ADS, ART

Advertisements present an abstract world in an imagined future which presents life as it should be, according to The Practice of Looking.  Besides attempting to sell a product, ads can be represent culture through art and entertainment.  Our culture and our consumerism are deeply intertwined because we live in a “capitalist consumer culture” (a system that depends an overindulgence in goods consumption. 

 

The industrial revolution was responsible for the introduction of mass production, mobility, and, eventually, a consumer society.  We have it to thank for the constant barrage of new ads, new features, new products, etc.  Companies consistently come up with minor changes to their products that offer littler (or no more) than a competitor’s.  Going to the grocery store, it’s incredible how many options there are for something as simple as orange juice.  Every company is attempting to make their products stand out in all of that mess, but they’re really only making it worse.

 

T.J. Jackson Lears blames our consumerism on a shift in values (to what he calls “therapeutic ethos”).  Less and less people value work ethic, while more and more are valuing “leisure, spending, and individual fulfillment” (268).  By the late nineteenth century, people were accepting the idea that they needed to constantly be improving their lives and themselves by purchasing new products.

 

I liked when the booked mentioned window shopping.  Fashion is one of my passions and strolling along the streets of New York City or the Champs de Lyse are things I have been lucky enough to experience.  They display the newest, highest fashion in a unique and beautiful way.  High fashion shows are a sort of advertisements as well and are incredibly influential.

 

Fashion advertising fits into the development of an indulgent society.  People want a certain image.  Nice clothing=wealth?  Maybe.  Nice clothing=artistic? Nope.  Following a trend is merely consumerism, but there IS an art to fashion and advertisements.  A company’s logo is like the designer’s signature.  Michael Khors puts his name on a shoe the way an artist would on an original painting.  He has built a fashion empire in the way Bill Gates built his Microsoft one.   Many people buy a product, not because they respect or value the work of the artist, but because they want to display that logo on their bodies.  To them, Michael Khors represents wealth, not classic quality design that is evolving, yet consistent over time. 

 

My favorite brand is a great classic one based in London.  It is know for a specific pattern that is widely copied.  Can you name is?

 

 

 

Answer Burberry.

 

Actual shopping evolved into online shopping and real-life window shopping has also evolved into an online activity.  I don’t necessarily shop online to buy things that I want or need, but I browse the sites of classic designers and new up-and-coming designers.  Their advertisements, their models, and the clothing and accessories they put on them are all art.  Fashion IS a form of visual communication in itself.  Color, fabric, skin, race, location, culture, light, and so much more are manipulated by fashion designers, seamstresses, builders, etc who are all artists.  Advertisements for fashion are also art.  They are displayed in a vast assortment of mediums.  Many are photographs that are finely altered by computers. 

 

Shopping is evolving more as second life expands.

 

Any ad that has a person is wearing clothing is using that clothing to say something about that person.  The same goes for clothing in a movie, although specific brands are not commonly advertised in film the way other products are.

 

 

1. Fashion for causes

2. Movies/TV- product placement, style

3. Culture influencing ads- green movement, organics, simplicity influencing product development and advertising

Saying our product is green and so is our company

Even fast food places Ex. Alaskan fish sandwich

4. Tattoos (branding)

5. Burton- snowboarding way of life

6. Jingles

7. Celebrities, athletes

8. Superbowl, humor

ADS, ART

Advertisements present an abstract world in an imagined future which presents life as it should be, according to The Practice of Looking.  Besides attempting to sell a product, ads can be represent culture through art and entertainment.  Our culture and our consumerism are deeply intertwined because we live in a “capitalist consumer culture” (a system that depends an overindulgence in goods consumption. 

 

The industrial revolution was responsible for the introduction of mass production, mobility, and, eventually, a consumer society.  We have it to thank for the constant barrage of new ads, new features, new products, etc.  Companies consistently come up with minor changes to their products that offer littler (or no more) than a competitor’s.  Going to the grocery store, it’s incredible how many options there are for something as simple as orange juice.  Every company is attempting to make their products stand out in all of that mess, but they’re really only making it worse.

