Ekspertiisihinnang KOV 2013 reklaami kohta

Randviir, Anti 2014. Ekspertiishinnang Tartu Ülikooli semiootikaosakonna ekspertidelt KOV 2013 reklaami kohta.

Vastata järgmistele küsimustele:

1. Kas isiku (vastavalt lisadus esitatule) fotoga reklaamimimist asutuse X välisseinal (või teleeetris) ja vahetult enne valimisi saab käsitleda tema isikliku valimisreklaamina?
2. Kui jah, siis milliste tunnuste alusel?
3. Kas ja milliste tunnuste alusel esitatud reklaamid võivad olla selle erakonna, kuhu eksponeeritud isik kuulub, valimisreklaamid?

(lk 2)

Viimasel ajal olen vahelduse jaoks hakanud lugema ka poliitiliste päevateemadega seostuvaid dokumente. Näiteks vabariiklaste poolt kirjutatud ja kongressi läbinud, natuke ka Eesti julgeolekut puudutavat, seaduseelnõu "Russian Aggression Prevention Act of 2014" ja Tallinna linnakantselei poolt tellitud ja rahvusvahelise rühma poolt läbi viidud analüüsi käesolevas hinnangus puudutatud KOV 2013 elektroonhääletuse süsteemi kohta, "Security Analysis of the Estonian Internet Voting System". Ma loen selliseid asju eeldusega, et neist võib midagi õppida Eesti ja maailma kohta, ükskõik kui pinnapealne ja võõras see ka poleks. Käesolevat ekspertiisi loen märksa suurema huviga, sest selle viis läbi oma osakonna õppejõud. Semiootiline ekspertiis pole mitte ainult erakordne, vaid tõenäoliselt ka õpetlik. Mis tunnuste alusel, tõepoolest, saab poliitiku pildiga reklaami pidada valimisreklaamiks? Vastupidiselt teaduslikule artiklile tundub siin olevat järjekord vastupidine: kõigepealt "empiiriline" osa ehk plakatite analüüs ja seejärel teoreetiline osa ehk vastused nendele küsimustele. Oma lugemisega aga lähen lineaarselt nii kuidas tekst juhatab; muidu pole pärast teooria lugemist äkki nii huvitav.

Plakati vormiline struktuur ja süntaktilised elemendid (lk 4)

Esimene asi mis silma torkab on semiootilise terminoloogia segu. Formal structure tuleb eeldatavasti vormikoolkonnast või Jakobsonilt/Lotmanilt; süntaktiliste elementide puhul tahaks öelda, et see on Morris, aga jällegi ei pruugi olla. Huvitav on sõnapaaride kooslus - miks mitte vormilised elemendid ja süntaktiline struktuur? Hmm, niipidi võiks pigem rääkida keelest. Pildi süntaktilisteks elementideks on siin ilmselt kujutatud isikud, tekst ja Tallinna logo. Viimane rida ütleb, et "Süntaktiliste elemetide hulka kuulub ka plakati värvilahendus." Aga kuidas väljendub vormiline struktuur? Eeldatavasti ilmneks vormiline struktuur süntaktiliste elementide korrastuses. Ehk: siin peaks vististi olema kirjeldus kuidas kujutatud isikud, tekst ja logo üksteise suhtes paigutatud on. Ilmselt selline kirjeldus ei oleks analüüsile midagi märkimisväärset juurde andnud.

[Plakati süntaktika ja semantika] Pildi keskmes on Tallinna linnapea ja Keskerakonna Esimees Edgar Savisaar, tema paremal käel Jaanus Mutli ning vasakul Arvo Sarapuu. (lk 4)

Siin on küll viide Morrise mõistetele, aga see selleks (huvitav oleks siin hoopis Morrise tüpoloogia - identifiors, designators, appraisors, prescriptors - kasutamine). Seda pilti (käesoleva postituse päis) vaadates on tõepoolest silmatorkav, et Edgar Savusaar on pildi keskel. Meenub nõukogudeaegne pilt Tartu turuhoonest, mille päis oli täis tähtsate tegelaste profiilipilte ja Stalini oma oli täpselt keskel. See on vististi nõukogude ajast Savisaarele külge jäänud tarkus, et kõige tähtsam mees peab keskel olema.

Ruum, mille kolme ametniku foto plakatil võtab, on umbes 73%. See on ainuvõimalikult tõlgendatav süntaktilise dominandina, mis plakati kui teate puhul on ka tähenduslik ehk semantiline domineerimine. Foto kolmest ametnikust allutab dominandina plakati kui teksti kõik muud elemendid endale ning loob niinimetatud semantilise perspektiivi. (lk 4)

Ruumisemiootik muidugi arvestab dominantseid elemente ruumi järgi. Protsent tundus aga arbitraarne. Selle kontrollimiseks paigaldasin GIMP-ile scripti selection-stats, mis mõõdab selekteeritud osa protsentuaalsust kogu pildi suhtes. Selekteerimiseks lõikasin ma esiteks pildist välja ainult plakati osa ja perspektiivi-tööriistaga kohendasin nurkasid. Seejärel lõikasin suhteliselt lohakalt, aga enam-vähem täpselt, välja kolm tegelinskit ja nende instrumendid. Lõpptulemuseks sain 42%. Siin on minu lõige:

Ma ei tea kuidas Randviir 73% sai, aga samas ei pea ma seda protsentuaalsust ka väga tähtis. Isiklikult pean palju olulisemaks seda, et need kolm tegelinskit on esiplaanil ja staadion on sekundaarne, lihtsalt mingi taust. Kuna minu asi pole mitte ruum vaid kehad, siis pean siin dominandiks hoopis seda, et kõik kolm tegelinskit vaatavad kaamerasse, läbi neljanda seina, vaatajale otsa. Kui reklaami objektiks oleks staadion, siis võiksid need kolm troppi vabalt pildil hängida, aga nad vaataksid staadionit. Siin pole staadion ise osa visuaalsest interaktsioonist vaid on redutseeritud taustale. Pilt ei ütle, "vaadake, staadion!" vaid midagi stiilis "vaadake meid, me oleme bänd vms ja meie nimed on nii tähtsad, et need on meie silmade kõrvale kirjutatud". Kui see oleks staadioni ja selle avamise reklaam siis oleks kohane pildistada staadionit ennast (kaugelt, ülevaatlikult) või ehk isegi sportlasi seda staadionit kasutamas. Mingid muusikainstrumentidega poliitikud ei puutu üldse teemasse ja on ilmselgelt roninud pildile mingitel välistel põhjustel. Randviirul on õigus, et kolm ametnikku on siin pildi dominant. Me arvamused erinevad vaid selle poolest, mille põhjal. // Ennetavalt pean ennast õigustama, et ütlesin ametnike kohta, et nad on tropid. Eesti Slängi Sõnaraamat määratleb troppi kui poissi kes on "Ülimalt kole ja täielik lollpea". Siin on minu selline määratlemine vähem seotud välimuse või arukusega vaid rohkem käitumisega. Kui ma näeksin selles staadioni-pildil nt sportlast venitamas siis see oleks normaalne. Kui ma näen staadionimurul seismas ülikondades ametnikke naeratamas oma lolli poliitikunaeratust ja hoidmas kohmakalt muusikainstrumente, siis hüppab täiesti loomulikult pähe, et need tüüpid on tropid.

Kui tegi on Hiie staadioni remondijärgse taasavamisega, siis tekib küsimus: mis seos on fotol kujutatud isikutel Hiiu staadioni avamisega ja/või selle taasavamisega peale selle, et kõik kolm on Tallinna linnaametnikud? (lk 4)

Ilmselgelt tuleb selle reklaami semiootilisest tekstist lugeda välja iseenesestmõistetav lugu kolmest linnaametnikust kes oma vabal ajal harrastavad kolmeliikmelise orkestrina spordiüritustel taustamuusika mängimist. Edgar Savisaar teadupoolest on ka albumi avaldanud muusik, kel on last.fm-i andmetel vähemalt 14 kuulajat ja tema lugusid on kokku kuulatud vähemalt 111 korda. Huvitaval kombel on seda statistiliselt sama palju kui Barthol Lo Mejor'i lool pealkirjaga "Edgar Savisaar" (7 kuulajat ja 43 kuulamist). Selline statistika ei ole jällegi väga tähenduslik, aga isiklikult ütleksin, et Bartholi lugu on päris hea. Igal juhul on herr Savisaar multitalentne inimene ja siin võib välja lugeda, et Hiiu staadioni taasavamisel ei hakanud keegi mõtlemagi mingi bändi palkamisele kui omad ametnikud on nii andekad (ja neid pingutatud naeratusi vaadates ütleks, et hädasti vajavad gig'i). Ürituse kava küll ütleb, et avamispeo viis lõpule Lenna Kuurmaa kontsert, aga kust mina peaksin teadma - äkki "Lenna Kuurmaa" on Savisaare, Muuli ja Sarapuu bändi nimi...

Plakatil edasisuunavat informatsiooni lisateabe kohta ei leidu. Teksti ja auditooriumi vahel seega sidet ei teki. (lk 4-5)

No mis mõttes ei teki? See sama uudislugu millele plakat ei viita, ütleb Savisaare (teised tüübid lõigati välja) pildi all, et Mutli, Savisaar ja Sarapuu "ergutavad linlasi uut staadionimuru katsetama ja sportlikke eluviise harrastama". Tähendab, mingid linlased pidid ju kohal olema ja nende ergutamist vastu võtma! Muidu tunduks see ettevõtmine natuke skisofreenne.

Süntaktiliselt ja semantiliselt muutub terviktekst dissonantseks ning sunnib interpretaatorit seepärast küsima: mida tegelikult edastatakse? Seega peab pöörama tähelepanu teate pragmaatikale ehk sellele, kuidas teade suhestub lugeja semiootilise käitumisega. (lk 5)

Ma arvan, et enamus reklaami vaatajaid ei pannud tähelegi, et see on mingi sündmuse reklaamplakat. Kõik saavad aru, et poliitikud on tahtnud ennast promoda. Siin tekib huvitaval kombel selline dissonants, et kui Urmas Kruuse pildile on keegi lisanud mõttemulli, "Jess! Sain pildile!" siis Tallinna ja Keskerakonna kontekstis ei üllata enam kedagi see, et Savisaar ja tema kaasvõitlejad kõikale ronivad. Nii vähe kui ma Tallinna TV-d olen näinud ilmub Savisaare lõust keskmiselt kolm korda tunnis ekraanile. Eriti sürr on talvel näha Savisaart suvel mingil üritusel jumalteabmida tegemas. Kogu aeg pommitatakse vaatajaid alltekstiga, jou, jou, mäletad, et Edgar Savisaar oli ka kohal kui keegi Tallinnas filmis mingit sündmust?

