In order to satisfy cultural demands for artists to recognise their responsibilities towards cultural misrepresentations issues relating to ethics, ethnicity, religion and sexuality, new
forms of representation are being formulated. Through the practice of photography, chirography and other media and the theme of the female shoe, this research can explore these
and other related issues that question the position we find ourselves in, and hopefully increases the important debate surrounding the future of photographic practices.
The research has revealed that there are two approaches to the ways in which photographic and chirographic combinations can be evaluated. One where photographic based images
simulate the visual appearance of chirographic media in various forms and secondly where chirographs imitate the visual appearance of photographs. In addition it can also be concluded that as a result of this investigation, and through employing the concept of contiguity, the additional reference has been made to 'imprints' such as vacuum-formed images. In these cases the research reveals that it is this particular kind of indexical emphasis [rather than iconic] that gives it its connotative power and in doing so aligns itself with Post-modern theories.
C O N T E N T S
List of Illustrations
Abstract
Synopsis
Chapter 1 Methodology
Chapter 2 The role of the photograph
Chapter 4 The relationship of theory to practice
Chapter 5 Images and evaluation
Chapter 6 Conclusion (evaluation & outcomes)
Bibliography
List of Illustrations
All illustrations are my own unless otherwise stated.
Fig. 1, Ansell Adams, ‘Monolith, the face of Half Dome, Yosemite Valley, California, USA’, c. 1927, 38 cm x 30.5 cm, silver gelatine print, in: Naomi Rosenblum, 1997, The World History of Photography (third ed.), New York, USA: Abbeville Press, 425.
Fig. 2, Roger Fenton. 'The Valley of the Shadow of Death', 1855, 24.4cm x 35.9cm, saltedpaper print, in: Mike Weaver (ed), 1989, The Art of Photography 1839-1989, catalogue, Newhaven & London: Yale University Press, ill. 99.
Fig. 3, Roger Fenton. 'Hardships of Camp Life', 1855, size unknown, salted-paper print, in: Time-Life (eds), 1974, Great Photographers, Netherlands: Time-Life International, 46.
Fig. 4, Robert Capa, 'Soldier at the Moment of Death, Spanish Civil War' 1936, 24.5cm x
34.2cm, gelatine-silver print, in: Mike Weaver (ed), 1989, The Art of Photography 1839-1989, catalogue, Newhaven & London: Yale University Press, ill.410.
Fig. 5, Charles Bell, 'Sixteen Candles', 1992, 152cm. x 274.3cm, oil on canvas, in: Edward Lucie-Smith. American Realism, London: Thames & Hudson, 193.
Fig. 6, Gerhard Richter, 'Emma - Nude on a Staircase,' 1966, 200cm, x 130cm, oil on canvas, in: Pierre Cabanne, 1997, Duchamp & Co, Paris: Finest SA/Editions Pierre Terrail, 61.
Fig. 7, Marcel Duchamps, ‘Nude Descending the Staircase No 2’ 1912, 146cm x 89cm, oil on canvas, in: Pierre Cabanne, 1997, Duchamps and Co, Paris: Finest SA/Editions Pierre Terrail, 59.
Fig. 8a [left] Marlene Dumas, 'Supermodel', lithograph on paper, 66.5cm x 51.5cm, in: Mariuccia Casadio, 1995, Marlene Dumas, London: Phaidon Press Ltd., 93.
Fig. 8b [right] Sandro Botticelli, 'Madonna del Magnificat’ (detail), 1483-85. Florence, Galleria degli Uffizi, in: Botticelli Book of Postcards, Magna Books. Manipulation by Roger Dorey, 2000.
Fig. 9. Rudolf Dührkoop and Minya Diez-Dührkoop. ‘Alfred Keer’, 1904, oil on pigment print, size not known, , in: Naomi Rosenblum, 1997, The World History of Photography (third edition), New York, USA: Abbeville Press, 316.
Fig. 10. Marcel Duchamp, 'With my Tongue in my Cheek', 1959, plaster, pencil and paper, mounted on wood, 22cm x 15cm x 5.1cm, in: Pierre Cabanne, 1997, Duchamp & Co., Paris: Finest SA/Editions Pierre Terrail., 174.
