In this essay, I am writing about semiotics, I will begin by explain what semiotics is and how it works, I will write about the semiotic approach according to Saussure, explain that there are two levels to sign, the denotative and connotative level and finally I will apply my knowledge on the semiotic theory on three selected photographs, the first being my own photograph which has personal meaning to me, the second will be from a newspaper article and the third will be a photograph used in print advertisement.
Semiotics is a field of study that explores how humans derive meaning from the world around them. This field of study was made important by Swiss linguist, Saussure, his work in linguistics wasn’t of any importance but his view on representation and his model of language was, “his importance lies, not in his detailed work in linguistics, but in his general view of representation and the way his model of language shaped to the semiotic approach . . .”(Hall, S. ), The sign can be anything that represent or indicates something else, called the object. Signs are not always pictorial, sounds can make signs like for example the sound of buzzing indicates that there is a bee around (also the texture can also be a sign, like the feel of fruit can tell you something about the ripeness of the fruit). Now because material objects can function as signs and communicate meaning, Saussure analysed the sign into two elements, called the signifier and the signified. It is important to note that, the underlying argument of semiotics is that “since all cultural objects convey meaning, and all cultural practices depend on meaning, they must make use of signs, and in so far they do, they must work like language works. . .”( Hall, S.2003)
Signs serves as a way to understand communication “a sign is any signal that communicates something to us”(O’Shaughnessy, M & Stadler, J. 2002), the best way to understand this is that, the is a sender, from there a message is produced and then it goes to the receiver. So this means that every sign consist of a signifier and a signified (as mentioned above), the signifier is the face of the sign, it is the material object of it like a picture of a giraffe, “the signifier is whatever material form is used as to convey meaning,”(O’Shaughnessy, M & Stadler, J. 2002). The signified refers to the meaning produced by the signifier, “the signified, on the other hand, refers to mental concept or meaning derived from the material manifestation” (Swanepoel, P. 2005, p212). Both the signified and signifier are required to produce meaning, but the meaning produced is shaped by our cultural background “. . . but it is the relation between them, fixed by our cultural and linguistic codes, which sustains representation” (Hall, S. 2005, p31). Saussure further argues that the relation between the signifier and signified isn’t permanently fixed, the meaning changes, the signified changes because of history, Swanepoel makes an example with the colour black, Swanepoel says that for many centuries, the colour black has been associated with darkness, evil, devilish, sinful etc, but in the 1960s, the phrase Black is beautiful came into existence as a result of the perception of black people, Swanepoel says that the signifier ‘black’ was made to signify the exact opposite of the previous perception of the colour Black. So therefore, the relationship of the signifier and signified is a result of social convention of a specific society and its historical moments, “they can never be finally fixed but are always subject to change, both from one cultural context and from one period to another. There is thus no single, unchanging universal ‘true meaning’” (Hall, S. 2003, p32). Since the meaning is never fixed and changes historically, the meaning that we the readers produce is almost never or close to the meaning intended by the speaker or producer.
It is important to note that Saussure focused on language itself, Hall (2003, p36) writes that the “rules are the principles which we learn when we learn a language and they enable us to use language to say whatever we want”, Saussure called this the Langue and the other part is the particular acts of speaking or writing which he called the Parole. Saussure had only focused on the formal aspects of language. So why use Saussure if he only focused on one aspect, well as mentioned in the first paragraph, signs have to work like language works in order for cultural objects and practices to produce meaning.
When a signifier and signified is combined and a sign is produced, once the sign has been produced, Hall (2003, p38) writes that, “we can progress to a second wider level, which links these signs to broader, cultural themes, concepts or meaning”. So, the first level, were the sign is produced is called the denotative level, and the second level, were the cultural themes, concepts or meanings are produced is called the connotative level according to Barthes. “Denotative is the simple, basic, descriptive level . . . At the second level – connotative – these signifiers which we have been able to ‘decode’ . . . connects them to broader themes and meanings . . .” (Hall, S. 2003, p39). “Barthes calls this second level of signification the level of myth” (Hall, S. 2003, p39).
Charles Sanders Pierce placed the sign into three distinct categories based on how the sign is related to the object, the icon, the index and the symbol. So, the icon resembles the object directly, it shares qualities with the object, for example, a painting of a car, is an icon representing a car, or a loop sound of explosions may be representing the sound of a car. An index is more of an implied association with the object, for example a sunset shows happiness and fulfilment. A symbol is not connected to the object, their meaning must be taught, they are easily misunderstood, for example the pentagon star, the star is often associated with evil, darkness and sinful things, were the true representation was that of the qualities of a man.
Back to the second level of signification, the level of myth, this brings us onto the topic of the Myth of photographic truth, the objectivity and subjectivity of images. Every image that is created, contains some degree of subjective choice, the selection of the frame, personalisation, all of these are subjective, and the images created can never be neutral. Historically, photographs were considered objective, they were believed to represent reality in its true nature, nowadays even security cameras are considered objective because although they seem to operate by themselves (security cameras), the designer of the camera decided on the frame rate and resolution, the decision made by the designer is based on social norms like legibility and clarity “in the case of automatic video, and still photography cameras . . . aesthetic choices like focus and framing are made as if by the camera itself, yet in fact the designers of these cameras also made decisions based on social and aesthetic norms such as clarity and legibility”(Sturken, M. & Cartwright, L. (2001). P16).