Teksti tarbija käitumine pragmaatika dimensioonis on seotud harjumusega kui märgiloome võtmelise aspektiga. Pragmaatika mõõtmes suhestub teksti tarbija teksti või muu märgilise üksusega. Antud plakati ilmselge dominant on foto kolmest muusikainstrumendiga ametnikust. Arvestades nende pikaajalist seotust Keskerakonnaga pole põhjust kahelda, et meedia, reklaami ja välireklaami kaudu on nende kui ametnike erakondlik kuuluvus plakatit nägevale inimesele, olgu viimane teksti tarbijana antud kommunikatsiooni sooviv isik või mitte, teada ja harjumuspäraselt äratuntav. (lk 5)

Omaette huvitav on ka taustavärv kui võti. Kui visata google pildiotsingusse "Hiiu staadion" siis võib näha pilte millel domineerib pruuni värvi puust tribüün. Plakatil on ehk teadlikult otsustatud mitte pildistada seda tribüüni kui staadioni loomulikku sümbolit, vaid sätitud ametnikud rohelise muru taustale, sest roheline värv on Keskerakonna värv.

Oluline moment on plakati värvilahendus. Kogu teade on paigutatud rohelisele taustale. [...] Roheline, kollane ja valge on põhivärvid ka Keskerakonna visuaalses identiteedis selle erakonna sümboolikast kuni koduleheküljeni. Oluline on see, et kasutatud rohelise, kollase ja valge toonid plakatil on täpselt samad või visuaalselt eristatamatud Keskerakonna sümboolikas kasutatavatest rohelise, kollase ja valge toonidest. (lk 5)

Noneh. Nii juhtub kui kommenteerid samal ajal kui loed. Oli ette aimata, et värvilahendus saab ära märgitud.

[..] plakat kui teade on ülekodeeritud – kõik nimetatud aspektid viitavad just nimelt Keskerakonnale, mille visuaalne identiteet on esitatud mitmes märgisüsteemis ja mitme visuaalse märgisüsteemi dimensioonis korraga. Teade on liiane, mis viitab sellele, et teate ideoloogilis-propagandistliku tähenduse adressaadile kohale jõudmises on püütud olla maksimaalselt kindel. (lk 6)

Selles suhtes on huvitav, et kõigile on selge kui päev, et tegu on millekski muuks maskeerunud valimisreklaam, aga linnavolikogu ei osanud selle kohta midagi kosta kui neilt selle kohta päriti. St nad vabandasid ennast välja, et nad pole veel vastavat materjali lugenud. Kui nad seda loevadki siis midagi uut nad sellest ilmselt teada ei saa. Küsimus on selles kuidas nad ennast nüüd välja vingerdama hakkavad sellest, et nad selliseid labaseid võtteid kasutavad.

Siinkohal pole oluline, kas adressaat seda ideoloogilist tähendust ja sõnumit tervikuna ideoloogiliselt teadvustab või mitte, sest interpretatsiooni intentsionaalsus võib olla ka mitteteadvustatud. (lk 6)

Ma kaldun kahtlema kas siin on mingit erilist ideoloogilist tähendust. Keskerakonna taktika valimispropaganda suhtes tundub viimasel ajal olevat rohkem pragmaatiline. Näiteks need plakatid millel figureerid poliitiku lõust ja üks sõna, "TÖÖTAB", ei sisalda mingit märkimisväärset ideoloogilist sõnumit. Pigem on nad vaadanud kuidas Obama plakatite puhul piisas ühest sönast ("HOPE", "CHANGE", jne.) ja ilmselt mõtlesid, et poliitilise diskursuse tase ongi tänapäeval selline. St nad vist ei märganud, et Obama puhul oli see üks sõna mitmekordselt kodeeritud - muutus ja lootus olid esimese mustanahalise presidendi puhul niivõrd selged, et seda ei pidanudki muud moodi välja ütlema. Keskerakonna "TÖÖTAB" seevastu on mittemidagiütlev. Sellise lähenemise pragmaatika näib olevat korduvale paljastusele (repeated exposure) toetumine: kui sa näed neid nägusid ja värvitoone piisavalt tihti, siis pole vahet mida tekst ütleb. Kaastudengid on sel teemal korda saatnud oma ekspertiisi:

Paaripäevane vaatlus Tallinna tänavatel tuvastas, et poliitilise kampaania välireklaami normiks on saanud neljatähelised hüüdsõnad (ei enam -laused): "RAHU", "VALI". Samas on need ikka veel kahesilbilised, missugune keerukus võib oletatava sihtgrupi jaoks siiski üle jõu käivaks osutuda. Kombineerides seda tähelepanekut Lisanna mõttega, et igasugu ligitõmbavaks kujundatud (reklaami-, multika-, mängu-) tegelaste välimus on tänapäeval hirmus hüsteeriline (punnsilmne ja ninnakargav), lõin oma semiootikuekspertiisile toetudes ideaalse loosungi ja apetiitse visuaalse immitsa. Voilà:

(reprodutseeritud facebookist autori loal)

Siin võib pedant nuriseda ainult selle üle, et plakat ei ole Keskerakonna värvilahendusega.

Näiteks: kui fotol kujutatud seltskond on tinglik kooslus (tegelikult nad ei moodusta ansamblit, instrumendid nende kätes ei kanna funktsionaalset, vaid konnotatiivset tähendust), siis on ilmselt ka nende seos plakati muu formaalse osaga (eelkõige teade Hiiu staadioni avamisest) tinglik. (lk 6)

MIS? Ma nägin nii palju vaeva, et kujutada Edgar Savisaart respektaabli muusikuna, kel on vähemalt 14 kuulajat! Okei, aga mis see konnotatiivne tähendus siin on? Et Edgar Savisaar on niivõrd andekas, et ta võib ilma igasuguse eelneva kogemuseta üles võtta orkestritrummi ja seda eksperdi tasemel mängida? Tähendab, lausa niivõrd muljetavaldaval tasemel, et seda tuleb pildistada ja kasutada mingi mõttetu staadioni taasavamise plakatil. // Siin pean jällegi ennetavalt ütlema, et Hiiu staadion on "mõttetu" vaid siinse reklaami kontekstis. Nagu peaks juba selge olema, staadion ise ei mängi siin mingit erilist rolli.

Nagu öeldud, ei informeeri plakat tarbijat sündmusest, selle toimumiskohast ega viita ka Hiiu staadioni funktsioonile, mis ilmselgelt peab olema seotud spordi ja sportimisega. Spordiga pole seotud ei verbaalne sõnum ega ole atleetlikkuse või sportimisega seotud fotol kujutatud ametnikud. Nii muutub isegi plakati formaalne sõnum tinglikuks ning sunnib ja suunab adressaati otsima selle tegelikku ehk varjatud ehk konnotatiivset tähendust ja sõnumit. (lk 7)

See on nüüd küll läbi lillede vihjamine tõigale, et ametnikud on paksud ja ebasportlikud ja ei peaks staadioni taasavamise plakatil figureerima, sest nad ise pole vist küll staadionit ammu kasutanud. Tõestamiseks võib arvestada plakati pindala mida hõlmavad ametnike vatsad (kogu plakatist umbes 10%). Siit ilmneb tegelikult märksa olulisem tõik, et see konnotatiivne tähendus on võib-olla seotud KOV 2013-ga.

[...] küsimus "KAS SINA OLED JUBA VALINUD?" suhestub Urmas Kruuse isikuga, kusjuures Urmas Kruuse võib olla nii küsimuse adressaat kui ka adressant. (lk 10)

See on vististi kõige labasem osa kogu sellest afäärist. Triatlon ei ole mitte kuidagi seotud valimisega - mida on triatloni puhul valida? Poliitiku pildi lisamist on minu teada õigustatud sellega, et Kruuse on muidu kõva suusataja (nagu enamus Tartu linnavalitsusest - meil on teadupoolest mingi suusaklubi-maffia võimul). Adressaad ja adressandi osa on siin huvitav. Sisuliselt tähendab see, et seda võib vaadelda kaheti: (1) Urmas Kruuse küsib vaatajalt kas ta on juba ... valinud ... triatlonil osaleda; ja (2) plakati autorid küsivad vaatajatelt kas nad on juba Urmas Kruuse poolt valinud. Randviiru selgitus näib olevat, et mõlemad tõlgendused on plakatis kohal: keskosa, "Urmas valis triatloni" on tõlgendus (1); ja plakati kõige alumisem element, "Tee oma valik!" viitab sellele, et me peaksime Urmas Kruuse valima.

Plakati segmendid on mahuliselt suhteliselt sarnased, seega formaalset dominanti pole. (lk 10)

Siin ma vaidleks vastu ja jällegi selle tõttu, et minu arvates ei ole ruumiliste mahtude suhted hea alus millelt otsida dominanti. Minu jaoks on siin dominandiks kogu plakati ainus fotograafiline osa - Urmas Kruuse võltsnaeratus. See tõmbab pilgu endale ja mõjub kummastavalt, sest esiteks ta vaatab plakatist välja, jumalteabkuhu, ja teiseks on ta keha kaetud tekstiblokkidega ja mõjub kohatult (kas ta seisab, istub, sõidab jalgrattaga? mida ta seal teeb peale lolli naeratamise?). Just nagu eelmise reklaami puhul pole ka siin poliitikut tegelikult pildile vaja. Kui Kruuset pildil ei oleks ja informatsioon oleks lihtsalt laiali laotatud oleks see samavõrd, kui mitte edukam, informaator. Olemasolev lahendus tundub sunnitud ja kellegi omaloominguline lisandus, "Jess! Sain pildi peale!" on täiest õige tõlgendus - poliitik on roninud pildi peale lihtsalt selleks, et saada pildi peale. Turunduses on teada, et kui saab ilma, siis pole nägusid igale poole toppida vaja. Näiteks kui veebilehele panna pilt beebist, siis ei vaata peaaegu keegi kõrvalolevat teksti vaid, nagu on pilgu liikumise mõõtmise järgi selgeks tehtud, vaadatakse beebile näkku ja silma (Cicero tarkus, et silmad valitsevad nägu peab siin paika). Sama lugu on siin: Kruuse võltsnaeratus ei aita Triatloni informatsiooni omandada vaid tõmbab endale tähelepanu, sest näod mõjuvad nii. Selle võltsnaeratuse suhtes on "Jess! Sain pildile!" tegelikult väga kõnekas, sest võltsnaeratusi tõlgendatakse tihti kui enesega-rahulolu. Siin on konkreetselt nii, et Urmas Kruuse ei naerata möödaminejatele, vaid iseendale; sealjuures on näha, et see on pingutatud ja tahtlik (inimesed kes ei naerata harjumuspäraselt avatud suuga näevad kummalised välja kui nad sunnivad end naeratama avatud suuga), niiet see mõjub lõppude lõpuks nagu ta üritaks iseennast veenda, et ta on jõle õnnelik inimene (aga mõjub kahjuks kui lihtsalt jõle inimene). Kusjuures siin on rohkem kui tõenäoline, et pilt on ümber pööratud - atrofeerunud parem näopool (sügavam/tumedam silmakoobas) on siin pööratud vasakule. Pole välistatud, et originaalis vaatas Kruuse paremale ja ta pilk oli originaal-kompositsioonis suunatud "Tartu Mill Triathlon" tekstile ja linna siluetile, aga see mõjus liiga võõrastavalt:

Niipidi (paremal) näeb ta küll rohkem inimese moodi välja, aga mõlemat pidi tundub ta kahjuks üksjagu "piinatud".

