This book is on the course reading list. It's a quick 'how to understand signs' book with some examples. The book tries to make the reader think about the structure that is all around us in our everyday lives; one that we don't think about and take for granted because we are too used to it. Simple examples are used to illustrate this; a traffic light for instance uses the colour scheme red, amber, green. We all know what it means. We also expect the colours to be stacked top to bottom in a certain order. There is no reason why they should be a particular colour or order but we accept that they are.
Everywhere we look signs are all around us. A sign is made up of two parts:
Signifier + Signified = Sign
To break that down:
The signifier = the form taken by the sign.
The signified = the concept the sign represents.
So, seeing smoke on the road ahead is a signifier for fire:
smoke: signifier + fire: signified = sign
At a very basic level Semiotics makes a lot of sense. When it is applied to photography too it becomes a useful tool for analysis. I do think there is a danger of the concept being built into ever more complex webs of signs that end up diluting its impact. Can we really decode the entire world around us by using semiotic signs? We use the code of language to express complex thoughts and ideas so maybe the concept is not so far fetched. The issue may be with interpreting semiotic signs. Who gets to say what sign means what? This must be subjective and prone to misinterpreation. It seems that the concept does have critics:
"Sometimes semioticians present their analyses as if they were purely objective 'scientific' accounts rather than subjective interpretations. Yet few semioticians seem to feel much need to provide empirical evidence for particular interpretations, and much semiotic analysis is loosely impressionistic and highly unsystematic (or alternatively, generates elaborate taxonomies with little evident practical application)." Chandler (2014).
The text in bold is a suspicion that I had myself. At the beginning of this book are a couple of very elaborate diagrams breaking down signs into many sub categories. I am dubious about the practical application of such taxonomies.
I need to read more deeply to be able to understand Semiotics in greater depth. Maybe I will change my mind at that time. For now, this book is good for dipping into as and when I need to remind myself about the usefulness of signs when decoding photographs.
references:
Chandler, D. 2014 [online] Accessed 19th June 2015. [Available from] http://visual-memory.co.uk/daniel/Documents/S4B/sem11.html
Showing posts with label Books. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Books. Show all posts
Wednesday, 24 June 2015
Friday, 1 May 2015
Redheaded Peckerwood - Christian Patterson
This book was recommended to me by fellow students at an OCA TV group meeting (thanks, John). I'd presented my 'Rubber Flapper' work and the discussion had moved on to my ideas for presenting the work in book format.
Redheaded Peckerwood is a book that visualizes the true-life story of Charles Starkweather and Caril Ann Fugate. In 1957 the couple went on a road-trip shooting spree across Wyoming and Nebraska. The book contains a combination of trial photographs from the newspapers of the day, the photographer's images of described events, places the couple visited and reproductions of evidence often found on the victim's bodies. The book has an intriguing mix of the real and the imagined.
The introduction is in the form of a small booklet attached to the inside cover. It looks like it is typed on a mechanical typewriter and the fold-out format is an indication of the overall quirkiness of the book to come.
The layout and picture format are what really interested me. The images jump about from page to page. They change ratio and orientation. Analysing the way the spreads are set out will be really useful in helping to inform my 'Rubber Flapper' book design ideas.
One of the most interesting aspects of the book is the aforementioned pieces of evidence. They are inserted between the pages in their original ratios. For example, there is a gas station receipt that is much smaller than the book pages. It looked almost like it had been placed between the pages as a bookmark. Later in the book, a larger fold-out sheet, containing a poem, helps to add a sense of being able to touch real life artifacts. These little changes in format are interesting ways to enhance the narrative and are very effective.
Juxtaposition is used very effectively to visually enrich the narrative. We know from the books introduction that Robert Colvert, a young gas station attendant, was murdered by Starkweather. So when we see a brightly painted advertisement 'Ask for Ethyl' facing another image of a luminous oil spill we are left in no doubt about the metaphor - for the life that was shed on the concrete of a gas station forecourt.
There are other metaphors for murder too. Starkweather and Fugate murder a number of 15 year old Fugate's relatives along the way. Bullet holes in walls; a small knife protruding from peeling plasterwork - spilled ink. As we turn the pages we are taken on a death-trip across sombre landscapes; dirty beds with rumpled sheets; telephone wires in old houses - telling a tale of flight through the landscape; sleep captured fitfully and ill at ease.