 

T.J. Jackson Lears blames our consumerism on a shift in values (to what he calls “therapeutic ethos”).  Less and less people value work ethic, while more and more are valuing “leisure, spending, and individual fulfillment” (268).  By the late nineteenth century, people were accepting the idea that they needed to constantly be improving their lives and themselves by purchasing new products.

 

I liked when the booked mentioned window shopping.  Fashion is one of my passions and strolling along the streets of New York City or the Champs de Lyse are things I have been lucky enough to experience.  They display the newest, highest fashion in a unique and beautiful way.  High fashion shows are a sort of advertisements as well and are incredibly influential.

 

Fashion advertising fits into the development of an indulgent society.  People want a certain image.  Nice clothing=wealth?  Maybe.  Nice clothing=artistic? Nope.  Following a trend is merely consumerism, but there IS an art to fashion and advertisements.  A company’s logo is like the designer’s signature.  Michael Khors puts his name on a shoe the way an artist would on an original painting.  He has built a fashion empire in the way Bill Gates built his Microsoft one.   Many people buy a product, not because they respect or value the work of the artist, but because they want to display that logo on their bodies.  To them, Michael Khors represents wealth, not classic quality design that is evolving, yet consistent over time. 

 

My favorite brand is a great classic one based in London.  It is know for a specific pattern that is widely copied.  Can you name is?

 

 

 

Answer Burberry.

 

Actual shopping evolved into online shopping and real-life window shopping has also evolved into an online activity.  I don’t necessarily shop online to buy things that I want or need, but I browse the sites of classic designers and new up-and-coming designers.  Their advertisements, their models, and the clothing and accessories they put on them are all art.  Fashion IS a form of visual communication in itself.  Color, fabric, skin, race, location, culture, light, and so much more are manipulated by fashion designers, seamstresses, builders, etc who are all artists.  Advertisements for fashion are also art.  They are displayed in a vast assortment of mediums.  Many are photographs that are finely altered by computers. 

 

Shopping is evolving more as second life expands.

 

Any ad that has a person is wearing clothing is using that clothing to say something about that person.  The same goes for clothing in a movie, although specific brands are not commonly advertised in film the way other products are.

 

 

1. Fashion for causes

2. Movies/TV- product placement, style

3. Culture influencing ads- green movement, organics, simplicity influencing product development and advertising

Saying our product is green and so is our company

Even fast food places Ex. Alaskan fish sandwich

4. Tattoos (branding)

5. Burton- snowboarding way of life

6. Jingles

7. Celebrities, athletes

8. Superbowl, humor

SECOND LIFE HOUSE

UPDATE: In searching for a place to build a house, I have accidentally teleported to one place with sexual noises in the background and one place with an Eddie Murphy stand-up going on in the background.....???

KJLHRGKDJSHL;KSAFG

Second Life and I do not get along!  I have been trying to find my way out of ONE building/area for 45 minutes???!!

VISUAL TECHNOLOGIES, IMAGE REPRODUCTION, AND THE COPY

Visual technology has changed as much over the years as society has.  The photographic camera, and all devices that came before it, has evolved along with humanity to produce photography, cinema, television, digital imaging, and more.  These inventions have an effect on the world, but they just one catalyst of social change.  The role of these technologies is to reproduce what the naked eye sees.  Reproduction could mean simply "a copy of an original work" (183) or, with a Marxist spin, it could mean the "cultural practices and their forms of expression" (183) that represent the ideologies of that society in that time period.  These ideologies are made up of the prominent political and social views of that society.

I thought it was interesting how the US Department of Defense came up with ARPANET for military email in the early 70's, not knowing that eventually it would become a network used by students, professionals, gamblers, politicians, and even criminals.  So many discoveries have been made by accident- think about Penicillin and America.  

Basically, society effects technology and technology effects society.  Photography, for example, increased in popularity at first, because of its use in law, medicine, and science, and also for personal portraits.  Geoffrey Batchen brought up an interesting question regarding this.  He doesn't want to know who specifically invented photography, but "'at what moment did photography shift from and occasional, isolated, individual fantasy to a demonstrably widespread social imperative?" (184).  Here he reinforces the point the text made earlier: that the invention of visual technology does not, in itself, create a change in society.  In fact, here photography developed (no pun intended) to meet the needs and desires of people in society in that time period (early 1800's).  