Foto tõuseb eraldiseisvalt samuti dominandistaatusesse, sest asub plakati visuaalses keskmes ning eraldub ümbritsevast tekstilisest-verbaalsest osast. Foto on verbaalsest diskursusest tajuliselt väga lihtsalt eristatav, mis viitab selle tähtsusele. Tähtsus omakorda viitab Urmas Kruuse foto tähenduslikkusele. Foto ja Tartu linna ehitiste siluetikoosluse vahel puudub semiootiline konkurents, sest viimane pole plakati visuaalsemiootilises ega tajulises keskmes, on mõõdult oluliselt väiksem ning pole värviline. (lk 10)

Tuleb välja, et jälle ruttasin tekstist ette. Arutluskäigud on muidugi natuke erinevad. Näiteks see, et Kruuse nägu on visuaalses keskmes ei ole minu jaoks nii tähtis kui tõik, et seal on nägu (see nägu võiks ka mitte olla visuaalses keskmes, aga ikkagi tõmmata endale tähelepanu). Minu arutluskäik kuidas plakati loomisprotsessis võis Kruuse nägu algupäraselt olla "õiget pidi" ja vaadata Tartu siluetikooslust, on muidugi spekulatiivne... Aga see selgitaks ka seda miks see must ristkülik seal niimoodi tornina seisab - see tuli vb hiljem lisada, et korvata esialgse kompositsiooni nurjumist (aga need on asjad mida ainult plakati kujundaja võib teada). Igatahes, minu spekulatiivne argument on lühidalt see, et Kruuse foto ja Tartu linna ehitiste siluetikoosluse vahel puudub semiootiline konkurents, sest originaalselt võis nende vahel olla semiootiline koostöö (cooperation).

Antud plakati dominant on foto Tartu linnapeast Urmas Kruusest. Plakati tarbijale on teada, et tegemist on pikaajalise Tartu linnapeaga ja Reformierakonna liikmega. Plakati tänavaile ilmumisaeg on ajastatud seoses kohalike omavalitsuste valimisega. (lk 11)

Seega me oleme ühel meelel, et Kruuse nägu on plakati dominant. See, et tegu on Tartu pikaajalise linnapeaga, on minu jaoks võõras teadmine (nimi on ääri-veeri tuttav, aga nägu küll varem näinud ei ole) mistõttu nimealune tiitel on kohane... Ja viimaks see püant, et selline kolm korda sõna "vali(mine)" kasutav, aga valimistega mitte seotud, plakat ilmub linnaruumi just enne valimisi.

Plakati formaalne visuaalne dominant on foto Priit Kutserist koos identifitseerimata arhitektuurilise objektiga – vähemalt 65% kogu plakatist. (lk 12)

Mina mõõtsin ainult seda ebavajalikku osa - Kutseri enda kogu - ja sain 22%. See on siiski peaaegu neljandik kogu pindalast:

Täiesti süüdimatult eeldan, et see identifitseerimata arhitektuuriline objekt on see ujula spordikompleks mis peaks kahe aasta pärast samal kohas seisma. St see arhitektuuriline objekt plakatil on õigustatud (kuigi pole üldse kindel miks seda ei võiks rohkem näha olla - tavaliselt on sellistel ehitusteavitustel mudeli joonis prominentsemalt esitatud). Ainult Kutser on sellel plakatil õigustamatu. Mille jaoks ta sellel on? Kas ta on selle projekti eestvedaja? Sel juhul võiks nimest ainult piisata. See oleks päris kohutav kui iga arendaja või projektijuht tunneks vajadust oma fotot iga ehitise peale lahmida. Ja kui Kutser oleks spordikompleksiga niimoodi seotud, siis võiks see olla ära märgitud. Praegu jääb aga mulje, et kahe aasta pärast seisab selle hoone ees hiiglaslik Kutseri-monument.

Pragmaatilisest aspektist pole antud juhul vähimalgi määral oluline, et plakatikompleksis pole Keskerakonda nimetatud või selle sümboolikat kasutatud. Teksti tarbija sotsiokultuuriline teadmine ongi antud juhul tõlgendust suunav. Kuna tegemist on pragmaatilisest perspektiivist tekkiva teisetasandilise diskursusega ning teisetasandilise ehk konnotatiivse tekstimõõtmega, saab plakatiansambli dominandi (Priit Kutseri) erakondliku kuuluvuse järgi väita, et tegemist on Keskerakonna varjatud reklaamiga. Priit Kutser hakkab konnotatiivsel tasandil kandma representatsiooni, mitte kõneisiku rolli. Pragmaatilises perspektiivis on plakatite ruumi kõrval tähtis ka nende väljapanemise aeg, mis valimisperioodil on kindlasti interpretatsiooni suunav. (lk 13)

Jeaps, Kutser kõrgub tulevase spordikompleksi kohal kui esitis, kui märk linnavõimust. Olulisel kohal on siin sotsiokultuuriliselt jagatud teadmine, et Kutser on see Savisaare sabarakk kes kuseb riimi nagu väike peer (listen to this shit, pööbel!).

Plakatil on kaks esmatasandi visuaalset dominanti: fotol kujutatud Karin Tammemägi ja üldine roheline taust. Kolmas dominant on pindselt teisejärguline – plakatil kasutatud teksti värvitoonid. Plakati dominandid moodustavad ühtse terviku ning selle semantilise perspektiivi. (lk 14)

Siin tekib dominandi-lähenemisega juba küsitavusi. Ideaalis peaks dominant allutama teised elemendid hierarhilisele korrastusele mille üle antud dominant valitseb. St dominanti peaks olema ainult üks. Siin on dominante mitmel tasandil ja need dominandid ise moodustavad ühtse terviku. Ma ei ole kindel kas need tasandid ei ole piisavalt selgelt ära määratletud (minu jaoks) või ei saa maa lihtsalt pihta kuidas mitmest dominandist peaks tervik moodustama. Mulle tundub, et siin on lihtsalt erinevad, ütleme "modaalsused", nt värviskeemid, verbaalsed sõnumid, visuaalsed illustreerivad komponendid ja fotograafiline pilt. Mitte ainult Karin Tammemäe plakatil, vaid sisuliselt kõigil senistel plakatitel on poliitiku foto olnud minu jaoks dominandiks. Ühel või teisel viisil on igal plakatil tajuda, et teised elemendid on fotole allutatud (Kruuse oma on vist erand, sest tema plakatil ma adun, et midagi on nihu läinud). Kõiki neid plakateid iseloomustab lõppude lõpuks see, et poliitiku foto on topitud sinna kuhu teda pole vaja. Ka Tammemäe kepikõnni-plakati puhul on väga kummaline, et ta ise on niimoodi suures plaanis. Kummastavaks teeb seda ka "Hakkame käima!" sõnum. Kui see oleks süüti kepikõnni-reklaam siis võiks sellel kuvada kasvõi Clip Art'i (nii tehakse minu kodulinnas) või pilti rahvamassist rõõmsalt kepikõndi sooritamas (ka selliseid reklaame on olnud). Siin tundub kõik rõhutatult isiklik. Mitte ainult kepikõnd, vaid kepikõnd kellegi Karin Tammemäega. Keskerakonna värvilahendused ja fondid muidugi hakkavad ka silma, aga need on minu arvates sekundaarsed Tammemäe isiku reklaamimise kõrval.

Eestikeelne hüüdlause on ilmselgelt kahemõtteline – kui kepikõnnitreeningutega seoses võib see viidata koos kõndimise üritusele, siis võib see samaväärselt olla ka ettepanek intiimsemate inimestevaheliste suhete loomiseks. Antud plakati puhul tekib küsimus: mislaadi isiklikumaid suhteid võidakse ette panna? (lk 15)

See kahemõttelisus on muidugi tabav, sest siin on plausible deniability. "Hakkame käima!" on üksjagu lapsik ja kuulub umbes 12-aastaste "intiimsemate inimestevaheliste suhete" mõistearsenali. Siin võib kriitikaga minna ka seksismi teemasse, sest ühest käest võib tõesti vaadata seda kui naisametniku seksualiseerimist (vaadata näiteks täpselt rindadeni avatud vestilukku), aga teisest käest oleks ainsa naise suunas sellise kriitika tõstmine kahtlane. Kutseri plakati peal küll ei olnud midagi sellist nagu "Mul tõuseb / hoone...", aga on "Kahe aasta pärast seisab...".

Jah, [isiku fotoga reklaamimist vahetult enne valimisi saab käsitleda tema isikliku valimisreklaamina] ning see puudutab kõiki analüüsitud reklaame. Pole oluline, kas isik toestas oma fotoga plakatil mõnda muud teadet, kuulutust või reklaami või iseloomustas muu teave isikut. Mõlemasuunalisel suhtel on plakatite fotodel kujutatud isikud positiivselt representeeritud ning avalikkusele esitletud. Kuna kõigil juhtumitel on tegemist reklaamide või reklaamivate teadetega või kuulutusteadetega, tähendab see mõlemasuunaline suhe ka vastavate isikute reklaamimist. Valimiste kontekstis on poliitikaga seotud isikud, kes ise valimistel ka kandideerivad või kuuluvad kandideerivasse erakonda, igal juhul valimisreklaami tähendusväljas. (lk 18)

Positiivne representeerimine tähendab siin minu arvates nende isikute seostamist positiivsete ettevõtmistega (staadioni avamine, spordihoonete ehitamine, triatloni "valimine", kepikõnnil käimine) isegi kui neil isikutel on reklaamitud ettevõtmistega väga vähe või mitte midagi pistmist (isikute seotust nende üritustega ei ole plakatitel selgitatud ega vihjatud). See on isikute avalikkusele esitlemine ilmselgelt läbimõtlematutel viisidel: Savisaare asemel oleks võinud kujutada sportlasi või staadionit ennast; Kruuse asemel mõnda sportlast; Kutseri asemel näidata rohkem tulevasest hoonest jne. Põhimõtteliselt kõigil juhtudel oli tegu plakatitiga mis ei vajanud ametniku fotot. Just selle alusel ütleksin mina, et tegu oli isikute reklaamimine.