Photographs are believed to depict the truth, it is visual evidence, what is seen is the truth, this is called positivism, were empirical truths are established through visual evidence, but note that with empirical truth, the scientist (tester) who determines the truth, his/her actions are viewed as a liability, the scientist subjectivity would influence the objectivity of the test/ experiment. Now back to the myth of photographic truth, Sturken & Cartwright (2001. P17) write that “a photograph is often perceived to be an unmediated copy of the real world, a trace of reality skimmed off the very surface of life. We refer to this concept as the myth of photographic truth.” To some degree in today’s world, photographs are still believed to depict the truth, even though there are computer programs that can manipulate images and make them a false sense of reality, now to find the meaning of images has become a bit complex.
Too find the meaning of an image, is to explore ideology, recognise that images are produced “within dynamics of social power and ideology.” (Sturken, M. & Cartwright, L. (2001). P21), so ideologies are social assumption that a particular society or culture makes, it is how we know things to be or how they should be, “ideology is manifested in widely shared social assumptions about not only the way things are but the way we all know things should be”( Sturken, M. & Cartwright, L. (2001). P21). So, the contrast between the subjective interpretation and objective recording in relation to the photographer is a crucial point to consider when determining the meaning of a photograph, another point to consider is the image’s proximity to other images, written texts, “as well as myriad associations” (Swanepoel, P. 2003. P206), all constitute to the meaning of photographs and how they are interpreted. Note, when images are reproduced in various places in diverse cultural contexts, the meaning of that image changes, so therefore the photographer’s intention is important in determining the meaning of images.
Now to apply my knowledge on semiotic theory through three selected images, the purpose is to show how meaning is produced and consumed through the visual within a given context.
he photograph clearly has been manipulated, the greyscale and the second layer placed on top of the first layer, at first it seems like two images, but on closer look, the second layer is just a cropped version of the first layer and we know that the image has been cropped from a larger image because of our knowledge on how human body should look (the left foot and head is missing indicating that the image has been cropped), we also cannot say were the photograph was taken. All these factors contribute to how the image is interpreted. So, on a denotative level, what is represented is a photograph of a person laying on the ground, so the signifier is a picture of a person laying on the ground and the signified is how the image is interpreted. On a connotative level, we have to link the image to broader cultural themes, we do this to find what is the meaning or ideology of this image, we can never truly know what is the meaning of this image unless the photographer tells us the meaning, but until then, we can analyse this image, the image could mean the fall of a millennial, I say this because, the person in the picture is laying on the ground, the person’s clothing suggest that he is young and since there is no evidence of bullets holes or blood, it is safe to assume that the person in the image is still alive. We can also draw meaning from the text below the image, the title ITS PRETTY COOL removes all possibility of death within the image and now that we know the photographer’s name, we can find that he is a South African based photographer which gives us an idea of were the image was taken.
We see a packet of Lays ( and based on the colour of the packet, I would say that the flavour of the chips is salted or lightly salted), on top of the packet is packaging of some sort of glue, the packets seems to be laid on the sidewalk next to what looks like the tip of the shoe. These factors are the signifiers, they are descriptive. What is signified is the topic of littering, I came to think of littering because of my upbringing and that in todays world, a large emphasis is placed on littering and global warming, so every time I see a piece of paper or plastic on the ground, my minds goes straight to littering. The signifiers are laid out in a particular way as to convey a message to the viewer, the message reads LAZY. Those very same signifiers are for everyone, they are not for any particular gender, race, age group or class, they suggest that the advert is for everyone to take notice. But were the advert is placed will narrow down the target audience, in this case, the Business Insider, so the target audience is clearly business men and women. All of this is the denotative level, it describes the what is in the picture and scraps on surface of what the advertisement means. On the connotative level, we link the advert to littering, even more so, who is doing the littering and what kind of person you are if you litter. What the advert says is that, if you litter, you are lazy or being lazy, the adverts does not directly say this, but the signifiers suggest so. Greater clarity is created on the meaning or ideology of the advert when the caption of the advert is read, also the creators of the advert (Toronto Live Green) provide more clarity and purpose of the advert.
A picture taken of the after effects of the cyclone that had hit Mozambique, on the denotative level, we see a community in ruins after a natural disaster has hit them. The signifiers are the ruined houses, the water covering what would be safe to assume the road and the people walking in the muddy water, the quality of materials that are seen and the amount of trees in the picture would suggest that this is a rural neighbourhood, the picture is taken from a high angle suggesting that the photographer was in a helicopter and the he or she was not trying to be subjective when taking the photograph. What is signified is that a natural disaster has just taken place, because of the signs we know or assume about natural disasters (ruin, damage, messiness, etc). So on the connotative level, you the viewer would be looking at this picture in a newspaper article, so with that, you would have seen the title of the article (At least 293 people dead in Mozambique after cyclone – UN), with the titled the signified would be confirmed, so you the viewer would link this image, to things like death, pain, help and even money. To add, this image would be assumed to be a depiction of the truth because we assume that everything within a newspaper is the truth. Sturken & Cartwright (2001. P17) write that “a photograph is often perceived to be an unmediated copy of the real world, a trace of reality skimmed off the very surface of life. We refer to this concept as the myth of photographic truth” going back to this statement, since the photographers subjectivity is meant to be objective, we assume that “a common set of interests and values and, trusting the photographer as an extension of ourselves, we take the photographs as accurate records of the events”(Todd, 1980. P53)
In this essay, I have explained what I know as the semiotic approach, I have explained how it works and I have analysed three selected pictures (a personal photo, a print advertisement and a picture from a newspaper article) through the semiotic approach. I have also explained what the denotative and connotative levels are and how they fit into the semiotic approach, and furthermore, I have explained the difference between objectivity and subjectivity of images.