Introduction. The article discusses various historical examples of symbolic spaces – spaces of the existence of an image – to consider how representation systems are arranged in them and how they set the tone for the complex process of creating an image of a person. The author does not consider the image as a conscious construct, which is completely dependent on this external system, but supposes that it is important to research it for a deeper understanding of the modern version of symbolic space and all complex and interrelated processes in it. Thus, the article provides theoretical grounds for a legitimate comparison of practices of the Internet and social media representation with the practices of the past which unfolded in specific, semiotic toposes: Egyptian murals in tombs, the ancient city, a medieval temple, and a European text of the Modernity.Methodology and sources. The theoretical basis of this research is on the contact of a number of approaches to the analysis of the image and image systems: representationst, phenomenological, philosophical-anthropological, (post)structuralist. The author uses works in historical, cultural and art studies in the respective eras as soursces of information on individual spaces of representation of the past (B. Manley, M. Bird, D. Yu. Dorofeev, V. Svetlov, S. Zotov, M. Maizuls, M. Foucault and others). The author relies on detailed descriptions of public spaces, identifies and compares their characteristic features. Results and discussion. Having examined the main features of a number of symbolic spaces of the past, the author shows how they inevitably affect the process of building an image, creating the system of representation. In this sense, both “city” and “text” are presented in the article as concepts, semantic fields and structures, and not as physical objects. The author comes to the conclusion that there is no so much novelty of the modern processes of symbolic exchange on the Internet, as it is usually declared. Most of the actual space`s features which today are called new are found in other spaces and other times. Polyphony, the visual component, one-to-many and many-to-many message addressing, active use of “ready-made” markers and symbolic “blanks”, the iconic character of the signs used – these features of modern communication in the Internet space seem to be new only in comparison with communication within the framework of the New European text. These features are quite applicable to the ancient city and to the medieval temple.Conclusion. The author shows a strong similarity of the modern Internet precisely with an ancient city and a medieval temple, while the text of the Modernity differs from them, and that creates the “novelty” of the current situation. This does not diminish interest in modern practices of representation since their specificity does not necessarily have to be built through the position of innovation which was valuable in the culture of the Modernity.
Political Image of the Regional Leader on Instagram