Huvitava nüansina võib välja tuua, et peale Karin Tammemäe, kes kutsus inimesi kepikõnnitreeningutele ning vähemalt mõnes neist ka ise osales, puudus muudel juhtumitel fotodel kujutatud isikutel asjakohane seos teabega, mis koos nendega plakatitel oli esitatud. Asjakohase teabe all pean silmas kaalutletud põhjendatust isiku seostamisel vastava teabega: otsene vastutuslik seos, otsene korralduslik seos, otsene osavõtuseos või muu sarnane seos. On vaid kaudsed, teisetasandilised, konnotatiivsed, teisejärgulised, kontekstuaalsed seosed plakatil esitatud tekstidega. (lk 18)

Täpselt. Neid fotosid ei olnud plakatitele vaja. Tammemäe oma on selles aspektis ainus erand, sest kui ta on kepikõnni isiklik läbiviija siis on tema isiku reklaamimine mingil määral õigustatud. Norida võib vaid selle üle, et kas üksikisikute eraviisiline kepikõnd väärib niimoodi reklaamimist. Kepikõnd ei ole mägironimine mille jaoks on vaja väljaõpet ja asjatundjat või ülevaatajat. Plakat reklaamib "kepikõnnitreeningut", aga jumal teab mida see endast kujutab (ilmselt oli Karin Tammemäe treening siiski vajalik, et kõndijad keppide rihmasid käte külge kinnitades ennast ei vigastaks vms). Informeerimise kaalutlusel oleks palju mõjusam olnud näiteks illustratsioon kepikõnni jaoks sobivatest radadest Põhja-Tallinnas.

Kõikide plakatite puhul on fotode kaudu kasutatud ühendajaid (konnektoreid), mis on samas ka plakatite dominandid ning viitavad nii semantikas kui ka pragmaatikas konkreetsetele erakondadele. Plakatite sõnum jääb kõikidel juhtumitel viitama valimiskontekstile ning plakatitel viidatud erakondlikele valimiseelistuste soovitustele. (lk 18)

Korraks lootsin, et konnektor on Morrise termin, aga tuleb välja, et hoopis Greimasi oma. Konnektorid on seega need elemendid mis viitavad erakonnakuuluvusele nt.

Sisereferentide süsteem, mida on võimalik näha plakatite ülekodeeritud teadetest ning viidetest tõlgenduse konnotatiivsele tasandile, näitab, et plakatite puhul on tegemist valimisreklaamiga või varjatud valimisreklaamiga. Seda järeldust toetab analüüsi pragmaatiline mõõde, mis seostab plakatid kontekstiga ehk konkreetse tarbijagrupi, aja ja ruumiga.
Niisiis: kõik analüüsitud plakatid on oma süntaktikas, semantikas ja pragmaatikas lõppkokkuvõttes valimisreklaamid, seda nii plakatitel esitletud isikutele, kui veel enam nende esindatavatele erakondadele. (lk 20)

Lõplik vastus on konkreetne. Ekspertiis oli ka huvitav lugemine. Kurta võiks vaid selle üle, et ekspertiisi aluseks olnud teoreetilise ja metodoloogilise toetava kirjanduse nimekiri on vahva, aga sellest nimekirjast ei ole palju abi kui teksti sees ei ole autoritele viidatud. See ei ole küll teadustöö, kuid paljudest mõistetest (nt sisereferentide süsteem) oleks paremini aru saada kui need oleksid pikemalt ära seletatud või konkreetsele autorile viidatud. Ja kuigi üleüldiselt on lähtutud küll Morrise kolmesest eristusest (semantika, süntaktika, pragmaatika), oleks väga lahe ka Morrise diskursusetüüpide teooria rakendamine (tema neljane eristus: identifiors, designators, appraisors, prescriptors). Ma usun, et nt dominantidest, konnektoritest, jne saaks märksa süstemaatilisemalt rääkida neis terminites. Selle usu realiseerimine jääb aga minu enda kanda, sest Morrise diskursusetüpoloogia on üks keerulisemaid ja läbimõeldumaid asju mida ma tean (ja millest ma ise tahaksin hästi aru saada). Igatahes, hea semiootiline ekspertiis on hea.

The City Image and Its Elements

Lynch, Kevin 1970[1960]. The Image of the City. Cambridge; London: The MIT Press.

As in any intellectual work, the content derives from many sources, difficult to trace. (Lynch 1970[1960]: v)

Uh, yeah. This is why I keep extensive notes on my readings. My intellectual work will ultimately derive its content from many sources that ideally will be relatively easy to trace.

Looking at cities can give a special pleasure, however commonplace the sight may be. Like a piece of architecture, the city is a construction in space, but one of vast scale, a thing perceived only in the course of long spans of time. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 1)

Linn on ruumiline konstruktsioon. I've already gathered similar statements but this one is one of the briefest.

At every instant, there is more than the eye can see, moret han the ear can hear, a setting or a view waiting to be explored. Nothing is experienced by itself, but always in relation to its surroundings, the sequences of events leading up to it, the memory of past experiences. Washington Street set in a farmer's field might look like the shopping street in the heart of Boston, and yet it would seem utterly different. Every citizen has had long associations with some part of his city, and his image is soaked in memories and meanings. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 1)

This is another good addition to the discussion of Jakobson's contextual function. Memory of past experiences belongs to the autofunctional or autosemantic dimension.

Moving elements in a city, and in particular the people and their activities, are as important as the stationary physical parts. We are not simply observers of this spectacle, but are ourselves a part of it, on the stage with the other participants. Most often, our perception of the city is not sustained, but rather partial, fragmentary, mixed with other concerns. Nearly every sense is in operation, and the image is the composite of them all. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 2)

I can get on board with this. A city would not be a city without masses of people and their transportation.

Although clarity or legibility is by no means the only important property of a beautiful city, it is of special importance when considering environments at the urban scale of size, time, and complexity. To understand this, we must consider not just the city as a thing in itself, but the city being perceived by its inhabitants. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 3)

This is the second instance of a Kantian undertone. The complexity of the city and the perception by its inhabitants both, I think, can be accounted for by a "communication network" approach.

In the process of way-finding, the stategic link is the environmental image, the generalized mental picture of the exterior physical world that is held by an individual. This image is the product both of immediate sensation and of the memory of past experience, and it is used to interpret information and to guide action. The need to recognize and pattern our surroundings is so crucial, and has such long roots in the past, that this image has wide practical and emotional importance to the individual. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 4)

Thus the environmental image is also related to how one interprets information received from the city environment and guides actions to be undertaken in it.

A vivid and integrated physical setting, capable of producing a sharp image, plays a social role as well. It can furnish the raw material for the symbols and collective memories of group communication. A striking landscape is the skeleton upon which many primitive races erect their socially important myths. Common memories of the "home town" were often the first and easiest point of contact between lonely soldiers during the war. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 4)

E.g. the "Taaramägi" myth of Toomemägi in Tartu.

In our own world, we might say that almost everyone can, if attentive, learn to navigate in Jersey City, but only at the cost of some effort and uncertainty. Moreover, the positive values of legible surroundings are missing: the emotional satisfaction, the framework for communication or conceptual organization, the new depths that it may bring to everyday experience. These are pleasures we lack, even if our present city environment is not so disordered as to impose an intolerable strain on those who are familiar with it. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 5)

If you view the city as a highly complex communication system then you indeed have to account for the conceptual organization of it. It's "legibility" is this sense becomes synonymous with intelligibility.

A landscape whose every rock tells a story may make difficult the creation of fresh stories. Although this may not seem to be a critical issue in our present urban chaos, yet it indicates that what we seek is not a final but an open-ended order, capable of continuous further development. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 6)

I think a communication system approach can facilitate this. Here the semiosic "meaning begets meaning" idea should be developed further. And what exactly does Lynch mean by "stories" here?

There may be little in the real object that is ordered or remarkable, and yet its mental picture has gained identity and organization through long familiarity. One man may find objects easily on what seems to anyone else to be a totally disordered work table. Alternatively, an object seen for the first time may be identified and related not because it is individually familiar but because it conforms to a stereotype already constructed by the observer. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 6)

It looks like Lynch concluded Michel Foucault's The Order of Things into a single sentence.

Each individual creates and bears his own image, but there seems to be substantial agreement among members of the same group. It is these group images, exhibiting consensus among significant numbers, that interest city planners who aspire to model an environment that will be used by many people. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 7)

The sociological aspect: a group has a shared or common image.

An environmental image may be analyzed into three components: identity, structure, and meaning. It is useful to abstract these for analysis, if it is remembered that in reality they always appear together. A workable image requires first the identification of an object, which implies its distinction from other things, its recognition as a separate entity. This is called identity, not in the sense of equality with something else, but with the meaning of individuality or oneness. Second, the image must include the spatial or pattern relation of the object to the observer and to other objects. Finally, this object must have some meaning for the observer, whether practical or emotional. Meaning is also a relation, but quite a different one from spatial or pattern relation. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 8)

Thus I can identify the riverside pedestrian path that has a spatial relation in terms of connecting my current residence with the town center and carries an emotional meaning in the sense that I prefer to traverse this path when I'm not in a hurry and feel like taking a stroll.

Brown remarks that a maze through which subjects were asked to move blindfolded seemed to them at first to be one unbroken problem. On repetition, parts of the pattern, particularly the beginning and end, became familiar and assumed the character of localities. Finally, when they could tread the maze without error, the whole system seemed to have become one locality. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 11)

This seems eerily familiar, as if it could apply to most anything. When you set out on something new then the whole does seem enigmatic but soon enough the contours may become familiar and through craft and persistence the whole may become systematic. Orienting the maze could here be a metaphor for mastering any activity.

Each individual picture is unique, with some content that is rarely or never communicated, yet it approximates the public image, which, in different environments, is more or less compelling, more or less embracing. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 46)

This belongs to the discourse on personal or private signs.

