Affect, symbolization, and “practices of the Self”
- DOI
- 10.5922/2225-5346-2026-1-3
- Pages
- 36-53
Abstract
Based on some of the states of Sergey Zenkin’s article, I describe the relationship between affect and symbol. Affect has two sides — cognitive and non-cognitive. The latter manifests itself in unconscious reactions. Conscious affect is regulated by the communicative situation and the sociocultural environment. Sergey Zenkin describes two systems of meaning circulation. The first is sign communication, the second is working with features and symbols. Symbols can be generated unconsciously and evoke similar reactions. Disruption of the flow of information through the system of non-cognitive affectations leads to their objectification. Affects arise in their place, centred on the tension between the source of the affectation and the individual. The former becomes a symbol of the relationship underlying the affect. I illustrate the transition from non-cognitive affectation to affect with the emergence of a new symbol with examples from "practices of the self" in the digital environment. Here, representation displaces the thing, and the source of non-cognitive affectations becomes the interface, network, account, etc. Affects of hope, togetherness, and a new naivety characterise the tension between the individual and the digital environment. When objectified, they become symbols of social status. Thus, representation and its tools evoke a sense of elevation above the world. The overall modulation of these affects is positive; status symbols convey the meaning of a better future, which encourages a shift in the boundaries between the real and the virtual. The mechanism of symbol generation during the transition from noncognitive affectation to normal affect may be part of the third system of meaning circulation discussed by Roland Barthes.