I love photography and photojournalism, so it pleased me to read that "Photography is the visual technology that most helped to usher in the age of modernity to the extent that it epitomizes that era" (185).  The ability to capture an image of nature, war, insects, musicians, or anything, really, changed the way humanity functioned.  As it captured our society, our ideologies, our planet, etc, it captured our time period and, thus, how we would be remembered.  Photography changed the way history, and life, was recored.  Walter Benjamin stated that because of these changes, photography could no longer be seen as art.  "Instead of being based on ritual, [art] begins to be based on another practice- politics" (199).  Is art nothing but a means to present political messages?  Art and photography are excellent and efficient ways to send political messages, but they are not bound to that role.

Some talking points:

1. Which is more important- photography as self-expression or photography as purely a means to capture and image seen by the eye and put it on paper?  Does photography (as an art form) have less value than, say, photography that is used to document and classify?  Do they overlap

2. What of the idea that something does not exist until a photograph is taken of it?  How could this be argued in both ways?

3. What is the importance of a iconic piece like the Mona Lisa?

I saw the Mona Lisa at the Louvre my freshman year of high school.  We walked through long hallways full of paintings that I remember finding very dull.  Finally, when we came across the Mona Lisa there was a large crowd around it and tons of pictures were being taken (reproductions, I guess).  I took one too, with my disposable camera, but now I don't know why.  I am not a big fan of the Mona Lisa, actually.  I don't like the look on her face, to be completely honest, and I don't find her all that intriguing.  It was small and dark and we only got to see it for a few moments.  My pictures, when I came back to the States, were less than flattering to her; crooked, no flash, and someone's head blacking her bottom left...it's not exactly a work of art.  There are millions of reproductions of this image, and I had been exposed to her face many times before, and I still didn't like it...so what was the value of this valuable piece of art to me?  I understand why the painting is valuable; the value of the original holds true no matter how many copies are made (191).  Plus, it's the work of a genius and an icon.  My problem is that the point of art is to study it and interpret it, to see the lines and ridges formed by paint, to see the canvas's skin, and to form your own opinion of it to keep with you when you walk away.  This was not the case with the Mona Lisa; no one got a chance to really see it.

Other notes:

*Authenticity and the fact that the amount of prints doesn't affect the value of the original

*Ex. designer clothing- knock offs look the same and are much cheaper, but if you value fashion and designers, then you do not want imitators

*The "hand of the creator" gives value

*Parodies are not copies if they've created another original idea

*Are all photographs pieces of art?

*Film, cinema- invention of the projector- copies of theatre for mass viewing

*Copying music is different- copying a song from a friend does not take anything away from the friend, but it lessens they value of the original 

*Edison- East Orange, NJ

KIRSTEN GOSSETT
ENGL 332
RESEARCH PAPER PROPOSAL


WHAT?

Purpose/Problem: To create a way to produce images that are the most representative of the war, what is going on, and the effect it is having on the world, through the use of diverse standpoints and inputs. Cross-cultural awareness and understanding should be supported by the media, as it is necessary for any positive socio-political change.

War, as it is seen by the naked eye, is the clashing of groups of people. Two different groups, whether it’s nations, tribes, or gangs, have an extended disagreement that leads to violence. Everyone involved in a war believes they are fighting the enemy; they are fighting for good. This good, however, is not the same for everyone. As Nietzsche says, there is no universal truth or universal good because all people have different experiences that make them interpret things differently. Every soldier, every citizen, every government sees things differently (in the countries fighting and the countries who are not). The way people feel about a war depends on the information they are given, mainly through the images they see. These images fuel arguments, support, emotions, etc.

The war in Iraq affects millions of people globally. I would like to understand what kinds of images people in the opposing countries are exposed to, the images they see, and how they perceive the war. The result will hopefully be a compilation of sorts which will provide the entire world more understanding of the war, the people involved, and what exactly is happening over there.

Important questions that will need to be addressed include:

How could the world benefit from countries having better understandings of each other?
Misconceptions and a lack of understanding can only lead to tension, hate, and more violence. Stereotypes and biased imagery only further such misconceptions and judgments.