This analysis limits itself to the effects of physical, perceptible objects. There are other influences on imageability, such as the social meaning of an area, its function, its history, or even its name. These will be clossed over, since the objective here is to uncover the role of form itself. It is taken for granted that in actual design form should be used to reinforce meaning, and not to negate it. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 46)

In Lotman's distinction of the two poles of the semiotics of city, one dealing with space and the other with the name of the city, Lynch's approach deals with the former while Lotman himself deals with the latter.

1. Paths. Paths are the channels along which the observer customarily, occasionally, or potentially moves. The may be streets, walkways, transit lines, canals, railroads. For many people, these are the predominant elements in their image. People observe the city while moving through it, and along these paths the other environmental elements are arranged and related. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 47)

Paths are of course intimately related to human movement and transportation. Paths form where people habitually move. There's also a notable chasm between the official, paved, pedestrian roads and the stamped-ground paths or shortcuts that show where people actually move. I've found this to be an interesting thing to notice: ideally, all such footpaths would be paved and made "official" but some are not, for one reason or another, and remain uncared for for a long time. Sometimes it even seems that these different paths come with their own prescribed form of movement: you take the paved official path when you've got time to stroll or when you're just a tourist discovering a place for the first and perhaps the only time; but when you live and the area and hurry to an appointment, the unofficial pathways are preferable because they are usually shortcuts.

2. Edges. Edges are the linear elements not used to considered as paths by the observer. They are the boundaries between two phases, linear breaks in continuity: shores, railroad cuts, edges of development, walls. They are lateral references rather than coordinate axes. Such edges may be barriers, more or less penetrable, which close one region off from another; or they may be seams, lines along which two regions are related and joined together. These edge elements, although probably not as dominant as paths, are for many people important organizing features, particularly in the role of holding together generalized areas, as in the outline of a city by water or wall. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 47)

The difference between a path and an edge becomes very apparent when a pedestrian path diverges from some edge, like the riverbank, building facades, car roads, etc. Though in some cases, like the four-square parks in Tartu, the "outer" paths act as edges. If a building were placed across the Tartu Kaubamaja, the paths within that area would disappear and the paths that act like edges woud take on more walkers.

5. Districts. Districts are The medium-to-large sections of the city, conceived of as having two-dimensional extent, which the observer mentally enters "inside of," and which are recognizable as having some common, identifying character. Always identifiable from the inside, they are also used for exterior reference if visible from the outside. Most people structure their city to some extent in this way, with individual differences as to whether paths or districts are the dominant elements. It seems to depend not only upon the individual but also upon the given city. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 47)

[ringkond, piirkond, rajoon] The difference seems to be whether you ascribe to the "going-through" paradigm of paths and edges, or "being-inside" paradigm of locating yourself within some distinct area.

4. Nodes. Nodes are points, the strategic spots in a city into which an observer can enter, and which are the intensive foci to and from which he is traveling. They may be primarily junctions, places of a break in transportation, a crossing or convergence of paths, moments of shift from one structure to another. Or the nodes may be simply concentrations, which gain their importance from being the condensation of some use or physical character, as a street-corner hangout or an enclosed square. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 47)

Nodes seem to be not only path-crossings, but "strategic spots" with some "use". In Tartu these would most likely be the bus terminal, Tasku, Kaubamaja, Kaubamaja playground, Küüni street node near the Barclay park, etc. In a word, places where people seem to congregate for some "use" reason.

Some of these concerntration nodes are the focus and epitome of a district, over which their influence radiates and of which they stand as a symbol. They may be called cores. Many nodes, of course, partake of the nature of both junctions and concentrations. The concept of a node is related to the concept of paths since junctions are typically the convergence of paths, events on the journey. It is similarly related to the concept of district, since cores are typically the intensive foci of districts, their polarizing center. In any event, some nodal points are to be found in almost every image, and in certain cases they may be the dominant feature. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 48)

This is indeed observable: every district has its own "center" (core) where paths lead. I've observed this in Tartu without acknowledging these terms.

5. Landmarks. Landmarks are another type of point-reference, but in this case the observer does not enter within them, they are external. They are usually a rather simply defined physical object: building, sign, store, or mountain. Their use involves the singling out of one element from a host of possibilities. Some landmarks are distant ones, typically seen from many nagles and distances, over the tops of smaller elements, and used as radial references. They may be within thec ity or at such a distance that for all practical purposes they symbolize a constant direction. Such are isolated towers, golden domes, great hills. Even a mobile point, like the sun, whose motion is sufficiently slow and regular, may be employed. Other landmarks are primarily local, being visible only in restricted localities and from certain approaches. These are the innumerable signs, store fronts, trees, doorknobs, and other urban detail, which fill in the image of most observers. They are frequently used clues of identity and even of structure, and seem to be increasingly relied upon as a journey becomes more and more familiar. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 48)

Here it seems important that most anything can serve as a landmark (signs, store fronts, trees, doorknobs, etc.) but the landmark sui generis should be singled out as a dominant element. Here one could probably differentiate public and private landmarks. That specific doorknob may be very relevant to me personally, but when coordinating action (a date, for example) with another, I have to refer to a more widely known landmark.

People with least knowledge of Boston tended to think of the city in terms of topography, large regions, generalized characteristics, and broad directional relationships. Subjects who knew the city better had usually mastered part of the path structure; these people thougdht more in terms of specific paths and their interrelationships. A tendency also appeared for the people who knew the city best of all to rely more upon small landmarks and less upon either regions or paths. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 49)

A few weeks ago I had to go to an event located in the old town of Tallinn, and got lost in the old town maze. I knew the "broad direction" in which I had to go but ended up in a narrow street that ended abruptly. I asked a passerby for directions and was first directed in terms of paths (go left, then right, etc.) and closer to my destination, in terms of local establishments (the name of some pub). It was a weird feeling, looking for a specific pub in a long line of establishments. Before embarking on my travels I looked at the satellite image of old town and interpreted a small green are as a fountain. In fact it was just a green area with a monument right across the pub I was directed to. In short, the local who knew the city better relied on establishments, while I relied on broad directional relationships and the satellite image.

Other qualities that gave importance to single paths were the visual exposure of the path itself or the visual exposure from the path of other parts of the city. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 51)

Well, an invisible path wouldn't be a path at all. The visual exposure aspect is probably the reason why the most notable paths, like in my case the riverside pedestrian roadway, are ones that run a long course, is spatially open or exposed, and enables the stroller to glance at monumental buildings or views.

The frequent reduction of the South End to a geometrical system was typical of the constant tendency of the subjects to impose regularity on their surroundings. Unless obvious evidence refuted it, they tried to organize paths into geometrical networks, disregarding curves and non-perpendicular intersections. The lower area of Jersey City was frequently drawn as a grid, even though it is one only in part. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 61)

I found only recently while mentally strolling around my hometown while looking at Regio's online map, that the Tartu street where I lived and which I always thought to be straight despite a noticeable curve, does indeed have a veritable curve in it. This discovery was astonishing.

Sounds and smells sometimes reinforced visual landmarks, although they did not seem to constitute landmarks by themselves. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 83)

Sounds and smells are too transient. One cannot easily presume that a given sound or smell will last at a specific place; there may be nothing to return to. Visual landmarks have a more lasting effect.

The image itself was not a precise, miniaturized model of reality, reduced in scale and consistently abstracted. As a purposive simplification, it was made by reducing, eliminating, or even adding elements to reality, by fusion and distortion, by relating and structuring the parts. It was sufficient, perhaps better, for its purpose if rearranged, distorted, "illogical." It resembled that famous cartoon of the New Yorker's view of the United States. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 87)

This is essentially a list of some semiotic manipulations that humans are capable of. It took some time to hunt down the March 29, 1976, cover of the New Yorker magazine.

However distorted, there was a strong element of topological invariance with respect to reality. It was as if the map were drawn on an infinitely flexible rubber sheet; directions were twisted, distances stretched or compressed, large forms so changed from their accurate scale projection as to be at first unrecognizable. But the sequence was usually correct, the map was rarely torn and sewn back together in another order. This continuity is necessary if the image is to be of any value. (Lynch 1970[1960]: 87)

I believe that similar semiotic manipulations appear elsewhere as well. I'm especially interested if similar operations occur in describing bodily behaviour (what I call concourse).

Security Analysis of the Estonian Internet Voting System

Halderman, Alex J.; Harri Hursti; Jason Kitcat; Margaret MacAlpine; Travis Finkenauer; Drew Springall 2014. Security Analysis of the Estonian Internet Voting System. Technical report.

Several countries have experimented with casting votes over the Internet, but today, no nation uses Internet voting for binding political elections to a larger degree than Estonia. When Estonia introduced its online voting system in 2005, it became the first country to offer Internet voting nationally. Since then, it has used the system in local or national elections five times, and during recent elections 20-25% of participating voters cast their ballots online. (Halderman et al. 2014: 1)

I recall that India supposedly had electronic voting, but that may be a different kind of system. Personally I have my own trouble with voting in Estonia. I can't partake of the Internet voting because my ID card is damaged. Twice it has happened that I wait for the day the elections are supposed to be (European Parliament elections were on the 25 of March this year) only to find out that in order to vote over the internet and elsewhere than my home district, I should have voted in the pre-elections. The first time this happened (that I couldn't vote on the voting day because I live away from my home district) I actually heard something about pre-elections (eelvalimised) and just didn't respond because I didn't know what it meant. This time there was no talk of pre-elections. Both times I had the false idea that on voting day I could go down to a voting station in the town I factually live and study at (Tartu) but find out that I can't vote because I'm officially registered to live in my homehown 90km away, I was supposed to travel there to vote. I had a long phone discussion with the voting information service about how they can't have a sensible system - vote wherever, but on the right day - because they need to send paper ballots to your home district on the voting day so as to somehow prevent falsification. The problem actually seems to be that although we have Internet voting, the process is not completely digital. It's a half-way deal, a mongrel of sorts. I would also be satisfied if there were other means to vote electronically that didn't require the ID card. You can approach some state matters through a bank-link. I would have no issue if I could "log in" via my bank and vote through a link through that system.

Many Estonians view Internet voting as a source of national pride, but one major political party has repeatedly called for it to be abandoned. (Halderman et al. 2014: 1)

Yup. That's the Center Party (Keskerakond). My ill-informed opinion on why this party and only this party is against the Internet voting system is that this party stands for Russian interest and the elderly. Having Estonians who are working elsewhere around the world and young people, (like me) who vote only on the condition that they don't have to leave their room, vote is not in this party's interests.