The most compelling aspect of Redheaded Peckerwood is the seamless integration of real and imagined events, blended and brought together. As the viewer we do not know what is real or imagined - nor do we care. We are on our own vouyeuristic road-trip. Just like Starkweather and Fugate we've seen this movie before. We already know what the ending will be.
Redheaded Peckerwood is a book that visualizes the true-life story of Charles Starkweather and Caril Ann Fugate. In 1957 the couple went on a road-trip shooting spree across Wyoming and Nebraska. The book contains a combination of trial photographs from the newspapers of the day, the photographer's images of described events, places the couple visited and reproductions of evidence often found on the victim's bodies. The book has an intriguing mix of the real and the imagined.
The introduction is in the form of a small booklet attached to the inside cover. It looks like it is typed on a mechanical typewriter and the fold-out format is an indication of the overall quirkiness of the book to come.
The layout and picture format are what really interested me. The images jump about from page to page. They change ratio and orientation. Analysing the way the spreads are set out will be really useful in helping to inform my 'Rubber Flapper' book design ideas.
One of the most interesting aspects of the book is the aforementioned pieces of evidence. They are inserted between the pages in their original ratios. For example, there is a gas station receipt that is much smaller than the book pages. It looked almost like it had been placed between the pages as a bookmark. Later in the book, a larger fold-out sheet, containing a poem, helps to add a sense of being able to touch real life artifacts. These little changes in format are interesting ways to enhance the narrative and are very effective.
Juxtaposition is used very effectively to visually enrich the narrative. We know from the books introduction that Robert Colvert, a young gas station attendant, was murdered by Starkweather. So when we see a brightly painted advertisement 'Ask for Ethyl' facing another image of a luminous oil spill we are left in no doubt about the metaphor - for the life that was shed on the concrete of a gas station forecourt.
There are other metaphors for murder too. Starkweather and Fugate murder a number of 15 year old Fugate's relatives along the way. Bullet holes in walls; a small knife protruding from peeling plasterwork - spilled ink. As we turn the pages we are taken on a death-trip across sombre landscapes; dirty beds with rumpled sheets; telephone wires in old houses - telling a tale of flight through the landscape; sleep captured fitfully and ill at ease.
The most compelling aspect of Redheaded Peckerwood is the seamless integration of real and imagined events, blended and brought together. As the viewer we do not know what is real or imagined - nor do we care. We are on our own vouyeuristic road-trip. Just like Starkweather and Fugate we've seen this movie before. We already know what the ending will be.
Monday, 2 March 2015
Questioning Identity: gender, class, nation - Kath Woodward
This book is on the reading list for Gesture and Meaning. It's written as part of an introduction to the Social Sciences and attempts to explain the psychology of group mentality in humans.
In order to understand who we are as an individual we must be able to see sameness and difference in others - to know who we are we must also know who we are not. In that way we create our own identity, by accepting or rejecting aspects of one another. This is where group mentalities come into play. We mentally join groups where we see perceive sameness. We are all members of many different groups: Adult Child, Married, Single, Parent, Teacher, Engineer, Unemployed, Religious, Atheist, Guitar Player, Bird Watcher, Creative. We can move between many different groups, adopting different identities for each one. We don't necessarily behave the same way with our parents or at work as when we are with our friends. The more successful we are at maintaining an identity the more we will be accepted within a group.
Within these groups we negotiate a hierarchy. The individual that is the most knowledgeable Engineer in the group, who best fits that identity, will be accepted as such by the other members of the group. The other members jostle for position around that perceived 'ideal' identity and fit in accordingly. The group can be accepting of more quirky interpretations of the Engineer identity and evolve or outright reject difference and remain static.
An individual may perceive themselves as a member of the School Parent group and attempt to join. They will be scrutinised by the other members of the group and assessed for the qualities of the identity required. If it turns out the correct qualities are perceived as lacking, the individual may be relegated to the bottom of the group or cast as Other - not necessarily accepted. The individual cannot maintain an identity alone. They need recognition from the other members of the group for that identity to be successful.
Groups themselves negotiate within a hierarchy of other groups. Groups that we do not belong to we perceive as Other. The Engineers group may perceive itself as superior to the Admin group in an organisation. This can only happen if the Admin group accepts the place given to it by the other group. If there is disagreement then there is a power struggle and conflict arises.