How do you provide the public with unbiased images? Is it even possible?
Even an unaltered image (print/video/etc) cannot be completely objective because what the photographer/journalist sees as important will differ based on that person’s background and ideology. Even if facing the same scene, it is very possible that an American journalist, an Iraqi citizen, an American soldier, etc. will perceive it differently. Therefore, it is not possible for any one image to

WHY?

There are increasing amounts of ways we are shown images: the national news, local news, Army advertisements, posters, websites (youtube.com), etc.

As war fought on foreign soil, the war in Iraq is brought home to Americans by primarily journalists and soldiers. As the war progressed and became more dangerous, it was difficult for journalists of any nationality to roam through the cities. Journalism can only go so far, outsiders can only go so far; we need to be shown the lives of our opponents (and their point of view) to truly understand them.

With the rise of digital images (I will use information from Ch. 5 to expand on this), it has become increasingly difficult to trust what we see. Almost anything can be altered with the technology we have now. Also, the way in which images are displayed can effect how they are interpreted.

Ex. On the news, we may believe something to be truthful, whereas on an Iraqi website the same image may be seen as American propaganda.

Perhaps the most honest information and telling images we have been exposed to have been unexpected, unedited, and/or raw.

Ex. The public execution of Saddam Hussein even ended up on youtube.com.
Ex. The scandalous photographs of the Abu Ghraib Prison
Ex. The insults and comedic critique of George W. Bush by Americans and others

A step that has been taken in the right direction was taken by the Daylight Community Arts Foundation, Inc who created the project “Photographs by Iraqi Civilians, 2004,” which distributed disposable cameras to random Iraqi civilians so they could document their daily lives. These films were developed and exhibited and have been posted online.

“It has been a year in Iraq during which many of the most important photographs have been made by non-professional, such as those US soldiers at the Abu Ghraib prison. […] Iraqi civilian photographers, most with no more than one roll of film, also have something to add” (1).

These unofficial, non-professional photographers add a perspective often missed, rejected, ignored, or edited by the media. It is important to remember here that no image is completely unbiased. These images need to be compared and contrasted to other images collected from other viewpoints to create a successful representation.




HOW?

I plan to compile the views of various people to see how they are affected by the war and how they perceive what is going on in Iraq. I will attempt to explore as many points of view as possible.

I will research the ways we, as Americans, are exposed to images of the war and what kind of images we see.

I will personally interview an analyst for the Department of Defense who went to Iraq for two separate three-month periods. (My cousin)

I will personally interview an American soldier who is departing for Iraq in the future.

I would like to interview some, if not all, of the following: an American soldier who has been to war, a random selection of students, a random selection local people, someone from Walter Reed Army Medical Center in D.C.- wounded soldier, soldiers’ families, Red Cross worker. (I worked there this summer)

These interviews will look into:
Their overall views of the war.
The images they have seen that are most telling and truthful (specific images and the provider).
What they think of the selection of images from 1) Iraqi news, 2) The disposable camera photographs.

Taking the images and interpretations of people from opposing sides and comparing and contrasting them, we will be able to see more clearly what shared values we have. Seeing how others value, and how they define, family, education, freedom, loyalty, etc. will not bring immediate world peace; however, it does have the potential to open people eyes to what is going on around them. The world hopefully eventually be able to come to a better agreement on human rights and what rights should be protected.

This has been a controversial war, which, in some ways, can be compared to Vietnam. That war was fought so far away that many Americans couldn’t even imagine it. The images they saw on the news showed America winning and succeeding in their goal, but the reality was quite different. The stories of soldiers coming back from the war were quite different as well. Even these conflicting perceptions and images only cover the American side. There was basically no coverage or mainstream discussion of how the war affected those in Vietnam, both soldiers and citizens. Being exposed to images from a variety of perspectives not only could have bettered our understanding of the war, the opponents, and our soldiers, but it could have improved historical accuracy. It is important to take what has been done in the past and improve it.

“In retrospect, one wonders how photographs by Vietnamese civilians at the time of the war in their country might have enlightened outsiders, or by Jews in concentration camps, or by any group not allowed to represent themselves on the international stage” (1).