Fig. 14. Reebok Advertisement for Aerostep PRO Graphite HXL with Metaflex hinge, Health and Fitness, April 1994, size not known. (LHS Advertising Agency) in: Pat Kirkham, 1996, The Gendered Object, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 129.
Abstract
In order to satisfy cultural demands for artists to recognise their responsibilities towards cultural misrepresentations issues relating to ethics, ethnicity, religion and sexuality, new forms of representation are being formulated. Through the practice of photography, chirography and other media and the theme of the female shoe, this research can explore these and other related issues that question the position we find ourselves in, and hopefully increases the important debate surrounding the future of photographic practices.
The research has revealed that there are two approaches to the ways in which photographic and chirographic combinations can be evaluated. One where photographic based images simulate the visual appearance of chirographic media in various forms and secondly where chirographs imitate the visual appearance of photographs. In addition it can also be concluded that as a result of this investigation, and through employing the concept of contiguity, the additional reference has been made to 'imprints' such as vacuum-formed images. In these cases the research reveals that it is this particular kind of indexical emphasis [rather than iconic] that gives it its connotative power and in doing so aligns itself with Post-modern theories.
Synopsis
This programme of study centres upon the relationship between photography and painting and in particular when they are combined in various ways. It proposes that it is the viewer's tacit knowledge of certain codes of interpretation of how images come about and that defines how connotation and therefore interpretation is affected. In recognition that certain semiotic distinctions made between photographic and chirographic codes are currently being blurred, thus creating interpretational problems for the viewer. In these cases the key issues are of just what is being connoted and how. The programme seeks to prove that it is the semiotic concept of contiguity that really defines the relationship between the photographic sign and the painted [referred to henceforth as chirographic, meaning hand-made]. It then brings into question, through practice-based research, how certain forms of contiguity appear to challenge photography’s ontological concept of truth.
Through using semiology as method I undertook some theoretical analysis and then tested this through practice. On the basis of an evaluation of my practice I found this to be complementary. On this basis I then recommend my outcomes.
The scope of this research lies in firstly establishing a sound theoretical position on "photographic specificity" as research method and then applying this to analyse historical images. From this using the female shoe motif a range of experimental images can be produced that addresses how the semiotic concept of contiguity can define the difference between photographic and chirographic indices. By also employing semiology to evaluate my practice further related issues of representation are addressed that questions its position in visual culture. This hopefully increases the important debate surrounding the future of some photographic and allied media practices. This programme seeks to show how the integration of theory with practice engenders novel approaches to practice.
The main hypothesis of the research is that we approach the interpretation of a photographic image differently from the way we approach the interpretation of a painting or chirograph. This difference is based upon the viewer’s knowledge of the different means by which they were ‘constructed’. The automatism of the construction of the photograph requires some contiguity to exist between the referent and the picture plane. Therefore there is a tacit assumption that the object was actually present at the moment when the photograph was made. This contiguity is not required when constructing a chirograph. The result is that the connotation of a chirograph [of the reality claims of the object] affects the interpretation. If we then go to combine these two construction methods in various ways problems arise about the status of what is connoted.
illustration not visible in this excerpt
The purpose of the research is to examine the unknown values above.
Chapter One Methodology
Semiology is the study of either the individual or the social production of meaning from sign systems. It involves the study not only of what we refer to as 'signs' in everyday speech, but of anything which 'stands for' something else. In a semiotic sense, signs include words, images, sounds, gestures and objects. Such signs are studied not in isolation but as part of semiotic 'sign systems' [such as a medium or genre]. For John Fiske, 'the central concerns of semiology are the relationship between a sign and its meaning; and the way signs are combined into codes' (Fiske, 1990: 281). It is a theoretical approach but does highlight the practice-led culturally defined codes that affect the interpretation. It also shows how images are imbued with meaning, and this is an important step in this investigation. Given that the aim of this portfolio is to investigate the interpretation of images that combine photography with painting; where more than one visual language is coexisting with another, then it would appear possible that these languages or interpretational codes could be analysed separately. Semiology does just that. A serious criticism of semiology is that it does not shed light on how culture actually interprets imagery, and therefore tends to require the additional support from ethnographic approaches. However this will not be necessary in this case because the investigation centres upon the viewer's knowledge of how the photographic and chirographic image are constructed and not solely the female shoe as a cultural referent. Semiology has also tended to be most useful in the analysis of existing imagery, rather than a tool for their production. Finally, semiotic approaches make certain kinds of questions easier to ask than others, and in particular it responds to the aims of this programme. For these reasons semiology will be the method used here.