External factors can play a part in determining identity. Gender, Race, and Class have a big influence in most societies. Groups operate within social structures created by Political groups for instance. These groups can determine the success or disadvantage of members of the other groups. Women, Working Class, Minority and Ethnic Groups, not only define their own identities but have to negotiate a world that is controlled by influential groups that also have a major input. In order to play a role (adopt an identity) we must be seen by others. Other groups can accept or reject aspects of that identity and make decisions on its behalf. For instance the ability of women to be be able to fight in the military is a perceived quality that other groups will have influence over.
This book has been very informative and has helped me to see more clearly how identity is formed and how an individual moves effortlessly between many different identities in different contexts. Also that we are not able to inhabit an identity without the consent of others. How we are seen and perceived by others is very influential in the success of any adopted identity. Membership of groups helps to re-enforce a chosen identity.
In order to understand who we are as an individual we must be able to see sameness and difference in others - to know who we are we must also know who we are not. In that way we create our own identity, by accepting or rejecting aspects of one another. This is where group mentalities come into play. We mentally join groups where we see perceive sameness. We are all members of many different groups: Adult Child, Married, Single, Parent, Teacher, Engineer, Unemployed, Religious, Atheist, Guitar Player, Bird Watcher, Creative. We can move between many different groups, adopting different identities for each one. We don't necessarily behave the same way with our parents or at work as when we are with our friends. The more successful we are at maintaining an identity the more we will be accepted within a group.
Within these groups we negotiate a hierarchy. The individual that is the most knowledgeable Engineer in the group, who best fits that identity, will be accepted as such by the other members of the group. The other members jostle for position around that perceived 'ideal' identity and fit in accordingly. The group can be accepting of more quirky interpretations of the Engineer identity and evolve or outright reject difference and remain static.
An individual may perceive themselves as a member of the School Parent group and attempt to join. They will be scrutinised by the other members of the group and assessed for the qualities of the identity required. If it turns out the correct qualities are perceived as lacking, the individual may be relegated to the bottom of the group or cast as Other - not necessarily accepted. The individual cannot maintain an identity alone. They need recognition from the other members of the group for that identity to be successful.
Groups themselves negotiate within a hierarchy of other groups. Groups that we do not belong to we perceive as Other. The Engineers group may perceive itself as superior to the Admin group in an organisation. This can only happen if the Admin group accepts the place given to it by the other group. If there is disagreement then there is a power struggle and conflict arises.
External factors can play a part in determining identity. Gender, Race, and Class have a big influence in most societies. Groups operate within social structures created by Political groups for instance. These groups can determine the success or disadvantage of members of the other groups. Women, Working Class, Minority and Ethnic Groups, not only define their own identities but have to negotiate a world that is controlled by influential groups that also have a major input. In order to play a role (adopt an identity) we must be seen by others. Other groups can accept or reject aspects of that identity and make decisions on its behalf. For instance the ability of women to be be able to fight in the military is a perceived quality that other groups will have influence over.
This book has been very informative and has helped me to see more clearly how identity is formed and how an individual moves effortlessly between many different identities in different contexts. Also that we are not able to inhabit an identity without the consent of others. How we are seen and perceived by others is very influential in the success of any adopted identity. Membership of groups helps to re-enforce a chosen identity.
Tuesday, 3 February 2015
Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics - Bell Hooks
Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics
I'd definitely recommend this book as a good way to get a grasp on the basic concepts of Feminism. A lot of people think they know what Feminism is - especially its detractors. Hooks argues that their view comes via the patriarchal mass media and is biased. The book explains how the movement has been influenced and changed over time and charts that history. The issues discussed around sexism, class, race, sexuality are done so without resorting to an overly complicated academic language.
Before reading this book I was unaware how much the different factions have split and changed the Feminist movement. How the white-supremacist and patriarchal mass media have made sure that Feminism has been thoroughly vilified and held in disdain by the majority public - with a little help from an elite set of educated women that have used Feminism to bolster their own power and class status, whilst leaving behind many of the women that needed a voice the most.
What I took from reading this book is that if you believe in equality for all then you are a Feminist. Feminism is not just about women's issues but a critique of the whole patriarchal system and how it suppresses both men and women. How some women (because they are brought up in the system) can be thoroughly patriarchal and just as damaging to the Feminist cause too.
I'd definitely recommend this book as a good way to get a grasp on the basic concepts of Feminism. A lot of people think they know what Feminism is - especially its detractors. Hooks argues that their view comes via the patriarchal mass media and is biased. The book explains how the movement has been influenced and changed over time and charts that history. The issues discussed around sexism, class, race, sexuality are done so without resorting to an overly complicated academic language.
