![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The article provides an overview of relevant theoretical models of the stereotyping and representation of otherness. Based on an analysis of examples from literature and the mass media, the author follows S. Gilman in comparing the pathological and non-pathological forms for perceiving and representing Others. The first set of approaches takes a hegemonic attitude to otherness, whereas the second one recognizes that otherness has its own value. The author describes and gives examples of such pathological forms as depersonification, fragmentation, fetishization, exotization, pathologization, and homogenization. In addition, the author identifies three counter-strategies (nonpathological forms) for representing Others that are practiced in the media that challenge, overcome, and transform the dominant mode of representation: the creation of new positive stereotypes about Others; the application of positive images to those manifestations of otherness that are perceived as purely negative and undesirable; and finally the search for and confrontation of ambivalent stereotypes that are attributed to Others through a critical analysis of the discourse and allowing people who have been othered to be heard.
Acknowledgments
This publication presents the results of a study that was funded by the Russian Science Foundation as part of the project “The Diversity of Types of Sociocultural Cohesion in the Context of Russian Reforms: Conceptualization and Qualimetry,” Grant No. 14-18-03784. I express my sincere gratitude to Yelena Yarskaya-Smirnova and an anonymous reviewer, whose valuable comments and recommendations significantly helped me to improve my work.