For these reasons, the Estonian Internet voting (I-voting) system represents a unique and important case study in election security. Its strengths and weaknesses can inform other countries considering the adoption of online voting, as well as the design of future systems in research and practice. (Halderman et al. 2014: 1)

Here's a trivial remark on cultural differences. The authors of this paper shorten "Internet voting" to I-voting. This makes sense firstly because I is the first letter of Internet, and secondly perhaps there's an American association between computer technology and Apple products (iTunes, iPhone, iPad) so that if America were to implement Internet voting, "iVoting" would be something they'd have to circumnavigate because of this association. In estonian, on the other hand, the name of the thing is eHääletamine that firstly stands for "elecronic voting" and secondly relies on the association between the Internet and the Internet Explorer icon that was an emblem of the Internet in the 1990s. These are subtle cultural differences with their own denotative and connotative aspects.

The weakness of the Estonian system stems from its basic design. Most e-voting schemes proposed in recent years use cryptographic techniques to achieve end-to-end (E2E) verifiability. This means that anyone can confirm that the ballots have been counted accurately without having to trust that the computers or officials are behaving honestly. In contrast, Estonia's design implicitly trusts the integrity of voters' computers, server components, and the election staff. (Halderman et al. 2014: 1)

Ah, yes. The weakness of the Estonian Internet voting system is that the Estonians rely on their officials behaving honestly. This could never fly in America. This is partly so because Estonia is such a small and insignificant country without any notable resources (the U.S. will never invade us to liberate the bog peat (rabaturvas) resources for the mass market, or at least one could hope...) and very little reason to presume that anyone would go out of their way to fix our voting results. Another part of the issue is actually cultural, again. It's a matter of difference in trust - a similar case could be made for the Canadians who don't lock their doors because they trust their neighbours. Neither trusting the integrity of the voting system nor trusting that your neighbour won't rob you blind the minute you leave your house unlocked would fly in the great U.S. (At this point I'm beginning to worry about the Anti-American sentiment I'm apparently giving off in this post.)

Cyberwarfare, once a largely hypothetical threat, has become a well documented reality, and attacks from foreign states are now a credible threat to a national online voting system. Given that Estonia is an EU and NATO member that borders Russia, it should not discount the possibility that a foreign power would interfere in its elections. (Halderman et al. 2014: 1)

The documentation of this reality involves references to China, U.S. and Iran. Only the fourth case involves Estonia and Russia and how the latter made DDoS attacks on Estonian sites ("Russia accused of unleashing cyberwar to disable Estonia").

Power to the People Party
Polly Politician
More Power to the People Party
Paul Politician
All the power to Drew Party
Dictator Drew
(Halderman et al. 2014: 2)

With all the talk of misogyny today I can't help but notice that Paul Politician is more forceful than Polly Politician. What if it were the other way around and Polly wanted more power to the people than Paul?

Our observation and analysis focus on the Estonian I-voting system as it was used for the 2013 municipal elections ("KOV2013"). In these elections, Internet voting was available for sever days, from October 10-16, and the main in-person polling took place on election day, October 20. (Halderman et al. 2014: 2)

Those are the first elections that I couldn't vote in because the information about Internet voting being available for seven days only didn't make it through to me. In hindsight it's mostly my own fault that I didn't research and invest more time into it. I was naive and thought that I could go in-person to any voting station on the main day and give my vote. Only this year, during the European Parliament elections, did I research and was unable to find any worthwhile information about how to vote. (To be true, I did find a lot of information on how the election was carried out internationally but nothing on the national level. A friend complained that he was equally unable to find even the candidate's list, so I guess I'm not the only one.)

At the start of each election, the election authority publishes a set of voting client applications for Windows, Linux, and Mac OS, which can be downloaded from https://valimised.ee. (Halderman et al. 2014: 3)

Welp, now I know where to turn when next elections are coming. It's kinda incredible that I only now stumble upon this site. Why am I so badly informed? (Could it have something to do with not following Estonian news, not watching the television, etc.?)

As a defense against coercion, voters are allowed to vote multiple times during the online election period, with only the last vote counted. All earlier votes are revoked but retained on the storage server for logging purposes. While the voting client indicates whether the user has previously voted, it does not display the number of times. The voter can also override her electronic vote by voting in person on election day. (Halderman et al. 2014: 3)

Wait. So why does the electronic voting option stop a whole four days before the main voting day? I don't believe that it takes up to your days for today's computer technology to process to electronic votes. Really, what is stopping the voting system from being my ideal of voting electronically on the main voting day?

Some procedures appeared to change several times over the observation period. For example, observers were initially allowed to film and photograph inside the server room, but were prohibited the next day because of the unsubstantiated claim of "possible electronic interference." In a similarly abrupt change in procedure, observers were required to leave their mobile phones outside the data center after multiple days where this was not the policy. Rewriting the rules on the fly suggests that the procedures had not been adequately thought out or were insufficiently defined for staff to implement them consistently. (Halderman et al. 2014: 4)

Presumably this was the first time the voting procedure was observed, so the accusation really amounts to "adapting to novel conditions by creating necessary restrictions". What for the observers is a rewriting of the rules might in fact have been a creation of rules (that is, writing, not rewriting).

Even when procedural safeguards were clear, they were not always followed. For example, procedure dictates that two operators will be present when performing updates and backups. Second-operator procedures like this are commonplace in situations, such as voting, where the outcome must be robust to a single point of foilure. On October 14 we observed that a lone staff member performed these tasks. The same staff member arrived with update disks and left with backup disks. Without a second operator present, the security of the system relies on the integrity of a single staff member. (Halderman et al. 2014: 4)

This sounds a lot like military. Two guards/operators are procedurally necessary, even though not really, because on guy can do it and the other would be there for the formality of having two guys. The idea seems to be that the integrity of a single staff member cannot be trusted but the integrity of two staff members surely can. Is if two staff members cannot be bought. I'd rather think that if one can, the other can, too. Ultimately, it seems to me, it doesn't matter how many operators you have checking up on each other, but whether you can trust the one person who is necessary to do the job. That is, I think it's a matter of quality, not quantity. (Then again I am way too naive and ignorant to have a say in this. My ignorance and naivete is exactly the reason why I'm reading this report that's so far removed from my own field and interests.)

In other instances workers inintentionally typed passwords and PINs in view of the camera. These included personal national Id card PINs and server root passwords. Similar problems were present during daily maintenance operations in the data center. Physical keys to the server room and rack were revealed to observers; these keys could potentially be duplicated using known techniques. (Halderman et al. 2014: 5)

If these kinds of things are considered, there can never be a completely secure voting system. The case is similar to the Bleeding Heart bug: we know in hindsight that there was a possibility for catching "bleeding" information, but there is no way to prove that anyone actually did so. Ultimately the question seems to be whether we can trust computers or people or anything or anyone, ever? Maybe it would be better to get some food storage and move to an underground shelter - then the only problem would be whether you can trust yourself not to slash your wrists out of boredom. This is getting hypebolic, but that's exactly the issue: you can always blow security questions out of proportion.

The most alarming operational security weakness during pre-election setup was workers using an "unclean" personal computer to prepare election client software for distribution to the public. As seen in Figure 5, the desktop has shortcuts for an online gambling site and a BitTorrent client, suggesting that this was not a specially secured official machine. If the computer used to prepare the client was infected with malware, malicious code could have spread to voters' PCs. (Halderman et al. 2014: 5)

Yes, the photographic evidence clearly shows that between OpeOffice, Opera, VLC Player, some Samsung software, there was a shortcut to PokerStars.ee - is this shortcut a security threat in and of itself? The argument that it was an "unclean" personal computer seems to hinge on this shortcut (did they ask the purported owner if this was a personal computer?). I don't see a BitTorrent client anywhere, but the question would again be: does a BitTorrent client make a government computer personal and "unclean"? This almost seems to hinge on the anti-piracy narrative that torrenting will inevitably get you malware.

Unencrypted daily backups were casually transported in workers' personal backpacks. DVDs holding updated voter lists from the population register were handled in a similarly casual way after having been created, as were told, by a member of staff at their own computer. We did not observe any audit trail or checks on the provenance of these DVDs, which were used daily at the heart of the I-voting system. (Halderman et al. 2014: 5)

These DVDs should be encased in bulletproof briefcases and carried with a four-member armed security team. A new computer must be set up to perform every simple operation and everyone must be treated as if they had ill intentions. That way, surely, there will be trust, safety and security.

After the votes were decrypted on the counting server, an unknown technical glitch prevented workers from writing the official counts and log files to DVD. Instead, they elected to use a worker's personal USB stick to transfer the files to an Internet-connected Windows laptop. (Halderman et al. 2014: 5)

Now imagine that the attackers were somehow omnisciently knowledgeable about this unexpected DVD-writing error and correctly predicted that a worker's personal USB stick and laptop would be used instead! My god, there are over 9000 potential attack vectors!

Keystrokes reveal critical passwords - Videos posted by officials during the election show operators typing, inadvertantly revealing critical system passwords. (Halderman et al. 2014: 6)

But the figure shows only the username ("root") and the official just about to write the password. There is no indication that an onlooker could see or camera could record the password. Since it's a linux system (as the figure clearly shows), the password doesn't even appear on the screen in any form. The attacker would have to be an expert "keystroke reader" and hope that the password was not changed after the video was posted.

Video shows national ID PINs - During pre-election setup, someone types the secret PINs for their national ID card in full view of the official video camera. (Halderman et al. 2014: 6)

The attacker would only have to steal that person's ID card and then he could falsify that person's vote. What a threat! Given that Estonia is an Orwellian state with telescreens on every wall, every vote can possibly be falsified using this method.

Posted Wi-Fi credentials - The official video of the server setup process reveals Wi-Fi credentials, which have been posted on the wall. (Halderman et al. 2014: 6)

Yes. If the video were only with higher resolution so that one could actually read the password and we could be sure that they didn't change passwords at all, this would be a possible attack vector.

At that point, the malware checks whether the voter's ID card is still present in the computer. If so, it opens a copy of the I-voting client in a hidden session and, through keystroke simulation, submits a replacement vote. In the case that the ID card has already been removed, the malware remains dormant until the card is inserted again. Since Estonian ID cards are utilized for a variety of applications, many voters are likely to use their cards again within the one-week online voting period. (Halderman et al. 2014: 9)

In this case you would have to hope that people do for some unknown reason hold their ID cards in the reader for extended periods of time. Since I don't use it myself I can't say for sure if this is the case or not. As far as I know the use of ID cards "for a variety of applications" is greatly exaggerated.

