Routledge New Accents Series : Structuralism and Semiotics , 2/ED

by Terence Hawkes

Published in 1977 as the first volume in the New Accents series, Structuralism and Semiotics made crucial debates in critical theory accessible to those with no prior knowledge of the field. Since then a generation of readers has used the book as an entry not only into structuralism and semiotics, but into the wide range of cultural and critical theories underpinned by these approaches.
It remains the clearest introduction to some of the most important topics in modern critical theory. A new afterword and fresh suggestions for further reading complete this new edition.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Linguistics, Theory, Criticism, Semiotics, Language

192 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1977

Reviews

[Alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good intro (1977) to where it seemed literary studies would go for a while. Doxa? Sometimes it's fun to see the Hawkes weave the strands (Vico, Saussure, Sapir, Lévi-Strauss, Russian Formalists) together; it'd be more useful to me to see him pull them apart. Pretty good on the 'so what?' - now we can read 'classics' better. Hits all the high notes that a fervent convert would, in the way that a fervent convert should... This version includes a note from the future (2003) wherein Hawkes reminisces about his Midlands accent, his philosophical adventures through France and America, and his stationing at Cardiff, from which to play gadfly to the Brit Lit critical establishment. Shakespeare appears at the end to award Hawkes the Legion of Honour.

[Jose Neira Délano · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am a modest designer and a very modest reader (totally ignorant) so more than a review, here are my impressions on Structuralism and Semiotics: EXTRAORDINARY! LUCID ANALYSIS! Easy to read! Terence Hawkes is a BRILLIANT SCHOLAR.

I bought the book way back in 1992 and only read it thoroughly in 2010 (!)

See, I have been hoping to get the guts to start making works of art. When I read Structuralism & Semiotics I realized that my ideas resonated with many of Hawkes’ analysis and assertions on the subject and helped me get started.

Please read the book

JND

[Ned Binnie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Clear and concise, expect as much from an English professor. Never going to read Jakobson.

[Bertrand · Rating 3 out of 5]

Other reviews are so scathing I am led to wonder whether I have not just filled my head with the misunderstandings of someone else - my own are quite enough to the task, so let us hope I did not, and that the scorn of others only result from higher expectations, and a better knowledge of the subject! Finding an 'introduction' to any theoretical subject is a bit like the Cinderella experience of buying shoes online: you buy it, and half of the time, it does not fit. Books you cannot return or exchange, because they come in one size only...
At any rate this one was a good fit for me: neither too slow nor too fast. The book was published in 1977, so relatively early considering its subject, which means the author would possibly lack a critical distance he does not attempt, anyway, to exert. Similarly the range of theoricians is incomplete, in part because of the date of publication, and also for more obscure reasons (where is Lacan, for example?).
He starts with Vico and takes his verum factum as the well spring of structuralism, then moves on to Saussure, who establishes the dual structure of the sign, and Piaget, who develops it into the notion of structure. We get an overview of American Structuralist linguistics, who introduce the notion that signs and language format our perception of the world, and Hawkes then spend quite a bit of his 160 pages on Levi-Strauss, mostly as an illustration. The focus of the book, however, is clearly on literary theory, and we then encounter Russian formalism, which is explored in more depth than we might I think expect from a recent book on structuralism. Those were full of interesting insights, and resonate with echoes of the avant-garde projects alongside or inside which they developed. The book then tackles structuralism proper - French structuralism, that is (sorry!) - from Greimas, to Todorov, to Barthes. Derrida gets a mention, but Foucault is only glanced at in the distance. The last chapter looks at semiotics in general, with Eco holding pride of place.
It is indeed quite a dull book - but that was largely what I sought, a book that might expound the systematic character of structuralism, with lists, diagrams and jargon: on this front Hawkes does not disappoint.

[Isaac Song · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is quite fascinating to have a look into how intellectuals of the 20th century turned their perspective from structuralism to something beyond it. Some would coin the term “post-structuralism” or “deconstructions”. And semiotics, as the sibling of these new-born schools, found itself really valuable in researching into post-modernism texts and phenomena. I highly recommend this book to those who wants to have a glimpse at the world of semiotics, and it also works as an index for the beginners(like me) to know what to read then. But it seems that the writer did not fully grasp some of the points from some scholars(it is really hard I understand). So it is quite necessary to read further if you are to study on it. All in all it is suitable for a start. As a compass, I believe that it can help me go further.

[Fiona · Rating 5 out of 5]

Provides great basis for Structuralism and Semiotics. Delves into the genesis of Structurualism, linguistic and anthropology and intro to semiotics. Provides intro to Ferdinand de Saussure, Levi- Strauss, and Roland Barthes.

[Charlotte Lampe · Rating 4 out of 5]

bought this in an oxfam because i liked the cover and now my entire relationship towards language and literature has suffered an incredible re-contextualisation (many "ahh" moments)... a great introduction to semiotics and i hope to explore more !

[Diptesh Augustine Sarkar · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolute mind turner.

[Jonathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Does a great job of laying out the question: why structuralism? And answering it with clarity and detail that makes a case that it is a necessary part of the inquiry of the social sciences.

[蓝 幻 · Rating 4 out of 5]

对结构主义的一个概览。结构主义作为二十世纪最大的显学之一，是理解二战后至今思想和文艺作品不可能绕开的，就以本书作为了解这个学说的开端吧

[Oskar Wielgosz]

Trochę sobie pominąłem pare rzeczy…

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Acquired 1997
Cheap Thrills, Montreal, Quebec

[Noelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good summary of structuralist theory. I could have done without the entire middle section though.

[Veera · Rating 1 out of 5]

Hideously boring. Fascinating topic, but reading about it is like being sucked into a vortex of confusion and gibberish.

[Penny · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not terribly engaging...and a tad dull. Still, it has some interesting points to make about semiotics

[Abdullah Başaran · Rating 2 out of 5]

Disappointing. Nothing is worth reading for semiotics. Hawkes cannot even summarize Derrida's and Barthes's arguments. The worse is its bibliography is utterly bullshit.

[Areej · Rating 4 out of 5]

Piaget <3 de Saussure <3 Lévi-Strauss <3 Jakobson <3 Shekloviski ... very well written book

[Luke Echo · Rating 2 out of 5]

An adequate introduction to the subject.