Behind the Image
This essay will be putting the theory of polysemy to the test- the idea that images can mean more than one thing. This theory is a key aspect of semiotics (a study of signs and symbols). The assignment that I have decided to undertake involves selecting a number of advertisements from a colour supplement then covering over any text or images that give away what it is selling and finally ask people to describe the image. Helping to understand how images can be interoperated in different ways.
The first step forward was to read Roland Barthes famous essay “The Rhetoric of the Image” taken from his book: Image Music Text. As confusing as this essay was it gave me a basic understanding on the three key areas of semiotics and the particular signs to look for within an image to help break it down in order to analyse it. The three key areas are:
-
Linguistic message: all the text and wording in the advertisement
-
Coded iconic message: the symbols and suggestions in the image
-
Non-coded iconic message: literary what the image shows
Using this structure it became easier to analyse an image rather than just letting what we first see dictate our thought over it.
When you look at an advert it can sometimes seem hard to believe that the images are there for a reason even if you can’t see its purpose “In advertising the significance of the image is undoubtedly intentional” (Roland Barthes, 1977:33). This tells me that within advertising there is a lot of depth and thought that must lie beneath the surface of an image as simple or complicated as it might seem and that that particular images are put there to trigger our minds in a certain way.
The images that I had prepared for the assignment were from two separate magazines: “Men’s Health Magazine” and “Wired”. These were advertisements for:
-
Pulsar Watch: an image of a man standing in an office building with a pair of binoculars, behind him is a woman at a desk/computer (neutral, lighting suggests timelessness)
-
Silk Light Soya Milk: an image of a father lifting up his two kids (warm and happy)
-
Canon digital camera: an image of many different people food and cultures (happy, bright)
-
Pioneer Blu-Ray/Av receiver: an image of a well built man with car parts ripping out his muscles (raw, emotive, and powerful)
Using the three key areas that Roland Barthes mentioned in his essay it was easier to single out intended signals being brought through the advert to the viewer.
I asked five friends whom I knew to describe what they saw in each of these images. I tried to select a range of different people.
It was interesting to see how different people analysed the images and what they took from it. Some people had more of a structured approach where as some just listed exactly what they saw. If we take the pioneer advert for example; at one end of the scope one person analysed the image and fed back that it was an image that showed “raw power”, “aggression”, “masculinity and dominance” He then went on to literary describe what the image showed “a hybrid man/machine” When asked what he thought it was advertising he thought it was perhaps a Gillette razor advert.
At the other end another person analysed the image and fed back only literary what they saw and did not read any underlying signs or emotions. “Black and white colour…tyre tracks…man/machine” when he was asked what he thought it was advertising he said either a car or a tyre company.
The exact same thing happened with the other three images that I produced to the five people whom I asked to interpret them. There were no consistent answers and nobody was able to identify what the image was advertising. These results then “pose a question of meaning” (Barthes, 1977:39); within advertising are images deliberately created to show more than one meaning?
In “Reading images” Theo Van Leeuwen suggests that “the viewer is simply offered information, a scene to contemplate. S/he is in the position of the voyeur” (Leeuwen,1996:121-130). Perhaps images in advertising don’t necessarily have a set meaning or even just a couple of ways of looking at it. However it could mean something different to every single person who looks at it due to the content involved and how the viewer takes it in.
Images have a clear foundation of meaning built up by“ an architecture of signs”(Barthes,1977:47) meaning that there is of course thought to what content is being added, and of course direct meaning can easily be shown through non-coded iconic messaging. However nothing is concrete due to the fact everyone will interpret the image in a different way.
This I then feel is why text is a very important part of advertising. A single word can change a viewer’s take on what the image is depicting. For example the Canon advert that I selected as part of the assignment had the words “capture the smile” written underneath the image. During the tests I eventually revealed the text that accompanied the image; however I did not reveal what the image was advertising. When the word “smile” was revealed every single person identified that the image would most likely be advertising something to do with cameras. This may be an obvious observation however it does not undermine the fact that text is a powerful contributor to the story within an image.
From reading Roland’s Barthes Rhetoric of the Image…there is a lot of views on how text can compliment an image. An important question to ask however: is whether or not the text is just redundant information or if it is adding fresh information to the overall picture. Text usually helps to identify simply the elements of the scene and the scene itself. However in terms of meaning, text can act like a double edged blade. It can either banish or add meaning to an image. Absence of text can leave more to the imagination. Recently I viewed an advert for the royal marine’s recruitment services. The image simply displayed a dense green forest. Below this in small writing was listed all the people in the picture from left to right. However in the picture you there is no-one to be found. This advert was interesting and left a lot to the imagination; however it successfully captured the message the Royal Marines wanted to display.