One core strength of the I-voting system is Estonia's national ID card infrastructure and the cryptographic facilities it provides. While the ID cards cannot prevent every important attack, they do make some kinds of attacks significantly harder. The cards also provide an elegant solution for remote voter authentication, something new countries do well. (Halderman et al. 2014: 10)

The problem here is that ID cards would be difficult to implement in larger countries. The U.S. reacted with kicking and screaming to universal healthcare. Just imagine what kind of threats could be imagined for having all of your personal information in a database.

As we have observed, the procedures Estonia has in place to guard agaist attack and ensure transparency offer insufficient protection. Based on our tests, we conclude that a state-level attacker, sophisticated criminal, or dishonest insider could defeat both the technological and procedural controls in order to manipulate election outcomes. Short of this, there are abundant ways thta such an attacker could disrupt the voting process or cast doubt on the legitimacy of results. Given the current geopolitical situation, we cannot discourst state-level attacks targeting the system in future elections. (Halderman et al. 2014: 11)

The current geopolitical situation is that Russia could stir some shit by rolling in with tanks and fleets of helicopters. Attacking the Internet voting system seems too subtle for Russia.

Due to these risks, we recommend that Estonia discontinue use of the I-voting system. Certainly, additional protections could be added in order to mitigate specific attacks, but attempting to stop every credible mode of attack would add an unmanageable degree of complexity. Someday, if there are fundamental advances in computer security, the risk profile may be more favorable for Internet voting, but we do not believe that the I-voting system can be made safe today. (Halderman et al. 2014: 11)

For some reason I'm reminded of some Fox News reporters: the day to talk about women's rights or gun control will come, just not today. Based on what I've read here, I' wouldn't discontinue the use of the I-voting system. Rather, I would set up some additional procedures and background contingencies - such as having an emergency USB stick and clean computer to transport data if DVD writing should fail, etc. It is impossible to negate all the threats, but in this case it doesn't seem necessary. I wouldn't recommend this system for the U.S., but for Estonia I think it'll do.

We have not accepted any financial support from within Estonia, except for travel and accommodations for the international observers during the Oct. 2013 voting period, which were paid for by Tallinn City Council. The only requirement for that arrangement was that we observe the elections. (Halderman et al. 2014: 11)

This actually speaks a lot about why this observation occurred and why the report was published. Tallinn City Council is under the control of the Central Party (Keskerakond) and far from unbiased towards the Internet voting system. At the end of the day, the Estonian party that doesn't want there to be Internet voting accommodated an international team to assess the security threats of said voting system. There are so many ongoing corruption cases against this party that it's doubtful whether anyone would even consider looking into the neutrality of the team that authored this observation/report. In any case, for me it was an interesting reading. Without paying much attention to news and television, this is how I learn about my own country.

Umwelt and animal communication

Maran, Timo 2014. Zoosemiotics: Umwelt and animal communication. Course powerpoint slides.

[...] focusing on relationships that combine cultural symbolic information, communication between humans and animals as well as biological facts and regularities.

The order here goes from strictly human (culture) to communi(cati)on between humans and animals and finally to the strictly animalistic realm (biology).

Probably in every case of animal depiction two aspects are present - some characteristic features derived from the animal as biological entity and some ascribed from human culture.

Compare this to Peirce's understanding of how "symbols grow" - on icons (here some characterist features derived from the animal as biological entity) and other symbols (here some characteristic features ascribed from human culture). That is to say, probably in every animal representation, there is something iconic as well as symbolic. In human representations, the actual characteristics of animals and their behaviour are mixed with our cultural knowledge, contingent representations and aspects of human behaviour (e.g. anthropomorphization).

Focusing on animal's semiotic engagement in environment may be relevant in cases where some subjective factor, such as a lack of tradition in animal inhibits it from using a resource or adapting with the changing environment.

Engagement is a good word here. I also like that animals' traditions are recognized here. Similar problems are of course present in human society as well: our semiotic engagement with our environment will also have to adapt with global warming and the weather getting increasingly bizarre and unpredictable.

Zoosemiotics deals with appearances (characteristics of biological forms), signification (semiotic relations of animals with their environments), communication (within and between animal species), and representation depictions in literature, art, film and other media of human culture) of animals.

The order reaches from appearances of biological forms for other biological forms to representations of humans that rely on the appearances, significations and communications. I wonder if this series can be viewed as a concatenating list: representations of inter- and intraspecific communication includes relationships of signification with environment that in turn rely on appearances.

Semiotic approach can focus of description and study of sense organs, comunication channels, signals and messages. Relevant questions are relations between the message, its meaning and context. Favorable methods for semiotics are observation and speculative description, comparative and participatory research techniques, modeling and communicatio nanalysis.

Speculative description and modeling stand out as something that semiotic approaches in my view engage in most often. A casual example of these approaches is the construction of typologies. Even in communication analysis semioticians seem to be engaging in these latter approaches.

[Zoosemiotics] is especially suitable for studying objects that are in-between - phenomena that connect humans to the animal world.

I like that Sebeok classified the study of human nonverbal communication under zoosemiotics. And it is indeed the case that the study of human territorial (proxemic, spatial) behaviour has based it's assumptions on Heini Hediger's work.

Animal classification in Navaho Indians:

• Speaking creatures (humans)
• Nonspeaking creatures
  • non-moving creatures (plants)
  • moving creatures (animals)
    • runners
    • fliers
    • crawlers

I like that the broadest level of distinction is between verbal (humans) and nonverbal (all other creatures), though it does feel like you could find moving and non-moving humans and further distinguish humans that run, walk, crawl, etc. The source: Levi-Strauss's The Savage Mind, pp. 39.

"[...] but all animals without exception exercise their power of singing or chattering chiefly in connection with the intercourse of the sexes." (Aristotle, Historia Animalium)

Humans are also animals. So...

Only meaningful use of language and thinking cannot be explained mechanically;

I think this is where one of the major flaws of Descartes's argumentation lies. Meaningful use of language and thinking is far from the only phenomena that cannot be explained mechanically. Also, how sure are we that the meaningful use of language and thinking cannot be explained "mechanically"? What if neuro- and cognitive sciences develop far enough to explain every cognition and affection "mechanically" in terms of physiochemical mechanisms?

Umwelt is the subjective world of animal that corresponds to its body plan, perceptual and effectual organs, and that is the only existing reality for the animal. Umwelt is organized by meanings.

Umwelt seems to be organized according to the physiological body plan (organs and organelles) as well as the perceptual world that these give rise to. This is a concise statement on the Umwelt, but as always something about it remains ungraspable (I recall that the body plan had something to do with teleology). I will surely have to read Uexküll in original German when I begin learning German.

[...] every organism reacts to the environment selectively as a subject, by ignoring certain influences and reacting to others in its specific way. The core of Uexküll's functional cycle is selective perception, interpretation and reaction or feedback.

Just this morning I thought of a neat metaphor to demonstrate selective perception and perceptual organization. When you hold an open book in in your hands backwards, all the letters turn into a jumble of lines, unrecognizable and complex. But once you turn the book teh right side up, words just jump out at you. I'd like to use this metaphor to explain the skills involved in "reading" nonverbal behaviour. But it works equally well here. The behaviour of an animal of another species may appear as a jumbled mess of complex signals, while the behaviour of a conspecific simply jumps at you as meaningful.

What is the function of the behavior, how it helps animal to survive? - functional explanation;

Ah. So that's what is meant by functional in this context. Here "functional" is almost synonymous with "adaptive".

Zoosemiotics ([Sebeok] 1963) - a discipline "within which the science of signs intersects with ethology devoted to the scientific study of signaling behavior in and across animal species".

Since humans are also animals and also have signaling behavior, the so-called "human ethology" does relegate human nonverbal communication, if not the totality of anthroposemiotics, under zoosemiotics. In this sense there would be a concatenating order: biosemiotics - zoosemiotics - anthroposemiotics.

First zoosemiotic source: Peter Marler's paper "Logical analysis of animal communication" (Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1961).

Oh wow, this is even available online. AND it uses "the methods developed by C. W. Morris (1946) for the logical analysis of human language" that distinguistes identifiors, designators, appraisors and prescriptors. This means that I will have to read it. That is, I need to read it.

Animals do not have language and human language should stay outside of the scope of zosemiotics.

I concur with this statement. It is also the reason why I didn't enjoy the seminars as much as I could have. Usually three male students started exchanging laborious ideas about the nature of human language while everyone else just listened on. If it were up to me I would have moderated the seminars to avoid spending too much time on language and focus on animal communication, the actual topic of the course.

Animal communication should be interpreted in the context of the animal Umwelts.

Also very agreeable. The Umwelt model is readily applicable to most everything involving animals and signs, so viewing animal communication in Uexküll's terms should be natural and easy. For some reason it's not though. I have yet to see an approach to animal communication that relies on the Umwelt theory to a satisfactory degree. (I have to specify that to me "satisfactory" here implies that the approach could equally well be used to view human nonverbal communication.)

Sebeok's research program of six questions:

1. How an animal formulates and codes its message?
2. How will messages be transferred, through what channel and under what circumstances?
3. How animal who acts as a receiver in the communicative situation decodes and interprets message?
4. What is the possible repertoire of the specific species?
5. What are the properties of code, used by the specific species?
6. What role has the contextual information for the communication?

Since this is one of my favorite topics (communication models), I'll compare these six questions to Ruesch's (1953) seven questions and modify them to suit animal communication.

1. How does the communicative behaviour signify or what is the so-called meaning of the given signal?
2. What media, channels and symbolization systems of communication are used? This involves both the perception and transmission channels employed. Input (Merkwelt) and output (Wilkwelt) should be distinguished.
3. With whom is being communicated and how do the receivers (animals of different species) perceive, evaluate and respond to the communication?
4. Who is communicating and what are the "effector organs" of the sender? What is this species' Umwelt like and what are the levels and functions of its communication?
5. What is communicated and how does the intent of the sender differ from the interpretation of the receiver?
6. What are the limitations and the context of communication, what is the type of situation in which it occurs, what rules are observed and what roles are assumed?
7. What is the result of the communication and how does it effect the behaviour or actions of communicators as well as other species involved?

The questions don't match exactly, but very similar or at least complementary answers could be yielded if both were asked.

What role does the contextual information have for the communication? The meaning of the perceived messages can differ depending on:

• does the territory, wheret communication takes place, belong to the sender or to the receiver,
• does communication take place in the open environment or in the close and secure surrounding,
• do participants stay in the same distance during communication or change position regarding to each other.

