Using Habermas' language: How would he respond to Ghosts of Rwanda?
Habermas would view Ghosts of Rwanda as representing a political discourse actively going on in the public sphere. According to Habermas, the public sphere is "a discursive space in which individuals and groups congregate to discuss matters of mutual interest and, where possible, to reach a common judgement." In other words, the views expressed by the makers of Ghosts of Rwanda via the content and interviews in their documentary are an example of a political debate taking place in the public sphere - a political debate which is intended to shape political policy according to the will of the people.
What is unique about Ghosts of Rwanda in relation to Habermas' theory is that it disproves his contention that "the public sphere has collapsed." Habermas believes that the true public sphere was corrupted by media institutions and therefore reflected a political discourse based not on the will of the people but on the will of the media producers responsible for creating the textual and televisual forums for said political discourse. In other words, Habermas might suspect that the political ideas discussed in Ghosts of Rwanda represent the vested political and business interests of its creator, PBS. On the contrary, however, PBS has little to gain economically or socially from the policy implications implicitly suggested in Ghosts of Rwanda. Instead, PBS' creation of the documentary seems to stem from a general interest on behalf of the network to raise public awareness about a particularly troubling event in recent history and to convince its viewers that the US needs to take a different approach to incidents of international genocide. While it can be said that PBS' views as social institution shaped the nature of the discourse in Ghosts of Rwanda, it would be overly cynical to suggest (as Habermas might) that PBS had an ulterior agenda in mind that benefited only themselves when they made this documentary. Rather, this shows that the uncorrupted public sphere can still exist in contemporary mass media and can serve as a viable forum for political discourse which serves to embolden the wishes and desires of the masses.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Blog 6
How would Stuart Hall respond to the question: How does L&O affect the audience in terms of ideology?
For Stuart Hall, the communication of meaning in a television show begins with the encodings of the show's creators -- the intentions of the producers, writers and actors as encoded and represented in the visuals and language of the show. These encodings exist in a cultural framework, and contain both the relative explicit denotation of the words spoken and the associative connotation of all that is seen and heard, as understood by the show's creators. What is actually communicated, however, depends on how the viewer decodes the "visual and aural" signs that make up the shows "discourse" (Hall 511). The decoding will be to some extent limited by what is encoded but can still vary widely among people and be at odds with some of the intentions of the creators. The encodings generally operate -- and this is certainly true in Law & Order -- within a "dominant code" (Hall 515), a set of common and broadly institutionalized signs and meanings. Law & Order portrays the official and classical view of wrongdoing and the law: people who commit horrible crimes for varied but fairly traditional reasons, a police bureaucracy determined to discover the culprits and a legal system trying to convict them but also working with the constraints and struggles of the law, and the constant tension between what is just and what is legal, trying to be just while pushing the limits of what is legal as regards to confessions, searches, etc.
How the viewer responds to Law & Order, however, will depend on his or her own social framework. According to Hall, they may view the show within the same "dominant code" and accept the show more or less as it's presented. Viewers may also operate under the "negotiated code" (Hall 516), in which there is variation among the viewers' interpretation based on the viewer's situation. In the case of Law & Order, which has so many different personal situations and points of view -- disturbed or defiant criminals, aggressive or more complacent law officers, zealous prosecutors as well as more balanced prosecutors and judges -- different individuals may interpret "Law" and "Order" differently based on their own corresponding position or inclinations, sometimes embracing and sometimes rejecting a character or situation and what may be the intended encoding. Finally, some viewers, according to Hall, may decode the show "in a globally contrary way" and view the show with an opppositional reading. This last set of viewers would mostly reject the show's basic 'law and order' framework for "an alternatvie framework of referecne" (Hall 517). This could be the interpretation of a criminal, or any particular individaul who is fundamentally at odds with the rules of American law or the way they are enforced in our culture.
For Stuart Hall, the communication of meaning in a television show begins with the encodings of the show's creators -- the intentions of the producers, writers and actors as encoded and represented in the visuals and language of the show. These encodings exist in a cultural framework, and contain both the relative explicit denotation of the words spoken and the associative connotation of all that is seen and heard, as understood by the show's creators. What is actually communicated, however, depends on how the viewer decodes the "visual and aural" signs that make up the shows "discourse" (Hall 511). The decoding will be to some extent limited by what is encoded but can still vary widely among people and be at odds with some of the intentions of the creators. The encodings generally operate -- and this is certainly true in Law & Order -- within a "dominant code" (Hall 515), a set of common and broadly institutionalized signs and meanings. Law & Order portrays the official and classical view of wrongdoing and the law: people who commit horrible crimes for varied but fairly traditional reasons, a police bureaucracy determined to discover the culprits and a legal system trying to convict them but also working with the constraints and struggles of the law, and the constant tension between what is just and what is legal, trying to be just while pushing the limits of what is legal as regards to confessions, searches, etc.