Realism and Perspective

The Realistic vs. the Abstract

To clarify, an image is though to be realistic when it reproduces the way something looks.  In the news, an image should be a representation of what is real (what the naked eye sees).  I think even an unaltered photograph, however, cannot always be and exact replica of what is real because any photographer will always be biased in some way, even if they try to be completely objective.  This is why the images on the news in other countries may differ; what a journalist (or average citizen) notices or believes to be important will differ based on their background.  This goes back to what Nietzsche said about there being no universal truth because everyone perceives things differently due to their different experiences and demographics.  Thus, I think he would conclude that there cannot ever be anything that is completely real.

I wonder if it is always necessary for images to represent exactly what is real.  A lot can be said from the way an image is distorted or the way an image is created to represent an idea.  The images created now will be a part of history.  People of the future will look back on our images to study history, politics, culture, and art the same way that we look back on the work of our ancestors. 

We must be careful when looking back on images because some artists did not use the most modern techniques f their time when creating art, the same way it has been common to alter images to look older in our world.  I love black and while photography and experiment with different grey-scales, which make my photos look older.  I also use colors and other editing techniques on my pictures, which is a modern development and representative of our time.  Another example of this could be the films we create that are set in earlier time periods or produced with the intention of imitating an older film.

Realism is defined by the book as “a set of conventions or a style of art or representation that is understood at a given historical movement to accurately represent nature or the real or to convey and interpret accurate or universal meanings about people, objects, and events in the world.”

Perspective, on the other hand, “refers to a set of systems or mechanisms used to produce representations of objects in space as if seen by and observer through a window or frame.”  Scientists, artists, psychologists, mathematicians, and physicists have used it in their studies.  The idea of perception has evolved over time to take into account the way human vision works and the way images are interpreted.  Images are not only used to represent one object or moment in time.  Artists, especially impressionists, began to us them to represent a moment in time, but an extended period that encompasses more than what the naked human eye would seen.

Questions and Ideas:

1. The question this chapter raises is can abstract art represent what is real?

2. Will video games book looked back upon by historians and are they representative of our changing culture?

3. Compare the works of 20^th century artists Jackson Pollock and Andy Warhol (not mentioned in the chapter, but know for his Pop Art).  How do their representations of emotions and images differ and how are they similar?  Is either representative of the culture of the mid-1900’s?

Andy Warhol's Campbell's Soup I (Black Bean)

Jackson Pollock Eyes in the Heat

Check this out  http://www.jacksonpollock.org/ 

On the floor I am more at ease, I feel nearer, more a part of the painting, since this way I can walk around in it, work from the four sides and be literally `in' the painting. 
-- Jackson Pollock, 1947.

3 Page Proposal Criteria

What? Why? How? -1 page each

Page 1- The problem statement.

Sub-questions (mini whats)

Page 2- Why is this important to deal with?

Deal with current situation.

What has already been done?

What do you already know?

Page 3- Methodology 

How do you intend to go about solving this problem?

Do you have a believable plan?

Do you know what you're talking about?

A paper:

Well bound

Cover page(s)

Table of contents

Abstract

Sections

Bibliography/notes at the end-MLA

Include pictures

Layout

Interviews- notes, tape recorder, whatever (Interview with ____ and date- bibliography)

March 12- FULL first draft

Have paper written.  The rest of the time will be dedicated to revisions.

Second Life

Second Life was VERY difficult for me.  I understood how to make the body, but even then, my avatar kept being bumped out of the screen.  When I finally found the free clothes area, I would "buy" the clothes that came free, but then I wouldn't really be able to find them in my inventory.  I found it all very difficult to navigate, but hopefully it will get easier the more and more I use it.

This is what I have so far...

Modernity: Spectatorship, Power, and Knowledge

When we look at am image, we look through a field that consists of "objects, technologies, and built and natural environments, as well as other people who are either present and looking with us (and we may also look at these people, and they look at us) or those who we know or imagine to have looked before or to be looking simultaneously at the same image elsewhere, on a different screen" (93).  We use all of our senses to look, which effects what we perceive.  This field is studied using the concepts of spectatorship and gaze (to look).  Further, to gaze is a "relational activity of looking."

