Article Sidebar

Submitted
August 31, 2020
Accepted
October 20, 2020
Published
November 17, 2020
Download
PDF Untitled
Statistic
Read Counter : 509 Download : 413

Main Article Content

Abstract

This paper focuses on finding out what meaning is reflected in the phenomenon of rejection of ornamental design of the 75th Anniversary of Indonesia's Independence, from the perspective of Yuri Lotman's (Tartu-Moscow-Semiotic School) cultural semiotics. This ornament has become a polemic in society, because a group of people feels that there is a visual cross in it, which is a representation of a certain group. The research finding states that rejection of the ornamental design for the 75th anniversary of the Republic of Indonesia occurred because a group of people felt that the “sign” in the design represented a certain group, outside them. This opinion is described by Yuri Lotman as the concept of "the inner space" (we/us) and "the outer space" (them). According to him, each culture has boundaries for defining itself (Semenenko, 2012). Everything outside "us" is "not our culture" (non-culture) or "foreign" (alien), and is often considered not good because it is not "like us" (Lorusso, 2015).

 

yuri lotman's (Tartu-Moscow Semiotic School) cultural semiotics, nationalism, plurality

Article Details

How to Cite
Yudithadewi, D., & Parikesit, B. (2020). Inner dan Outer Space dalam Kontroversi “Salib” pada Ornamen 75 Tahun Kemerdekaan. Jurnal Komunikasi, 15(1), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.20885/komunikasi.vol15.iss1.art4
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Azra, A. (2020). Indonesia Bertahan dari mendirikan negara hingga merayakan demokrasi. Penerbit Buku Kompas.
  2. Britannica.com. 2018. Cross Religious Symbol. https://www.britannica.com/topic/cross-religious-symbol
  3. Cheregi, B. F. (2017). Nation Branding in Romania After 1989: A Cultural Semiotic Perspective. Romanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations, 19(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.21018/rjcpr.2017.1.229
  4. CNNIndonesia. (2020a). Agustus 10. Ormas di Solo Minta Pemerintah Revisi Logo HUT RI Mirip Salib. CNN Indonesia. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20200810203039-20-534244/ormas-di-solo-minta-pemerintah-revisi-logo-hut-ri-mirip-salib
  5. CNNIndonesia. (2020b). Eks Menag Respons Aa Gym soal Logo HUT RI Mirip Salib. CNN Indonesia. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20200813112356-20-535246/eks-menag-respons-aa-gym-soal-logo-hut-ri-mirip-salib
  6. Gatra.com. (2020). Diprotes Ormas, Pemkab Hapus Ornamen Mirip Salib Logo HUT RI. Gatra.Com. https://www.gatra.com/detail/news/487105/gaya-hidup/diprotes-ormas-pemkab-hapus-ornamen-mirip-salib-logo-hut-ri
  7. Gunadha, Reza & Bhayangkara, Chyntia Sami. 2020, Agustus 13. Logo HUT RI ke-75 Mirip Salib, Tengku Zul: Umat Mayoritas Mau Digilas? https://www.suara.com/news/2020/08/13/170936/logo-hut-ri-ke-75-mirip-salib-tengku-zul-umat-mayoritas-mau-digilas?page=all
  8. Kompas. (2019). Api dalam Sekam Intoleransi Simbolik. Kompas. https://kompas.id/baca/utama/2019/01/04/api-dalam-sekam-intoleransi-simbolik/
  9. Kull, K. (2015). A semiotic theory of life: Lotman’s principles of the universe of the mind. Green Letters, 19, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/14688417.2015.1069203
  10. Liputansumsel.com. (2020). Logo HUT RI Ke-75 Mirip Salib Umat Dan Ormas Islam Bereaksi. Liputansumsel.Com. https://www.liputansumsel.com/2020/08/logo-hut-ri-ke-75-mirip-salib-umat-dan.html
  11. Lorusso, A. M. (2015). Unity and Pluralism: The Theory of Jurij Lotman. Palgrave Macmillan.
  12. Lotman, Y. (1990). Universe of The Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture. LB. Tauris & Co Ltd.
  13. Lotman, Y. (2005). On the Semiosphere. Sign Systems Studies.
  14. Nariyati. (2020). Logo HUT RI diprotes gegara mirip salib, politikus hingga pengamat beri komentar. Hops.Id.
  15. Nazaruddin, M. (2019). Tartu-Moscow Semiotic School and the Development of Semiotic Studies in Indonesia. Asian Journal of Media and Communication, 3(2).
  16. Nöth, W. (2006). Yuri Lotman on Metaphors and Culture as Self-referential Semiospheres. Semiotica, 1(4), 161.
  17. Nöth, W. (2014). The Topography of Yuri Lotman’s Semiosphere. International Journal of Cultural Studies.
  18. Novikova, A. A., & Chumakova, V. P. (2015). Yuri Lotman’s Cultural Semiotics as a Contribution to Media Ecology. Explorations in Media Ecology, 14(1 & 2).
  19. Prijanto, J. H. (2017). Studi Terhadap Perang Salib Sebagai Upaya Penanaman Nilai-nilai Toleransi Dalam Pembelajaran Sejarah. Scholaria, 7(2), 118 – 125.
  20. Sari, L. M. (2018). Simbol Salib Dalam Agama Kristen. Religi, 16(2), 155–168.
  21. Selvam, R. (2017). Is Jesus Death on the Cross a Satisfaction for the Sins of Humanity or a Demonstration of God’s Love? A Theological Understanding of Atoneme in Relation to the Sacrament of Reconciliation. http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/etd/318
  22. Semenenko, A. (2012). The Texture of Culture An Introduction to Yuri Lotman’s Semiotic Theory. Palgrave Macmillan.
  23. Sugiharto, J. (2017). Kaleidoskop 2017: Pilkada Brutal Gubernur DKI Jakarta. Metro.Tempo.Co. https://metro.tempo.co/read/1045103/kaleidoskop-2017-pilkada-brutal-gubernur-dki-jakarta
  24. Talia, S. (2018). Muslim Views of the Cross as a Symbol of the Christian Faith. Heirs of The Apostles.
  25. Torop, P. (2005). Semiosphere and/as the research object of semiotics of culture. Sign Systems Studies.