How the viewer responds to Law & Order, however, will depend on his or her own social framework. According to Hall, they may view the show within the same "dominant code" and accept the show more or less as it's presented. Viewers may also operate under the "negotiated code" (Hall 516), in which there is variation among the viewers' interpretation based on the viewer's situation. In the case of Law & Order, which has so many different personal situations and points of view -- disturbed or defiant criminals, aggressive or more complacent law officers, zealous prosecutors as well as more balanced prosecutors and judges -- different individuals may interpret "Law" and "Order" differently based on their own corresponding position or inclinations, sometimes embracing and sometimes rejecting a character or situation and what may be the intended encoding. Finally, some viewers, according to Hall, may decode the show "in a globally contrary way" and view the show with an opppositional reading. This last set of viewers would mostly reject the show's basic 'law and order' framework for "an alternatvie framework of referecne" (Hall 517). This could be the interpretation of a criminal, or any particular individaul who is fundamentally at odds with the rules of American law or the way they are enforced in our culture.
Blog 5
Quoting Barthes' "Myth Today" Essay: Discuss how Barthes would understand the following CNN image:
"And it is again this duplicity of the signifier which determines the characters of signification."
The signifiers in this picture are the American soldier in combat, the barren wartorn landscape, and the spraypainted Iraqi flag. Taken together, these images can lead to a number of different signifieds. The signifier here where exhibits the duplicity that Barthes mentions is the Iraqi flag. One one hand, this could signify that the Americans and Iraqi people are allies and that the American combat presence in Iraq is an extension of America's intention to spread democracy and peace througout the world. However, the Iraqi flag could also signify the sovereignty of Iraq and the fact that an American soldier is essentialy fighting in a place he has no business being. Given the duplicity of this particular signifier, Barthes might contend that this image denotes a positive military situation but connotates the intrusion of Americans in to a foreign land.
"And it is again this duplicity of the signifier which determines the characters of signification."
The signifiers in this picture are the American soldier in combat, the barren wartorn landscape, and the spraypainted Iraqi flag. Taken together, these images can lead to a number of different signifieds. The signifier here where exhibits the duplicity that Barthes mentions is the Iraqi flag. One one hand, this could signify that the Americans and Iraqi people are allies and that the American combat presence in Iraq is an extension of America's intention to spread democracy and peace througout the world. However, the Iraqi flag could also signify the sovereignty of Iraq and the fact that an American soldier is essentialy fighting in a place he has no business being. Given the duplicity of this particular signifier, Barthes might contend that this image denotes a positive military situation but connotates the intrusion of Americans in to a foreign land.
Blog 4
Find three quotations in “Rhetoric of the Image” that you find illuminating, Discuss them and apply them to the following ad for the last episode of The Sopranos.
1. "in advertising the signification of the image is undoubtedly intentional; the signifieds of the advertising message are formed a priori by certain attributes of the product and these signifieds have to be transmitted as clearly as possible."
I thought this quote was interesting because it reveals a complexity in media advertising that perhaps Barthes didn't anticipate. While Barthes contends that the signifieds of an advertising message are "formed a priori by certain attributes of the product" there is reason to believe that this applies to material products like cars and soap, but not to cultural products such as films, TV shows, etc. When advertising a TV show the signifieds of the message are not necessarily formed a priori by the show's attributes. For example, the above ad for The Sopranos has a connotation that America provides the opportunity for all to succeed in a free-market, even if that success comes by way of criminal activity. This is not, however, necessarily a signified message that one would readily associate with early seasons of The Sopranos. Rather, the producers of this show are creating a message in this ad that takes almost a retrospective look at Tony Soprano and what he has accomplished over the entire duration of the series. This makes sense, because the ad is not for the show itself but for the final episodes of it.
2. "If our reading is satisfactory, the photograph analysed offers us three messages; a linguistic message, a coded iconic message, and a non-coded iconic message."
