Rhetoric of the Image

Rhetoric of the Image by Roland Barthes discuses the three messages a photographic analysis can yield.
First being the linguistic code. This is the link between language and picture; either in comics, graphic novels or ads. The text helps anchor the viewer into the context which the creator intended. Meaning it molds your frame of reference. It can also distract you from things, thereby validating, or falsifying information that would be interpreted differently given a dissimilar context. It can also attribute meaning to objects not found in the picture (fill in gaps and questions left by the image). But text can also pose a problem for the creator. The viewer must have the cultural knowledge to decode the text (understand the language it was written in and know its cultural reference).
The second is a coded iconic message. This message refers to the way a person can interpret particular items (and the image as a whole). This does not mean the viewer looks at the image in a literal sense, but in a more abstract way of thinking. For example the coded iconic message of a red background may be it signifies warmth and love, when it reality it is only a color. The codes in an image are culturally dependant. This means that an image can take on a different interpretation depending on the cultural context of the viewer.
The final message is the non-coded iconic message. This is the literal interpretation. Using the example stated above a red background becomes just that, a background colored red. The non-coded iconic message is the literal items in the image, not their inferred meaning, just their being or representation of.
Using the three analytical messages I will apply them to the following image (an ad for the final episode of The Sopranos.)

The first text that appears in the image (appears in order of western language, left to right, top to bottom) is the words “The Final Episodes”. The word “The” for instance implies the creator wanted the viewer to feel a sense of importance in the statement. The statement “Final Episodes” would have the same finishing message with or without the first word. This means it was added for effect. It gives the statement authority, rather than having it just mealy be a statement. Next we come upon the word “Final”. This word implies that there must have been events that predated this event and are somehow linked. Also in American culture the world final (or finale) gives the expectation of greatness. The finale of anything is designed to be the most intense and intriguing. For example, the finale of a firework display is usually the most enthusiastic part of the display. Then the word “episode” arises. This is what the word “final” describes. It also validates that the something is a part of a greater whole. The word “episode” means part of a greater collection. Then the date is given. This tells the viewer when the actual final episode takes place. The date allows the individual to place this event in time. This allows them to place it in reality and take it off the screen or paper. There is nothing to the left of the date so the eye moves down. Here it is greeted by the words “Made in America”. The word “made” implies the creation of something (physical matter or an idea). The word “America” describes (in the context of the sentence) where that something was made. But if we only look at the image linguistically we do not know what it is that is being made, only where it is made. Because of this we must look further.
We must now look at the coded iconic messages in the image. First we see a man in the foreground (we know he is in the foreground because of the rules of perspective, rules that were culturally constructed in their depiction, even though the appearance of perspective is apparent in nature we constructed the rules of their replication). The fact that he is a man is globally accepted. In American popular culture we assume the man is a “mobster” of some sort. Even without seeing the actual show, American held stereotypes says that pudgy balding Italian men with smug looks on their faces belong to the mobster lifestyle. We also see that his eyes are squinted and looking away from the camera (the viewer). This adds to his demeanor by giving the impression that he is “looking out” at something off in the distance. In the background we see the statue of liberty. Many people living in the United States view the statue of liberty as an icon of liberty and freedom. The fact that the statue is in the background diminishes its overall importance in the photo. This means that the man is actually more important (in the context of the image). Given the cultural significance the Statue holds in Americans minds, the inferred importance of the man is extremely high. His has implied power over liberty and freedom. Then we see birds fly off to the edge of the photo. The fact that the birds are in flight implies a sort of tension within the photo. The birds add motion to an otherwise motionless photo (other than the water; but water has an implied sense of constant motion, whereas the birds have a conscious decision to be either at rest, or in motion). The fact that birds are moving means a couple things. First, they were at one time at rest (not moving) and, now that they are moving, they have a destination at which they will stop again. The two combined infers that there was a reason the birds left their state of rest. This adds meaning to their flight and thereby adding meaning to the man and his restful state. We can also infer that that the words “made in American” refer to the man. This is because we know the statue of liberty was not made in American (although it resides there). The birds can also be removed from this statement because western culture believes animals are not, in a sense, “made”. But this causes problems. Humans (the man) are in fact animals, so the sentence cannot be referring to the man himself (the physical man). The only thing left is the stereotype of his mobster persona, which can in fact be created or made in America. So in a sense the words “made in America” do not refer to the physical man, but his line of work and mentality.
Finally we can look at the literal interpretation or non-coded iconic message. The image shows a Man standing in front of the statue of liberty with birds flying in-between. This means that the man and birds were at that exact position in time and space at one point prior. We know this because we can reduce it further. It is an image. An image repeats an instant in time and space. It is a copy of that time and those photons of light in that said time. Furthermore the photo is just a chemical reaction. So in order to see this as a man, birds and statue, we must agree to what culture has told us about photographs. If the viewer did not understand the concept of a photo, they would assume it is a depiction of an event happening in the present, not the past.
Given these three analysis we can take a lot from this photo. But not all things in an image are intended. There are textual cues on how far one can take an interpretation and dissection of a photo. It is up to the viewer to decide where meaning ends and the ridiculous begins. But if you utilize these three analysis correctly you can truly understand how a picture can become a thousand words.