From the results I have attained I have begun to construct a method on which factors influence how an image is read. So far there I have broken it down into four categories which I believe create the biggest influence in the reading of an image:
-
Realism of an image can really define how a picture is perceived. How realistic an image is can totally change the dynamics of what is trying to be shown through an image. For example the Silk Light Soya Milk advert is a very warm image that portrays family life and doesn’t look like it’s been changed in anyways. However if you compare this to the image of the Pioneer Blu-Ray/Av receiver: a man/machine, it has clearly been photo shopped to be made to look futuristic and cutting edge. Different levels of realism will give the impression of different qualities of the product. Even if the image and the product are only marginally related the concept of realism in context to the product creates a “desirable complex” (Jonathon Baldwin, Lucienne Roberts, 2006: 80) to the viewer.
-
A person’s life experiences will shape the way images are read. The idea of polysemy is that images can mean more than one thing. However images can have countless meanings due to the fact that everybody will see them in a different light. I feel that these multitudes of meanings come from how a person personally relates to those images. Life experiences, memories, education etc, can constitute different interpretations of an image. “their meanings are appropriated from the world we live in” (Judith Williamson, 1978)
-
Stereotyping of images is used to target certain markets. Stereotyping within images is effective as it can help paint a clearer image as to what is being put across. For example in Roland Barthes “Image Music Text” Barthes describes an advert for pasta. The image is saturated in Italian connotations. If this were to be sold to say a British audience the signs within the image would immediately be associated with an Italian background. Memories or thoughts would be stirred up that would associate to that product. If it the product was plain British made pasta. It would not sell as well. People’s expectations would not be met as to what pasta is or where it should come from. However if the same Italian pasta was sold I Italy they would not pick up on the same connotations that others might. Stereotyping within images can be a comfort to a buyer, as they would then feel comfortable with the product as they have knowledge of its background or origins and feel safe with what it is.
-
Adding text is the final thing that can central a persons personal view on an image. It will focus their mind on that area being put across. For example if I were to say: “think of an apple” you would automatically think of an apple. The same goes for text as part of an image. It will highlight the key meaning within the image.
Images are never totally entirely clear at a first glance. From the results that I attained from my research the theory of polysemy appears to be a valid one. However it doesn’t appear that an image will just have a few meanings. I have came to the conclusion that an image has countless meanings, as people are individuals with their own individual personality, character, background and age; therefore the interpretation of an image is an individual finality. “All images are polysemous; they imply underlying their signifiers, a “floating chain” of signifieds, the reader able to chose some and ignore others” (Roland Barthes, 1977:39). So all images have the potential to have multitudes of meanings, due to the arrangement of signs within the image. However these signs are merely foundations and can not dictate a definitive meaning. The relationship between image and text is an intimate one. The addition of text can help complete a description of an image/product, and so helping Solidify the meaning of the image
Douglas Haddow speaks of a collapse of advertising within media in his recent article “Pop Nihilism: Advertising Eats Itself” for the Adbusters magazine. Images speak meaning; however the meaning to those images becomes lost in today’s society due to a mass of uninterested consumers. “The consumer is bound by nothing and controls everything” (Douglas Haddow, 2009; Adbusters). Suggesting that the efforts involved in todays marketing and advertising are almost futile; today’s media wave requires repetition, persuasion and the power of mass media to lodge those images and meanings into our heads.
However I don’t agree with Haddow’s opinion. After re-reading Roland Barthes essay: “The rhetoric of the image” It has been my understanding that the image is something that has grown and lasted and will continue to last. Looking back to the classical period when images and text were first combined; it was the known that images were usually added to text in books to add a small amount of information or understanding. Today the image is now a key factor in the world of media, and its polysemous nature allows abstract creativity to flow through the pictures to produce personalised meaning to the viewer(s).
References
Baldwin, J. & Roberts, L. (2006) Visual Communication: From Theory to Practise. Switzerland, AVA Publishing SA.
Baldwin, J. (2001) The Polysemic Nature of Advertising: Effectiveness and the encoding and decoding of multiple meanings in advertisements.
Barthes, R. (1979) Rhetoric of the Image, in Image, Music, Text. Glasgow, Fontana/Collins
Haddow, D. (2009) Adbusters, Pop Nihilism: Advertising Eats Itself
Leeuwen, Van, T. (1996) Reading Images
Williamson, J. (1978) Decoding advertisements: Ideology and Meaning.
Filed under: Uncategorized