I found this quote particularly illuminating because of its simplicity and apparent validity. In The Sopranos ad, we can clearly identify these three messages. The linguistic messsage, "Made in America", suggests literally that The Sopranos is a television show produced in America. The non-coded iconic message (which utilizes the symbolism of the Statue of Liberty) is that The Sopranos is synonomous with American values, particularly those associated with freedom and liberty. The coded iconic message is more complicated because it juxtaposes the "goodness" of America and its freedom with the harsher reality that criminal enterprises like the Mafia take advantage of this freedom for their own self-benefit.
3. "What is a lexicon? A portion of the symbolic plane (of language) which corresponds to a body of practices and techniques"
The introduction of the term "lexicon" is of particular relevance to the analysis of The Sopranos ad. The phrase "Made in America" is embedded in our cultural lexicon and is layered with different connotations. Literally, it denotes that something was produced in America. The connotations, however, are that things made in America are special for a variety of reasons - they represent quality, they are good for the country because they necessitated the emplyment of American citizens, and that the products themselves are infused with many of the same values we associate with our country. If the phrase "Made in America" was not a part of our cultural lexicon, the linguistic juxtaposition at work in The Sopranos ad would go unnoticed and unappreciated.
1. "in advertising the signification of the image is undoubtedly intentional; the signifieds of the advertising message are formed a priori by certain attributes of the product and these signifieds have to be transmitted as clearly as possible."
I thought this quote was interesting because it reveals a complexity in media advertising that perhaps Barthes didn't anticipate. While Barthes contends that the signifieds of an advertising message are "formed a priori by certain attributes of the product" there is reason to believe that this applies to material products like cars and soap, but not to cultural products such as films, TV shows, etc. When advertising a TV show the signifieds of the message are not necessarily formed a priori by the show's attributes. For example, the above ad for The Sopranos has a connotation that America provides the opportunity for all to succeed in a free-market, even if that success comes by way of criminal activity. This is not, however, necessarily a signified message that one would readily associate with early seasons of The Sopranos. Rather, the producers of this show are creating a message in this ad that takes almost a retrospective look at Tony Soprano and what he has accomplished over the entire duration of the series. This makes sense, because the ad is not for the show itself but for the final episodes of it.
2. "If our reading is satisfactory, the photograph analysed offers us three messages; a linguistic message, a coded iconic message, and a non-coded iconic message."
I found this quote particularly illuminating because of its simplicity and apparent validity. In The Sopranos ad, we can clearly identify these three messages. The linguistic messsage, "Made in America", suggests literally that The Sopranos is a television show produced in America. The non-coded iconic message (which utilizes the symbolism of the Statue of Liberty) is that The Sopranos is synonomous with American values, particularly those associated with freedom and liberty. The coded iconic message is more complicated because it juxtaposes the "goodness" of America and its freedom with the harsher reality that criminal enterprises like the Mafia take advantage of this freedom for their own self-benefit.
3. "What is a lexicon? A portion of the symbolic plane (of language) which corresponds to a body of practices and techniques"
The introduction of the term "lexicon" is of particular relevance to the analysis of The Sopranos ad. The phrase "Made in America" is embedded in our cultural lexicon and is layered with different connotations. Literally, it denotes that something was produced in America. The connotations, however, are that things made in America are special for a variety of reasons - they represent quality, they are good for the country because they necessitated the emplyment of American citizens, and that the products themselves are infused with many of the same values we associate with our country. If the phrase "Made in America" was not a part of our cultural lexicon, the linguistic juxtaposition at work in The Sopranos ad would go unnoticed and unappreciated.
Blog 3
Two Quotes from The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction:
“...for the first time – and this is the effect of the film – man has to operate with his whole living person, yet forgoing its aura. For aura is tied to his presence; there can be no replica of it. The aura which, on the stage, emanates from Macbeth, cannot be separated for the spectators from that of the actor. However, the singularity of the shot in the studio is that the camera is substituted for the public. Consequently, the aura that envelops the actor vanishes, and with it the aura of the figure he portrays.”