Before reading this book I was unaware how much the different factions have split and changed the Feminist movement. How the white-supremacist and patriarchal mass media have made sure that Feminism has been thoroughly vilified and held in disdain by the majority public - with a little help from an elite set of educated women that have used Feminism to bolster their own power and class status, whilst leaving behind many of the women that needed a voice the most.
What I took from reading this book is that if you believe in equality for all then you are a Feminist. Feminism is not just about women's issues but a critique of the whole patriarchal system and how it suppresses both men and women. How some women (because they are brought up in the system) can be thoroughly patriarchal and just as damaging to the Feminist cause too.
Wednesday, 10 September 2014
Society of the Spectacle - Guy Debord
This book is a tough read. Although the ideas are intriguing:
'In Societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all life presents as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation.' Debord (2009).
In other words our society is over saturated with images churned out by the media; that we can no longer see ourselves, and mediate with each other through a set of image-based cliches and stereotypes.
The book reads as statement after statement without pause to clarify, reflect, or give examples. I think I got the gist of Debord's argument but another read through is required - if not multiple reads over time. I also looked online for further clarification. I came across a Guardian review that neatly clarified some of the books concepts and helped to cement the various ideas that are thrown up - putting them into a more simpler form than I could manage.
'All told, the book is full of sentences that describe something simple, but profound: the way that just about everything that we consume - and, if we're not careful, most of what we do - embodies a mixture of distraction and reinforcement that serves to reproduce the mode of society and economy that has taken the idea of the spectacle to an almost surreal extreme.' Harris (2012).
So, we're just a bunch of factory worker drones that produce and consume in equal measure. We are kept at peace by shiny things (celebrity culture, passive consumption of television) waved in our faces as a method of distraction so that we don't become too aware of our enslavement. I use the term 'factory worker drones' merely as a euphemism for everyone that has a salaried job and works within Capitalist commodity culture. Debord points out that we actively participate in the spectacle. Even our leisure time that has expanded greatly in the last century is focused into shopping, eating out, exercising, holidaying - all of these activities are designed to make us consume. The system reinforces itself.
I'm not even pretending to fully understand this book. I'm sure some of my points don't quite hit target with the book's core ideas. But I will give it another read soon - after I've had time to ponder and maybe do some more research.
References:
Debord, G. (2009) Society of the Spectacle. London, UK: Anthony Rowe, CPI Group
Harris, J. (2012) Guy Debord predicted our distracted society. The Guardian. Ed: 30th March 2012.
'In Societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all life presents as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation.' Debord (2009).
In other words our society is over saturated with images churned out by the media; that we can no longer see ourselves, and mediate with each other through a set of image-based cliches and stereotypes.
The book reads as statement after statement without pause to clarify, reflect, or give examples. I think I got the gist of Debord's argument but another read through is required - if not multiple reads over time. I also looked online for further clarification. I came across a Guardian review that neatly clarified some of the books concepts and helped to cement the various ideas that are thrown up - putting them into a more simpler form than I could manage.
'All told, the book is full of sentences that describe something simple, but profound: the way that just about everything that we consume - and, if we're not careful, most of what we do - embodies a mixture of distraction and reinforcement that serves to reproduce the mode of society and economy that has taken the idea of the spectacle to an almost surreal extreme.' Harris (2012).
So, we're just a bunch of factory worker drones that produce and consume in equal measure. We are kept at peace by shiny things (celebrity culture, passive consumption of television) waved in our faces as a method of distraction so that we don't become too aware of our enslavement. I use the term 'factory worker drones' merely as a euphemism for everyone that has a salaried job and works within Capitalist commodity culture. Debord points out that we actively participate in the spectacle. Even our leisure time that has expanded greatly in the last century is focused into shopping, eating out, exercising, holidaying - all of these activities are designed to make us consume. The system reinforces itself.
I'm not even pretending to fully understand this book. I'm sure some of my points don't quite hit target with the book's core ideas. But I will give it another read soon - after I've had time to ponder and maybe do some more research.
References:
Debord, G. (2009) Society of the Spectacle. London, UK: Anthony Rowe, CPI Group
Harris, J. (2012) Guy Debord predicted our distracted society. The Guardian. Ed: 30th March 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)