Different people in different places will have different ideas of what it means to be modern.  They will argue over an exact date on which the world became modern; however, many scholars agree that modernity is defined by the historical, cultural, political, and economic conditions related to the eighteenth century philosophical movement known as the Enlightenment.  At this point in time mankind got the idea that they could control nature through technology, science, and rationalism.  Here began the rise of industrial society and scientific rationalism (95).  As this continued, there was an incredible rise in industrial capitalism.  As people moved from the country to cities, there became new forms of architecture and new products.  

The term flaneur is used to describe someone who strolls through the new city, taking in all of the sights through glass windows and metal surfaces.  When that term is defined, I feel like it comes with feelings of excitement, awe, and beauty; however, in the industrial revolution there was a great amount of strife.  While the buildings were growing higher and higher into the skies, there were many poor, struggling people below covered in soot and grunge.  

While modern man likes to see himself as incredibly advanced and sophisticated, some, like Latour, argue that man never fully separated himself from nature.  Maybe it is not possible to do this.  Latour offers the idea that man, nature, machine, etc.- they are all intertwined complexly (I believe this is true, and man has no choice but to accept it).

Now let's move back to the idea of spectatorship.  Spectatorship, we've found, is the practice of looking, while a spectator is the one who looks.  Recently I read Nietzsche in one of my English classes here at Clemson, and I was interested by his ideas of perception.   He argued that every single person would perceive and image differently due to the differences in their cultures, backgrounds, etc.  Basically, he believes that what we have seen influences what we will see.  If every spectator perceives things differently, then, argues Nietzsche, there can be no universal truth.  The idea of there being no universal truth is key in the twentieth century existentialist movement. 

 

Questions/Talking Points:

1.     Isn’t there importance to images we “glance” at and how we perceive them (not only the images we “gaze” at)?

2.     If women were used in cinema to be objects of the “male gaze”, then will me ever be used to be a part of the “female gaze”?

3.     What examples of voyeurism (the pleasure one takes in looking while they cannot be seen) can you find in your every day life?

 

 

Viewers Make Meaning

The first necessary thing to do here is make a distinction between the audience and the viewer.  The viewer is a person who looks, while the audience includes all who look.  Viewing is effected by other social and relational aspects regardless of how the image is viewed (in private, in public, or context specific).

An image does not mean one thing to every person, in any place, or in any time period.  The meaning they find in an image depends on a combination of social and relational aspects that is specific to each individual based on their life and what they have been exposed to.  

This production of meaning involves three main parts:

1.  An image cannot be separated from the codes and conventions that go along with the image.

2.  The viewer and how they interpret the image.

3.  How the image is exhibited.

Number three brings us to the point of interpellation.  This involves how and image in the media catches our eye.  This could be considered the most important aspect because the world is full of images and to convey a message and image has to dramatically stand out from all the rest.  Advertisers have the main goal of grabbing people's attention and pulling them in- their success is dependent on whether or not they are able to do this.

What the viewer must be aware of is that not all images and their messages come from one person.  Often a company or organization sends out a unified message through their images; however, this message has come from a larger amount of peoples' ideas coming together as one.  This can be seen in a movie that has one producer, yet only comes together because of the ideas and word of many other people.  

Ronald Barthes noted this idea in terms of authors and reader, but it can be seen within many other contexts.  He believed that one author cannot completely claim their works to be entirely theirs because their ideas are based, consciously or unconsciously, on the ideas of hundreds of others that they have encountered.  Interestingly another philosopher noted the importance of the author lies in his or her ability to send the message and portray the collection of ideas.

Questions/Ideas

*The third part in the production of meaning is probably the one most forgotten.  If an image is on the news or a flyer or a billboard, the viewer will interpret it differently.  How can this be used by young people or people with no connections?  How can they make themselves be heard or their ideas seem important and noteworthy. 

*What are ways to "interpellate" a viewer?  Does the image have to be loud and bold?  Or could softer, more subtle images stand out?

*This all related to the inauguration of Barack Obama and this importance of his speech today and those he's had in the past.  His speeches are a collection of ideas; he represents the ideas of many.  His face and phrases have become iconic.  Intense media scrutiny and political critiques have caused him to have to be strong and bold in his answers and speeches.