“Magician and surgeon compare to painter and cameraman. The painter maintains in his work a natural distance from reality, the cameraman penetrates deeply into its web. There is a tremendous difference between the pictures they obtain. That of the painter is a total one, that of the cameraman consists of multiple fragments which are assembled under a new law. Thus, for contemporary man the representation of reality by the film is incomparably more significant than that of the painter, since it offers, precisely because of the thoroughgoing permeation of reality with mechanical equipment, an aspect of reality which is free of all equipment. And that is what one is entitled to ask from a work of art.”
How do these quotes apply to The Blair Witch Project? Is the film an attempt at recapturing the aura (either of the actor of the landscape), or an even more assertive attempt at cutting into reality?
The first quote suggests that the actors in Blair Witch present to the audience an aura not of the actors themselves but rather, of the characters they portray. However, one of the goals of Blair Witch was to create a sense among the audience that they were not watching actors but rather, watching real people. Therefore, the auras of the three main characters serve to ground the viewer in the present reality of the situation rather than preoccupy them with the traits, motivations, etc. that might propel these characters forward in the narrative of some other film. In Blair Witch, however, it is the aura of the landscape rather than of the individual characters that is most dutifully recaptured for the viewer.
The second quote speaks to prominence of the filmed landscape in Blair Witch. Practically the entire film takes place in the wooods, and it is a goal of the filmmakers to create a genuinely scary yet realistic setting in which the characters can act out the story. This goal is acheived largely through the use of handheld digital video in Blair Witch which gives the scenes in the Woods an added sense of realism for two reasons; 1) The quality of the video itself is more realistic and less "pretty" than film, giving the surroundings a sense of natural rawness and grittiness. 2) The fact that all of the shots in Blair Witch are supposed to originate from a piece of diegetic equipment within the narrative heightens the illusion that we are seeing "an aspect of reality which is free of all equipment" In other words, the very images that are viewed on the screen would not exist (in the viewer's mind) were it not for the diegetic equipment used by the characters themselves. This distances the viewer from the actual equipment that was used to create the film and creates a heightened sense of reality and of "being there" with the characters.
“...for the first time – and this is the effect of the film – man has to operate with his whole living person, yet forgoing its aura. For aura is tied to his presence; there can be no replica of it. The aura which, on the stage, emanates from Macbeth, cannot be separated for the spectators from that of the actor. However, the singularity of the shot in the studio is that the camera is substituted for the public. Consequently, the aura that envelops the actor vanishes, and with it the aura of the figure he portrays.”
“Magician and surgeon compare to painter and cameraman. The painter maintains in his work a natural distance from reality, the cameraman penetrates deeply into its web. There is a tremendous difference between the pictures they obtain. That of the painter is a total one, that of the cameraman consists of multiple fragments which are assembled under a new law. Thus, for contemporary man the representation of reality by the film is incomparably more significant than that of the painter, since it offers, precisely because of the thoroughgoing permeation of reality with mechanical equipment, an aspect of reality which is free of all equipment. And that is what one is entitled to ask from a work of art.”
How do these quotes apply to The Blair Witch Project? Is the film an attempt at recapturing the aura (either of the actor of the landscape), or an even more assertive attempt at cutting into reality?
The first quote suggests that the actors in Blair Witch present to the audience an aura not of the actors themselves but rather, of the characters they portray. However, one of the goals of Blair Witch was to create a sense among the audience that they were not watching actors but rather, watching real people. Therefore, the auras of the three main characters serve to ground the viewer in the present reality of the situation rather than preoccupy them with the traits, motivations, etc. that might propel these characters forward in the narrative of some other film. In Blair Witch, however, it is the aura of the landscape rather than of the individual characters that is most dutifully recaptured for the viewer.
The second quote speaks to prominence of the filmed landscape in Blair Witch. Practically the entire film takes place in the wooods, and it is a goal of the filmmakers to create a genuinely scary yet realistic setting in which the characters can act out the story. This goal is acheived largely through the use of handheld digital video in Blair Witch which gives the scenes in the Woods an added sense of realism for two reasons; 1) The quality of the video itself is more realistic and less "pretty" than film, giving the surroundings a sense of natural rawness and grittiness. 2) The fact that all of the shots in Blair Witch are supposed to originate from a piece of diegetic equipment within the narrative heightens the illusion that we are seeing "an aspect of reality which is free of all equipment" In other words, the very images that are viewed on the screen would not exist (in the viewer's mind) were it not for the diegetic equipment used by the characters themselves. This distances the viewer from the actual equipment that was used to create the film and creates a heightened sense of reality and of "being there" with the characters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)