An important question for this type of investigation is to what extent semiology can inform us about the language of photography. Victor Burgin insists that:
There is no 'language' of photography, no single signifying system (as opposed to technical apparatus) upon which all photographs depend (in the sense in which all texts in English depend upon the English language); there is, rather, a heterogeneous complex of codes upon which photography may draw. (Burgin,1982: 143)
The semiotic method chosen for this research programme, and core theoretical text is, ‘Semiology of Photography - Tracing the Index’ (Sonesson, 2000). According to Sonesson, the philosophical writings of Jean-Marie Schaeffer have the most significant influence on current thinking. He has, in the opinion of Sonesson, resolved aspects of the photographic sign previously not attended to. Schaeffer proposes that the psychology of the image-spectator relationship is a combination of knowledge and belief. He proposes that the photograph’s power to convince, often regarded as the power to portray a fragment of reality itself, rests on the implicit or explicit knowledge of the photograph’s arché. This is what Schaeffer refers to as the genesis of the photographic image or its originality as a medium of representation. As most cultures have experienced photographic images, it also refers to what the viewer is supposed to know. As a consequence of knowing that it is a photograph and not a chirograph the viewer applies the appropriate interpretational codes. Schaeffer supports many other semiologists who observe that it is primarily a trace, an optical chemically produced version of the appearance of light at a place and at a given moment in time. As a result the viewer believes that it is an accurate representation, and is ready to believe it tells the truth about this actuality. This, it has to be clarified, does not mean it is the truth. Truth is a constructed reality and is examined below.
In addition Sonesson states that the photographic apparatus regulates the relationship between the viewer and the photograph. The apparatus is defined as the medium of the image, i.e. its technical determinates, technique, and ideology, as well as psychological and cultural effects and implications that include the plastic levels. Plastic levels include ways in which the image has been devised, i.e., compositionally, medium, style etc. The automatism of the camera and its apparatus means that the image production is always mediated to a greater or lesser degree by the author’s intent. Without realising it the photographer is always applying an ideological point-of-view to the image; the many different ways in which decisions are being made on camera controls, lighting, object pose, etc. Even where impartiality is clearly sought, there is a level of purposeful intent.
A simple description of photography could be: the result of light reflections from a subject being transferred onto a two-dimensional light-sensitive surface. However Rosalind Krauss explains the photographic sign more accurately:
More specifically the photograph is a type of icon, or visual likeness, which bears an indexical relationship to its referent. (Krauss, 1985: 203).
The terms 'Icon' and 'Index' have their roots in the semiology of American philosopher, C. S. Peirce and his triadic view of the sign:
- The Representamen: - the form that the sign takes, not necessarily the material.
- An Interpretant - not an interpreter but rather the sense made of the sign.
- An Object - to which the sign refers. (Fiske 1990: 42)
In addition:
- Denotation is the term used when dealing with the first order of signification generated by the signifier and the signified; the initial, common sense and obvious meaning of the sign regards this as the 'literal' meaning of a sign. (Chandler: 2000)
- Connotation, refers to the second order of signification. Fiske views this as the 'associative, expressive, attitudinal or evaluative shades of meaning’ since it works through the form of the signifier or how the communication is being made rather than what. (Ibid.)
Connotation is a well-known problematic area for semiotic analysis. Connotation is a dimension of meaning that that is not inherent in the object but is determined by and relates to all the cultural, historically, ideologically determined factors that influence the viewer's reading of the sign. Basically, in photography denotation becomes the term for what is being photographed, while connotation refers to how it is being interpreted on film or as a print.
