Mitchell Readings...some questions from George

Mitchell

1. Mitchell writes, "representation is always of something, or someone, by something or someone, to someone. It seems that only the third angle of representation need be a person" (p. 12). For each of these images, who or what is being represented? How does authorship influence the meaning of the representation? What about audience?

2. What network of signs are invoked by each image, and are these links explicit? What codes are being used, and what agreed meanings allow us to understand the images?

3. Mitchell distinguishes between code and convention. What conventions are used in each image, and are these conventions easily distinguishable from the codes used to decipher them?

4. Postmodernism is brought up in the following quote, "Postmodern culture is often characterized as an era of "hyper-representation," in which abstract, formalist painting has been replaced by experiments like photorealism, and reality itself begins to be experienced as an endless network of representations." Do these images speak to postmodern culture? (think of the image of a cross, or the American flag for example)

5. What "taxes" or costs are made by the representations in these images? (see above for image ideas or think of others)

Colebrook...some thoughts by George for Wed

Colebrook

1. According to Colebrook, representation is contradictory. What does he mean by this, and what does he propose is the solution?

2. How does autonomy relate to representation? How does Colebrook break up possible responses to representation, the limits of language, and its relationship to the world?

3. What are the differences between epistemology, ontology, and grammatology?

Some questions on Latour from George for Wed

Latour

1. How does the term "anamorphosis" fit into Latour's argument?

2. Latour claims Holbein's painting cannot show the visible and invisible worlds in the same view point. Can this explanation of representation be applied to other differences besides issues of location of space? Does subject position (socially) have the same kind of perspective limits?

3. How do the two regimes Latour talks about differ? How does representing images of faith differ from representing images of science?

4. Latour describes key differences between the first and second regimes of representation. How does each deal with representation? How are each of these images understood from the first regime? From the second?

Some thoughts on Hall by George for our presentation

Hall

1. Hall describes three levels of meaning: the object, the concept, and the word. How do these images operate on these levels? Are they objects, concepts, words, or mixtures thereof? How do imaginary concepts like justice, faith, or patriotism complicate our understanding of these levels?

2. Hall describes a threefold system as does Peirce. How are these systems similar, and how are they different? Do objects, concepts, and words refer to issues of Peirce's firstness, secondness, and thirdness?

3. Icons and indexes are discussed. Does Hall use these terms in the same way as previous authors? What are the similarities and differences in his use of terms?

4. In his discussion of the Inuit's many words for snow, Hall raises an important question, "How far is our experience actually bounded by our linguistic and conceptual universe?" (p. 23) What are the implications of the opposite argument, that our difference languages reflect our different experiences as culture groups (ie. the Inuit have more words for snow because, in the geographical region where they live, there is a variety of "snow" experiences that are relevant to their lives)? Are both perspectives necessarily opposed to one another?

5. What are the approaches in each theory of representation that Hall discusses? How do reflective, intentional, and constructionist approaches to understanding images translate into actual image decoding? How is the comic, the map, and the weather image reflective, intentional, and constructed? What role does technology play in each approach, and how does technology enhance or detract from each perspective?

6. In Hall's discussion of the traffic light, Hall mentions that the real importance of color difference is the ability for us as the audience to distinguish between the colors. Do the color blind experience different representations if they are unable to distinguish one color from another?

Representation...continued

Check out this on you tube....

http://www.autospectator.com/cars/chevrolet/0018545-new-chevy-tahoe-ad-campaign-features-mary-j-blige

How is Mary J Blige "represented" in this commerical?

Representation...some thoughts to ponder on images

For our class presentation/discussion..we (Meg, Rudy, George) wanted to throw out some questions for you to ponder pre class....

Imagine a cross, a crucifix..what does this mean to you? Does the fact that Villanova is a Catholic University have a bearing on why you choose to attend?

Picture an American flag. What does this represent to you? What about pre 9-11?? post 911?

Imagine all of the teachers and professors you have had over the years...do any of them "represent" what a "typical" teacher should look like??

Hello All,as I was in the process of scrapping my original idea for the final project, I ran across this video again, which I thought that some of us may find provocative - sometimes I get annoyed with how much scholarship that focuses solely on the Internet - Internet this, Internet that, but then occasionally something like this video will bring me pause, for it reveals (and here, visually!) how incredible this technology is, by making us pay close atttention to how it works.

There is certainly some room to focus on aspects of the internet in conjunction with either visual communication or visual culture. Maybe I'll look into it for a final project idea. There is certainly something here that can be said about the relationship of text and image - anyway, what is fascinating about this little video is that it focuses no only on the content of the digital medium, but also digital web2.0 tools that are used to make web content.

Hey Gordon, what do you make of the statement "the machine is us?" Seems Deleuzian to me - can you point me to some textual resources that address this kind of idea?