Carrying on from the last lecture, we looked further into semiotic terminology. It was particularly helpful to firstly compare both words and images as signs.

As a signifier, a word does not physically resemble what it describes - it is therefore an arbitrary sign. It requires knowledge (of language, linguistic rules and cultural definitions) to decode. How words are said or written affects the reading of meaning - this is the 'plane of expression'.

As a signifier, an images does resemble what it describes - it is therefore an iconic sign. Images are usually experienced before words are (as memories are experienced visually before we reframe them in words). How an image is captured or rendered affects the reading of meaning - this is the 'plane of abstraction'.

​An important term to note is anchorage - used by Barthes, this describes the relay between words and visuals. There are different types of anchorage:

• word-specific (written or verbal): providing all or most of the information needed to decode through words.
• image-specific: providing all or most of the information needed to decode through images.
• dual message (amplification): using words and images to communicate the same message in tone or content.
• independent (convergent): words and images being used together but contributing independently, to convey a message neither could do alone.
• parallel (divergent/multimodal): words and images being presented together, but on different paths.​​

Signs are polysemous, meaning they are open to many interpretations. When using signs, consider the planes of meaning:

• denotation (primary meaning): a sign's most immediate reading - non-coded, reflects broad consensus, and requires only literal deduction.
• connotation (secondary meaning): a sign's underlying meaning - uses coded interpretation to invoke ideas and link other concepts (intertextuality).

​

Rene Magritte was a Belgian surrealist artist. His paintings, like the one above, were known for being dreamlike and thought-provoking. Arguably his most famous work, the image shown is the perfect exercise for a semiotic analysis.
​

We have to consider both the written and image messages here, and the primary and secondary meanings of both.

In terms of the image message, take the literal observations first. We can clearly see a smoking pipe - it has a gold band, and it is floating. The image seems to be an oil painting, and is rendered realistically. In terms of the text message, we can see the words "ceci n'est pas une pipe" in handwritten script - this translates to "this is not a pipe" in the French langue. These are our denotations.

​Taking the image on a secondary plane of meaning, we start to make connections based on our experience and knowledge of reference. The smoking pipe relates to the Victorian era - its gold band suggests it is well made, perhaps middle or upper class. We also know that in society, especially in Victorian culture, this kind of pipe was seen as a symbol of masculinity. The fact that the pipe is floating gives a sense of surrealism, bringing to mind 1920s surrealist paintings. The text reinforces this - the statement of "this is not a pipe" seems so bold and contradictory that it invokes skepticism in the viewer. We get a suspicious, dreamlike sense of "things are not what they seem". These are our connotations.

Both the image and text play off each other to encourage response; both are required together to convey the intended message, making this an example of convergent anchorage. In my view, the main anchored theme of this work of art is the surrealism - both the image and the text suggest a certain level of illusion, or trickery. When you think of the title, 'The Treachery of Images', you can begin to piece together what Magritte was going for.

At the end of the day, it isn't a pipe. It is a painting ​of a pipe.

​As touched on in Y1, Semiotics is a critical methodology focusing on 'signs', and providing a framework for decoding them.

​A sign is anything capable of conveying meaning (eg. words, images, gestures, clothing, etc). Signs can be grouped together to form 'codes', to convey encoded messages (eg. body language, alphabets, dress code, etc).

​​Modern semiotics (as noted by Jonathan Bignell in 'Media Semiotics', 2002), owes itself to the work of two semioticians; Charles Peirce (1839-1914), and Ferdinand de Saussure (1859-1913). Both were linguists with a synchronic approach to language. Their ideas were relatively similar, but their stances were succinctly different; Peirce was an essentialist, whilst Saussure favoured a structuralist view.*

*Essentialism suggests our external environment influences us - that we are born a "blank slate" which is then imprinted on by our experience of reality.
 Structuralism suggests we have an underlying, inherent nature that shapes us even before we are born - that we are not moulded by our reality.

As a structuralist, Saussure proposed that language is ideological - relating to political and cultural ideas. He also viewed lingual communication as an 'exchange of minds', requiring mutual cooperation (reference and knowledge of reference) to work.

An entire language system (langue) is made up of words (signs, which are symbolic and arbitrary). This concept, that each sign is in fact dyadic, is the basis for Saussure's equation:
​

A syntagm would then be a complete, ordered sequence of signs (ie. a sentence). A paradigm  is a point of substitution in a sentence which allows for an exchange of a similar sign without changing the overall structure. Noting these two elements is essential in explaining the meaning of a parole.

Another semiotician directly influenced by Saussure was Roland Barthes (1915-1980). Notably, Barthes' work built on Saussure's ideas and focused on their link to cultural media, coining the term myth (the bringing-together of a sign and its connotations).

As Barthes mentioned in 'Mythologies', 1957, myths in mainstream media and culture may:
- reflect dominant ways of thinking ("cultural norms").
- be structured (to communicate messages or propagate stereotype).
- be ideological (politically/socially motivated).

An example in Bignell's text I found quite useful was that of the Rolls-Royce. The word, or linguistic sign, denotes a make of car. But beyond that, considering the connotations we've derived from our experience of reality, it becomes a connote or "symbol" of luxury and wealth.

In lecture, we looked at wrestling and the wrestler/audience dynamic as another example of Barthes' mythology concept.

Exaggerated body language and excessive gestures are used in wrestling to emphasise meaningful discourse. These gestures can be seen as individual signs, used together to create a semiotic code - when repeated and reinforced, they can be easily decoded by the audience.
​

Therefore, the myth here is that wrestling presents the illusion of passion. It has all the context of sport, but is actually a performance - fans derive pleasure from the illusion of dealt justice.

From this case study, we can separate the whole process into 3 parts:
- PRESENTATION: the live event.
- REPRESENTATION: mediation (editing, direction, relay).
- RE-REPRESENTATION: reframing (highlighting, biased opinions).