An Intro to Visual Culture: Ch. 1-2

In the first chapter, "Images, Power, and Politics" Sturken and Cartwright discuss representation. They assert, "Representation refers to the use of language and images to create meaning about the world around us" (p. 12). Further, they discuss the historical debates about representation considering whether representations "reflect the world as it is, mirroring it back to us through mimesis or imitation, or whether we construct the world and its meaning through representations" (p. 12). Immediately, Kenneth Burke comes to mind and his ideas of terministic screens and symbolic action. Burke says we all view the world through a different screen. Much like Sturken and Cartwright, he believes that the world is not simply reflected back to us through representations that stand in for things by copying their appearance. My point is, that it's highly unlikely that each of us viewed the images in the book in the same way or through the same lens. The picture that illustrates this point best is the Weegee (Arthur Felig) photograph entitled, "The First Murder." All of the people in the photograph are viewing the same scene, but each person has a different sentiment, emotion, lens, or screen they are viewing it through.

Another interesting point made in the first chapter is the widespread use of digital imaging technologies since the 1990s. Sturken and Cartwright purport these technologies have "dramatically altered the status of the photograph relative to truth claims, particularly in the news media" (p. 22). The result is that digital imaging has "partially eroded the public's trust in the camera image as evidence, even as the truth-value of the photograph clings to digital images" (p. 22). The authors make an excellent point saying that images are an important means through which ideologies are produced and onto which ideologies are projected. What ideologies or examples come to mind after reading this? Personally, the first thing that came to my mind are airbrushed images in magazines that have attributed to the distortion of acceptable female body types in America. Digital technologies have been employed to convey how women should look according to a particular ideology and mindset. Studies have shown correlations between these digitally altered images and the prevalence of eating disorders.

Much of the chapter also discusses denotative and connotative meanings. According to Sturken and Cartwright, denotative meanings refer to an images literal, explicit meaning. Whereas connotative meanings are informed by the cultural and historical contexts of the image and its viewers' lived, felt knowledge of those circumstances--all that the image means to them personally and socially (p. 20). Company logos operate according to a principle of instant recognition, counting on the fact that the denotative meaning slides into connotative meanings. They use the Nike swoosh as an example. The denotative meaning is the swoosh equals Nike. The connotative meaning is the swoosh means quality and coolness that will (hopefully) boost sales. What other examples of company logos come to mind, and what are the denotative and connotative meanings? Also, consider how different audiences view certain company logos. Take for example, Apple and their apple logo. Apple users see the logo and identify with the company as well as their products. There is a sense of "Apple pride" in that these consumers stick apple stickers on their car and boast about Apple computers trumping any other brand. However, for PC users, the apple may not necessarily be a symbol or representation of a preferred line of products. Instead, the PC users may shun the apple logo and see it as representing a cult or specific group of people whose interests are inherently different.

In the second chapter, Sturken and Cartwright discuss the production of meaning saying that it involves at least three elements besides the image itself and its producer. They are as follows:

(1) The codes and conventions that structure the image and that cannot be separated from the content of the image.
(2) The viewers and how they interpret or experience the image.
(3) The contexts in which an image is exhibited and viewed.

The authors go on to define a viewer as an individual who looks, and an audience as a collective of lookers. After they describe this distinction, they discuss the idea of interpellation as it applies to media and images. They assert that "images interpellate viewers" and purport interpellation describes the way that images and media texts seem to call out to us, catching our attention (p. 50). To be interpellated by an image is to know the image is meant to be understood, even if one's interpretation is unique or goes against the grain of a meaning that seems to have been intended. Advertising seeks to interpellate viewer-consumers. It seems as if advertising and other mass media campaigns target audiences. However, Sturken and Cartwright place a lot of emphasis on the individual and viewer in Chapter 2. Why do you think the authors have chosen to consider viewers, not audiences? They say by considering viewers they can describe some of the "many ways that viewers make meanings outside the boundaries of producers' intended messages and effects, even as viewers recognize those intended meanings" (p. 52).