Why pink?

Yesterday my roommates put a sign above my door that says "Caution: Blonde Thinking", hence the name of this blog.

Blonde hair in itself has become a powerful image.  Maybe to some it implies ditzy and dumb, but I find other meanings.   Marilyn Monroe, Princess Diana, Madonna, even Britney Spears- these blondies may not all be role models, but they're certainly icons.  They command attention.  You want to see them, and you can't deny that you are at least a little interested in what they do and say.  They may not be well-read or college grads, but think of the experiences they've had, the people they've interacted with, and the places they've been.  They have an impressive creativity and knowledge of people and the world that has helped them reach their goals.

Perhaps most importantly, they have a platform.  When all eyes are on you, you can say what you want through images or words.  Your passions and the issues you care about- people will hear them.  And if you have the blonde, and the knowledge to back it up, its a pretty powerful thing.

Another girly pop culture reference, if you can stomach it, has to be Legally Blonde.  Quick summary: ditzy blonde sorority girl works to pass the LSATs to win back her ex-boyfriend, goes to Harvard Law School for him, realizes her potential, ditches her ex, and saves the day with her knowledge of law and hair care.  Cheesy "girl power" in a pink nutshell.  It takes more than book smarts to be successful; you have to keep your eyes open and your senses sharp.  

Visual communication is not only about one image meaning something specific.  It can be about changing the way people view an image, thus changing the way they think.  Disproving a stereotype, exceeding people's expectations, proving someone wrong- please, I can do it all, and I can do it in heels.

To wrap things up, the three main components of my blog:

The title

The pink

The photograph

My hair color, my favorite color, and my goal: simple expressions of who I am.

Images, Power, and Politics

So it's all about making sense of the world.  

Looking, seeing, touching, etc.  People do these things every day, all day, without even thinking about it.  It's up to each person to communicate by grabbing someone's attention or being subtle.  It's up to each person to look or look away; to interpret or ignore.  

A powerful image, word, font grabs you no matter what- think the red Communist flag in China, or the advertisement on a race car.  Somethings are almost impossible to ignore.  Images represent ideas, ideologies, and even emotions.  

Of course there are rules for images as well as words.  Copyrights, sensors- these apply to images too.  Breaking the rules doesn't always imply something vulgar, it can simply be an artist choosing a unique way to represent an idea, or maybe their time period.  Abstract art is a perfect example.  

The Museum of Modern Art in NYC is stocked with signifiers, but what signified, what's meant, is sometimes lost on people.  Even great art critics can misinterpret abstract art (and other art for that matter).  At first glance I have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on in figure 1.13.  It's uniqueness gets my attention, but laughing devil guys surrounded by butterflies isn't exactly an image that's easy to understand. 

So there's art, photos, cartoons, news, video, and advertisements.  That is only the tip of the iceberg of visual communication.  Flags, layout, font, color, 3D images, clothes, video games, even a picture a little kid draws- these convey ideas too.  Every image can be come an icon, or a portrait of the times.  Every image could be looked at by someone in another country or in the future and still convey something.  Every image has meaning, whether we choose to look at it or not.

1.  In the age of advancing technology and an increasingly fast-paced media people are exposed to incredible amounts of information each day.  Life moves as fast as the information coming in- reading articles, even watching the news can take too much time.  It takes only one moment to look at am image.

2. The best way to communicate through an image is to make it powerful.  Powerful is not necessarily bright and bold, yet it somehow captures your attention.  There is no extra fluff; within seconds, within one glance, the image needs to say what it's meant to say.

3.  Can an image exist that portrays no bias on the providers part?  Can a picture of war really say it all?  There are always more sides to a story- whatever is picked to be shown must contain some bias, right?  

***There are programs supported by photography magazines that give disposable cameras to people who live in places of unrest and in troubled times.  Camera distribution is combined with classes and darkroom construction.  The people who must life in the difficult conditions document their daily life, which portrays what they see daily and what they think is important.  Their views can be compared to our ideas and images to create valid ideas and overall understanding.

Here is a link to pictures that were taken by Iraqi citizens.