What I have found most interesting in geosemiotics is the idea that objects, such as buildings and structures of various sorts, public spaces like parks, fountain plazas, etc, that are not meant initially to be signs at all can indeed become signifiers. I always thought that as a matter of interpretation and almost as a coincidental curiosity one could find meanings drawn from where these objects are and how they interact with the space around them, but never did I imagine one could develop a cohesive theory, much in the scientific spirit, that would lay out the groundwork for a proper analysis of the signifiers and signified found in objects in place, and how humans enter into discourse with these meanings, and even how the objects themselves enter into discourse with each other. I am still skeptical, however, as to the degree of objectivity the theory, and consequently, the analysis of these relationships of meaning and the discourses that emerge from them have, but, to be sure, there is always a degree of relativity in any theory involving social impressions and interpretations humans have regarding discourses in place. This is only to say I am not sure that any of the elements in the theory can be set in stone as a kind of truth, in the strong sense. What I do think can be set in stone is that wherever there are people, and wherever those people encounter and thus engage with objects that other people have made and have set in place, i.e. in the human environment, those people will have impressions and thus interpret the possible meaning that they see those objects as having, to them and to the society in which they are. And that is what is fascinating about geosemiotics, and semiotics in general for that matter, that it offers a comprehensive way we can approach in study this human social phenomenon of signifier and signified, and the relationship these have with society, culture, human behavioral tendencies, and human communication in general. There arises from the theory a formal language we may employ in talking about these matters, which proves to be quite helpful and of great use.
For these reasons I really just enjoyed working through all of the different research assignments in the process of learning how to apply this newly acquired language together with the knowledge that I initially brought to the table, in a way combining the theory of semiotics with the logic of my own discipline, philosophy, allowing the analytical approach and language of the former to compliment that of the latter, and vice versa. By far and large, I enjoyed the learning process and the outcome, an analytical consciousness all the greater and profound, which enables me to do what I seek most in life: understanding it (in addition to enjoying it of course).
I believe the biggest idea, (not to belittle the others because that would be a mistake and not in tune with what I believe), that I would like to inquire into in a formal research project would be that of segregation in space, as in a community (from smallest to largest), since along the way of our study in this course I have come to discover that even things like physical structures in place can reinforce tendencies in society to keep certain social groups isolated and separate and thus marginalized, not to the degree as in a concentration camp, but in effect, similarly, because notice that the only difference there is between a concentration camp and a marginalized group in society is the fact that in the former there are physical barriers while in the latter the barriers are mental; but when structures such as roadways, bridges, buildings, and the like are erected, consciously or not, such that they reinforce the social notions of these mental barriers that marginalize a certain group, the marginalization becomes more like that of a concentration camp. Examples such as projects, ghettos, and the like can give a empirical illustration of how this is so.
In order to develop these ideas I think I am interested in Interstate-81, which runs right through the middle of the city of Syracuse, and in this way dividing it into clear pockets of poor income communities, both on the West and South sides of the city, and pockets of higher (sometimes rich) income communities, both on the East and North sides of the city, which happen to lie on either side of the freeway. Truth be told, and in all fairness, it does not present itself in reality as clear cut as just described, as the socially historical conditions found in each period of the development of the city present different manifestations and expressions in how the city is divided. At any rate, this subject seems to be a great one for a sustained research project, and consequently a sustained research essay.