Connotation relates to all the super-added cultural meanings that inflect the reading of the photograph. There are no naturally given meanings. Meanings emerge through a process of negotiation between viewer and photograph. This is a social, culturally determined process, not a natural one. Of significance to this programme and its outcomes is how meaning is determined by the social context in which the photograph is produced, distributed and consumed: the apparatus.
From this we could summarise Peirce's terms in relation to the photograph as follows:
Icon
A sign based on resemblance, such as a photograph that resembles (in some respect) its referent.
Index
A sign in which there is a causal or logical link between sign and referent. Photographs are indexical traces of the reflected light from the referent [mediated through the photographic apparatus and all sorts of exposure decisions on the part of the photographer]. Most other modes of image making, and certainly language, lack this intimate contact.
Symbol
This refers to arbitrary, culturally established signs. Language provides the best example, but the connotative character of photography also has a symbolic dimension.
These different types of semiotic functioning are not mutually exclusive. They can overlap or have different emphases. The peculiar character of photography relates to this complex interplay of semiotic modes and it is this that makes the discussion of photographic meaning so problematic. It has been observed (Sonesson, 2000) that the photographic sign is defined through its double relation of contiguity [index], and similarity [icon] between its expression and its content. Through this investigation it will be revealed that there is more to this concept when comparing a photograph with a chirograph. In Sonesson’s paper, (2000), he introduces a number of contemporary theorists who have definitions of what constitutes the pictorial sign in relation to photography, and some to painting. Each has a particular approach to this on- going debate, e.g. some think that it is primarily and icon others an index. He points out that the indexical approach to "photographic specificity" is the most common. He critically reviews the claims for indexicality, as presented by Vanlier, Dubois and Schaeffer. He makes comment through his critical analysis of each rather than proposes his own theory. This is useful to this research, as many of these works have not been translated into English. The work of Jean-Marie Schaeffer has a particular importance to this investigation because he states that:
- a photograph cannot be explained by conventionality, in the sense in which this term applies to verbal signs.
- that there are iconic, as well as indexical, elements in photography.
- that the photograph must be understood as a perceptual unit and, as such, contrary to the photonic image, it is not digital, nor does this conception admit of the photogram being considered the central instance of photography.
- that we can only apprehend the photograph as such when starting out from the assumption that it is an instance of the picture type known as photography.
- that photography is essentially involved with time and space.
- that the index is not a sign but starts out as a relation to its referent before entering the sign system. (Sonesson, 2000: 84)
The important implication here is that it is the viewer’s knowledge that the image is a photograph that defines it. This also means that the viewer interprets the meaning through knowledge of how the image was formed. Therefore the core semiological concepts that this research will employ [from Jean-Marie Schaeffer] are:
- An Index is based upon a relation.
- An Icon is a sign based upon similarity
- A Symbol is a sign based upon convention.
Schaeffer [and Peirce] consider the photographic sign as being primarily an index. In fact he states it as being an indexical icon (Schaeffer, 2000: 71). However, indexicality is initially not a sign but a relation, until it enters the sign system. This means that it is an iconic sign but in addition its indexical relationship to its referent defines it as being a photograph. The issue with indexicality therefore consists in establishing what kind of relation it is. According to Sonesson [after Peirce] the relation depends upon it having either:
‘a real connection,’ an ‘existential relation’ (implying the existence of something) or a ‘dynamical connection’ (energy or motive force) Including spatial, or a ‘physical connection’. (Sonesson, 2000: 62)
Finally there is, however, a much more important distinction to be made among indexical signs, between what Sonesson calls abductive indices and performative indices. An abductive index is one that that functions only because the viewer takes it for granted that certain regularities that are commonly supposed to prevail do indeed prevail. Abductive indices include;
Footprints and fingerprints, as well as the peculiar walk of the sailor, are indices of this kind. (Sonesson, 2000: 62)
Performative indices are those that point to something else, like photographs can do. He reminds us that Peirce´s own most common examples of demonstratives like "this" and "that", as well as an arrow or a finger pointing at an object, or pointing out a direction, are performative indices. In order to have Schaeffer's knowledge of the arché it is important to have recognition that the image was formed through being an abductive index, rather than a performative index.