Also, every received message becomes the contextual information for following messages (cf. works of W. John Smith).

Oh wow. This is strongest alternative to Jakobson's weak context component. In human terms these would be: where is communication situated (public area, a special-function room, someone's place, semiprivate or private area, etc)? Is the environment, to use terms advanced by Hall, sociofugal or sociopedal? Does the communication occur "in situ" (e.g. fixed place) or during movement, e.g. walk, a car or bus ride, etc? The latter aspect of previous messages becoming the context for following messages is what should be accounted for by the contextual function (at least in the synfunctional dimension).

Conspecific spheres around the animal body [according to Heini Hediger]:

• social distance (kept normally by conspecifics),
• personal distance (kept normally in pair relations),
• flight distance (where animal tries to escape),
• critical distance (where animal attacks).

Typology was used later by Edward T. Hall in sociology.

This was one part of Hall's final product (proxemic zones). The other part came from the German-American linguist Martin Joos, whose then-popular book on speech styles, The Five Clocks, gave the impetus to apply Hediger's spheres on human spatial communication.

Post-linguistic era of zoosemiotics: criticism over the suitability of the transmissional communication approach for zoosemiotics and search for alternatives.

This is very much to my liking because it reflects the problems I'm having in studying nonverbal communication. The transmissional model just doesn't work well when there is barely an explicit and intentional message. In my own search for alternatives I've replaced "nonverbal communication" with discussion of "nonverbal behaviour" and instead of messages or cues prefer to think of the "regulative" function of social behaviour. That is, the behaviour of one organism influences, modifies, controls, guides, conducts, and generally effects the behaviour of others around it in a variety of ways greatly outside the scope of a simple exchange of messages. At the moment I think that the alternative may be viewing it from a more general or broader level: not on the level of single messages, but on the level of clusters and complexes of messages and non-messages - but here I lack the terminology to phrase it correctly.

[...] things of animate or living nature (body forms, colors and patterns of skin, sounds that animals make, physical signs that tehy leave behind, etc.).

A reference to Adolf Portmann's 1967. Animal Forms and Patterns: A Study of the Appearance of Animals. All of his papers available online are in German, but there is a paper on him by Karel Kleisner in the journal Biosemiotics, volume 1 issue 2, pp. 207-219 (2008).

Communication - semiotic interaction between two participants (differs from semiosis in that communication includes a sender and code repertoire).

Definining communication as semiotic interaction does make sense from Tartu semiotics persepctive: in autocommunication the two participants are one person interacting through or across (space and) time. Such a broad definition also allows for Lotman's five textual communication forms: e.g. semiotic interaction between the text and the reader, between the reader and the cultural background of the text, etc.

Representations are means of culture for organizing its relations with other living organisms; representations can also have various roles in culture (memorizing places, times or events; charterizing cultural objects and building personal or social identities).

All of these are interesting. Representations that characterize cultural objects seems to be something I haven't thought of before but should. Memorizing places, times or events is also neat. A specific instance that comes to mind in terms of relations between animals and human culture is the imagery of Russia as a bear and how at the eve of WWII, "We called the bear for help (against the nazis) but then the bear didn't leave."

In birds, but also in many mammals mating rituals have elements of young-adult relationships.

This reminds me of the poetic notion that love is a space two people create for themselves to be children again. This is exemplified of how lovers treat each other like babies, caress and care for each other. There is also the example of the actor-pair Nick Offerman and Megan Mullally communicating at home almost completely in baby-talk (which may have been a joke, though).

An ability to make associations is the basis for semiosis; the ability to establish links between perception and suitable action is the basis for Uexküllian functional cycle.

I still wonder how this could be applied on humans. Other than etiquette and "proper behaviour" nothing comes to mind.

In communication theory / semiotics, common possibilities to define communication are:

1. transmissional - to focus on the transmission of message;
2. semiotic / semantic - to focus on the meanings in communication;
3. pragmatic / social - to focus on the creation of common understandings by communication;

The third one seems most interesting, though I would distance myself from "common understandings" and focus on the aspect of organizing behaviour or action. Another slide tells that this view of communication as "a process in which participants create and share information with one another to reach mutual understanding" is authored by Rogers and Kincaid in their 1981. Communication Networks. They use this paradigm to approach family planning in Korea, for example. Reviewer Rolf T. Wigand wrote: "at hand of the Korean data, the authors illustrate effectively the usefulness of network concepts in describing, explaining, and predicting individual, dyadic, group and system behavior." (Social Networks 5(1): 89-91) It appears that they were influenced by Ruesch's paradigm ("individual" here most likely refers to Ruesch's "intrapersonal network"). In any case I cannot find the book itself but there are reviews out there, which may be helpful for rethinking Ruesch.

OR even better, "communication is the transmission of any sign-mediated influence from one part of a living system to another part" (T. Maran).

This actually is better, because "sign-mediated influence" leaves it open for a variety of semiosic processes (not just "exchange of messages"), both direct and indirect, and "a living system" is equally broad and can be understood as a single organism as well as a group of organism (as a system) or the ecosystem at large. Even culture can be understood as a living system - Lotman often uses the notion "organic system".

In autocommunication an organism sends out some signal to the environment and gets some information about itself or about the surrounding environment by receiving the same signal.

I wrote a paper on semiotic approaches to autocommunication, but it was a failure, because I ran out of space with just a cursory overview of what semiotic thinkers such as Peirce, Mead, Morris, Ruesch, Jakobson and Lotman thought about self-communication, intrapersonal communication or autocommunication. I may have to write another paper dealing with interesting questions such as how exactly is echolocation a form of autocommunication and whether there are analogues to this in the human realm. I believe there are countless instances of humans and animals engaging in semiotic relations with their environment in order to deduce information about themselves, others around them or the environment itself - it is only a matter of building a solid theoretical framework and elucidating illustrative examples.

Distinction between propriocetive (inside body) and exteroceptive (through the environment) feedback / autocommunication.

I don't actually fully "get" proprioception. I'll have to read Sherrington again when I know more of physiological research at that time, but I'm really confused about where interoceptive falls in this scheme. It would appear that interoceptive is actually inside the body and proprioceptive is something like "perception of your own body through it's outer surface". Oliver Sacks wrote that before Sherrington, proprioception was known simply as "muscle sense" (cf. Th.v. Uexküll 1992: 463-465). More confusion stems from the Latin proprius which meant: (1) own, individual; and (2) special, particular, characteristic (e.g. the English "proper"). In this etymological sense, proprioception would be simply self-perception.

Animal body plans or body forms determine the location of perceptual and communicatory organs, and accordingly what and from where it is possible to perceive.

Communicatory organs are here probably synonymous with Uexküll's effector organs.

Communication by vibrations. Tactile communication can be divided between:

• Mediated tactile communication (e.g. elephants communicating by trampling the ground)
• Immediate tactile communication (grooming behvaior in primates and in other herd animals).

For creating sound signals and other vibrations animals use the most diverse methods - vocal cords, syrinx, vibrating the whole body or some part of it, rubbing different parts of the body, using special membranes and airbags, creating sound by making contact with the environment.

I have begun turning attention to "mediated tactile communication" but call is strepitation after Roger W. Wescott's paper Introducing Coenetics: A Biosocial Analysis of Communication". Strepitus or "communicative body noise" includes "foot-stamping, which involves contact with the ground". We're dealing with vibrations, but the classification depends on how vibrations are received: by tactile sense, by listening or, as in some marginal cases vibrations can even be seen, by visual sense.

Shared activities of single individuals may result in rather sophisticated behavioral regulation (e.g. building of the anthill).

I find this most interesting, as my own ventures into the "power" aspects of nonverbal communication have led me to prefer the term "social regulation of behaviour". This is something that we have in common with other social species.

[Mechanisms that birds use for orinetation:] low-frequency infra-sound (indicating the position of oceans and other large water-bodies) [...]

Hmm. So infrasound does have some positive uses as well. A quick search does tell that there are "Infrasound sensitive neurones in the pigeon cochlear ganglion" and there occurs "Communication by infrasound in a non-stridulating cricket".

In ritual fights such body postures and gestures are used that allow opponents to make predictions about each other's body size and fighting capability. For instance, bears stand up in the conflict situation, showing to competitors their actual body size.

How nice of them.

Signs are often related to the physiological processs of animals, such as metabolism. All animals need to excrete residues of their metabolic processes. Every such excrement is a natural sign about the animal, showing that it has been in the environment.

For humans, the natural excretions are complemented with garbology.

An interesting group of signs, related to the physical reality and animal physiology, are the motivational signs or motivational signals, i.e. movements that indicate motivation or intention. Motivational signs are for instance stretching head, neck and wings before flying in birds. In this case also the direction of the head has a sign value, as it indicates the intended direction of the take off.

In humans this is discussed under the heading of "action potentials". A common example involves the student who starts packing his things, sits on the edge of the chair, trebles his legs rhythmically and glances yearnfully towards the exit before the class has officially ended.

Semiotic selection (T. Maran, K. Kleisner) - a process in which some image in the selector's Umwelt is imprinted into the perceptible features of another organism. Semiotic selection creates linkage between animal's inner perceptual sphere and physical forms in nature and between different species.

This sounds a lot like the recognition concept of species that K. Kull has talked about. The Phylloscopus trochiloides example on the next slide, wherein the same species of birds with different songs around the Himalayas don't recognize each other when they meet in Siberia.

This approach emphasizes the role of organism's own semiotic and behavioral activity as relevant factors for directing the course of evolutionary processes. Evolutionary developmental biology or evo-devo - emphasizing the role of the ontogenetic development in forming a phenotype (that may have evolutionary consequences).

This seems to be the core of the matter of the epigenetic view. (As little as I understand it...)

British entomologist Richard I. Vane-Wright defines mimicry: "Mimicry occurs when an organism or group of organisms (the mimic) simulates signal properties of a second living organism (the model), such that the mimic is able to take some advantage of the regular response of a sensitive signal-receiver (the operator) towards the model, through mistaken identity of the mimic for the model" (Vane-Wright 1976: 50).

In grifting terms, the con (the mimic) simulates some properties of the "real thing" (the model) so as to fool the mark (the operator).

Alexei A. Sharov has explicated mimicry with the term 'inverse sign', where sign has a positive value for the sender ('transmitter' in his terminology), but negative for the receiver. Sharow specifies that 'an inverse sign is always an imitation of some other sign with positive value for the receiver' (Sharov 1992: 365).

In case of the mimic octopus, it takes on the shape and behaviour of other poisonous creatures in its environment.