными стано- В плане прагматики реализация этих стратегий в рамках природной версии оказывается затруднительной, поскольку смерть от лавины или урагана не дает семиотических оснований для реализации данных стратегий: отсутствие базовой «тайны» делает бессмысленным как само существование субкультуры дятловедения, так и объекта семиотической инклюзии — погружаться оказывается некому и не во что.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Vestnik slavianskikh kul’tur [Bulletin of Slavic Cultures]
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
