No news is good news? Making the Finnish public image of Russia
Abstract
Finland and the Russian Federation share significant overlaps in history. With the exception of a couple of conflicts, the relationship between the two is commonly described as friendly. With a common border of more than 1,300 km, Finland has always been closely tied to its eastern neighbor. Despite the physical proximity, the Cold War era closure of the border increased the mental distance between the two sides, and fostered an image of the other colored largely by attitudinal stereotypes. For a long time, the tightly secured border was deemed as a necessary construction, which allowed cross-border flows and influence to be managed and filtered. The resulting ‘us’ versus ‘them’ mentality etched in the minds of many has proven to be far more deeply rooted and harder to erase than the political border per se. In an attempt to trace the development of the portrayed image of Russia, this article analyzes the opinion columns featured in the main Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat during 1990–2010. The analysis suggests that little effort has been made to improve the popular geopolitical image of Russia. While understanding the potential of having Russia as a neighbor, many Finns continue to actively reconfirm the elements in the neighbor, which should be let go in order move beyond stereotypes. This tendency is only reinforced by the load of the language used, which seems to inhibit people from critically evaluating the opinions and views that they hold.
Lakes, presidents and shopping on mental maps: children’s perceptions of the Finnish–Russian border and the borderland
The Finnish–Russian borderland has transformed in the last three decades from two isolated national territories into a transition zone, where the ‘other’ culture and society is ever more present. This paper analyses what kinds of perceptions Finnish and Russian children have of the border and the borderland today. It also examines children’s territorial identifications in the borderland. The research is based on 263 mental maps collected from 9–15-year-old children in the cities of Lappeenranta (Finland) and Vyborg (Russia) and the village of Pervomayskoe (Russia) between 2013 and 2017. The analysis of the maps illustrates that the children participating in the study perceive the Finnish–Russian border mainly as a place for border crossings, although they continue to use the border as a tool for constructing socio-spatial distinctions. In this way, the children actively participate in processes of bordering and play an important part in the social life of the borderland. The participants’ perceptions of the borderland are connected to the national and local contexts that they live in but vary widely between individuals. The paper argues that the local border-related phenomena and children’s border-crossing experiences are increasingly relevant for their national and local identification processes. Besides providing novel information regarding Finnish and Russian children’s perceptions and identifications in the Finnish–Russian borderland, the paper adjusts the mental mapping method to a borderland context and enhances our understanding of the complexity of the bordering processes taking place in borderlands.
Medieval Modal Theories and Modal Logic Handbook of the History of Logic. Volume 2: Mediaeval and Renaissance Logic
1The translation of the Categories is edited by L. Minio-Paluello in Aristoteles Latinus 1.1-5 (Bruges-Paris: Descl~e de Brouwer, 1961) and the translation of the De interpretatione by L. Minio-Paluello in Aristoteles Latinus II.1-2 (Bruges-Paris: Descl~e de Brouwer, 1965). The translation of Porphyry's Isagoge is edited by L. Minio-Paluello and B.G. Dod in Aristoteles Latinus 1.6-7 (Bruges-Paris: Descl~e de Brouwer, 1966). Boethius's commentary on Aristotle's Categories is found in Patrologia Latina (ed. J.-P. Migne), 64, 159-294, De syllogismis categoricis in Patrologia Latina 64, 793-832, In Ciceronis Topica in Patrologia Latina 64, 1039-1169; an English translation with notes and an introduction by E. Stump, and De differentiis topicis in Patrologia Latina 64, 1174-1216; an English translation with notes and essays by E. Stump, Boethius's De topicis differentiis (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1978), Boethius's In Ciceronis Topica (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1988). Boethius's two commentaries on De interpretatione are edited by C. Meiser (Leipzig: Teubner, 1877-1880), his two commentaries on Porphyry's Isagoge by S. Brandt, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 48 (Leipzig: G. Freytag, Vienna: F.Tempsky, 1906), De hypotheticis syllogismis by L. Obertello (Brescia: Paideia, 1969) and De divisione by J. Magee, with a translation and commentary (Leiden: Brill, 1998). Some other ancient works were also used, such as Apuleius's Peri hermeneias (ed. C. Moreschini in Opera III (Stuttgart: Teubner, 1991), Augustine's Dialectica, trans, with notes by B.D. Jackson from the text edited by J. Pinborg, Synthese Historical Library 16 (Dordrecht: Reidel, 1975), and pseudo-Augustinean De decern categoriis, ed. L. Minio-Paluello, in Aristoteles Latinus 1.1-5, 133-75. For the sources of eleventh and twelfth century logic, see J. Marenbon, 'Medieval Latin Commentaries and Glosses on Aristotelian Logical Texts, Before c. 1150 AD' in Ch. Burnett (ed.), Glosses and Commentaries on Aristotelian Logical Tezts (Warburg Institute Surveys and Texts 23), (London: Warburg Institute, 1993), 77-127, republished and revised in J. Marenbon, Aristotelian Logic, Platonism, and the Contezt of Early Medieval Philosophy in the West, Variorum Collected Studies Series (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000). 2Analytica priora, ed. L. Minio-Paluello, Aristoteles Latinus III.l-4 (Bruges-Paris: Descl~e de Brouwer, 1962), Analytica posteriora, ed. L. Minio-Paluello and B.G. Dod, Aristoteles Latinns IV.l-4 (Bruges-Paris: Descl~e de Brouwer, 1968), Topica, ed. L. Minio-Paluello and B.G.