From this it is clear that traditional optical-chemical photographs are both abductive and performative indices. What is of interest here is that Sonesson appears to include the photograph with a footprint, which is principally abductive. That is that the print has been made as a result of the referent [the foot] coming into direct contact with the expression plane [the ground] and being released leaving the trace. In this case contiguity is meant, even if it is not a photograph. A series of experimental images based upon this concept appear later in this portfolio. Indexicality is, in some way, dependent upon there being a relation between the expression and content of the potential sign: that is, the index supposedly "denotes by virtue of being really affected by that object". It is particularly useful to this research that discourse on "photographic specificity" draws attention to its comparisons with other media, in particular, painting and drawing as its indexicality is conceived in a different way.
Winfried Nöth (2000) offers crucial cultural commentary upon the photograph's plurality of meaning that neither Schaeffer nor Sonesson fully deal with. Nöth enables a more full and clear articulation of the complex interplay between the photograph as purveyor of truth and its inherent ability to assert a lie.
Summary
From Schaeffer the photograph is said to be an index which is its relation between the referent and the expression plane. Specifically it is the relation of contiguity because the image is made through its contiguous relationship to the referent. This special kind of contiguity is close enough for the referent to rub off on the expression plane of the sign. Schaeffer also states that in order for the viewer to understand the image as a photograph and its claims to actuality it is necessary to have knowledge of its arché. By this he means recognition that the image was formed through being an abductive index, rather than a performative index. This suggests that an image could be of the performative type but not necessarily produced as a photograph. In addition Schaeffer refers to the footprint type of contiguity as primarily abductive. Using Schaeffer's theory of indexicality as method the aims of this portfolio can be met.
Chapter Two The role of the photograph
In this chapter we will apply the semiological concept of contiguity to analyse a number of images in order to attempt to explain the relationship between photographs and chirographs. These images form a series aimed at showing the way in which photographs obtain their particular connotational value. These have been selected from historically sourced material leading towards a further series of both chirographic and combined photographic and chirographic images from my own practice.
Jean-Marie Schaeffer, as well as many others maintains that the relation between the photograph and the actuality from which it is born is indexical, arising because of the natural relation between the sign and its referent. The photograph embalms the past like a mosquito in amber or a fossilised footprint; it continues to point to what was but no longer is. The photographic image also mirrors the world closely and it is its particular form of contiguity between the referent and the photographic expression plane that gives it such comprehensive reference. Schaeffer defines each medium as having its own arché which he claims as the knowledge of the kind of medium, and the interpretational codes that are supposed be used in order for all to see it. With photography it is the belief in the reality of the image as Jacques Aumont points out:
Because we know that the photographic image is a print, a trace a mechanically and physico-chemically produced version of the appearance of light at a given moment, we believe that it is an adequate representation and we are ready to believe it tells the truth about this reality (Aumont: 1997: 81)
Because knowledge and belief are so difficult to separate, there is a consensus of opinion at present that the viewer knows rather than believes. As discussed earlier these are still psychological issues that exist.
Both history and popular knowledge have encouraged us to view a photograph as an unmediated transcription of actuality, rather than seeing it as a coded image whose form and content transmit identifiable points of view; a mirror of actuality. The photograph's naturally strong iconic nature contributes to this high visual and cultural status, because it is perceived as the most reliable witness to actuality.
The American Photographer Ansell Adams adhered to the strictest codes of photographic practice whereby he exploited the photographic arché to its limit, where the iconic and indexical claims to reality have been made dominant and therefore connoting actuality.
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Fig. 1. Ansell Adams, 'Monolith, The Face of Half Dome, Yosemite Valley, California,' c. 1927.
[...]
- Quote paper
- Roger Dorey (Author), 2001, Combining photography with painting in theory and practice. New forms of representation, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/320656
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.