The Magician and the Cameraman

The Blair Witch Project was one of the first real attempts at creating a movie were the viewer thought it was “reality”. But unfortunately reality happens to be extremely broad. There are many aspects of reality one could try to replicate. Walter Benjamin, writer of The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction describes two facets of reality that greatly impact our perception of what is realistic. First being aura, the presence giving off between the interaction of an actor and the audience (as in what occurs during a play). This aura is the interaction between physical people and objects. This is almost impossible to recreate in cinema. When you view The Blair Witch Project you see people and landscapes, but they are not literally there. In the case of a film you are viewing a two dimensional screen, not a physical environment. If you sectioned off a one inch square of screen, and enlarged it, the image becomes distorted and unrecognizable. If you were to do this with an actual person or landscape, there features will disappear, but you will be able to recognize it is a physical object. Because you are not connecting with the actually elements, you lose physical interaction, and therefore aura.
But all is not lost. The Blair Witch Project does succeed in cutting into reality and therefore replicating it to a degree. The movie does not just try to depict a story; it tries to get inside your head and force you to live one. This invasive tactic creates a veil of reality that in certain points of the movie, is hard to lift. This is done a couple of ways. First there is no music/soundtrack in the movie. There is no music/soundtrack in reality. Although music can be an important dramatic effect, it inevitably shatters the perception of reality a movie tries to create. The Blair Witch Project was also shot almost entirely hand held. The shaky camera is more realistic than shots taken from a stable tripod. When the characters run through the woods, it is visual chaos, you can barely make out what is going on. But this represents reality. When you sprint through the woods you are not turning your head on a level tripod, you are dashing around objects, making your head and eyes (camera) shaky. The above techniques all help to create the allure of reality, but there is one last aspect that cuts the deepest. The entire movie was shot in the first person. The camera lens acts as a characters point of view. This technique directly immerses the viewer. When watching a movie not shot in first person, the viewer has the option of immersing themselves in what’s displayed, but in this case, you have no choice. You are forced into the middle of the situation.
There is no way to recreate the aura of interaction between two physical elements. And because of this the film would not try to recapture it. But the film does cut into you and therefore reality. The Blair Witch Project is realistic because if forces you to be involved. It cuts out the anticipated Hollywood garnish, and leaves you with the raw elements creating a more perfect picture of reality than anything before it. As Walter Benjamin would say “Magician and surgeon compare to painter and cameraman”. The Blair Witch Project was a life saving operation performed by a skillful hand.

Interpretation According to "Practices of Looking: An Introduction."

This photo can be interpreted in a multitude of ways. The book Practices of Looking: An Introduction describes interpretation in a couple of ways. First, the meaning of something is dependent on the individual looking. Their experiences and cultural expectations shape their reaction. This means that an images meaning can change as a culture changes. Because of this, an image can have an allure or meaning that is completely contradictory to what the creator had in mind. The interpretation of a work of art also depends on the knowledge and expectations the viewer has of the time period when the work was created. Using these two concepts we can begin to deconstruct the image at hand in accordance to my view (this is all I can do, because this is all I know). First as an American, I know of the great racial tension between whites and black during the 1960s. The reason I assume the photo was taken in the 1960s is because my prescription to the idea that black and white photos are artifacts of the past. This coupled with my understanding of dress and fashion trends leads me (in my mind, not necessarily fact) to assume and think this photo was taken in the 1960s. Because of these assumptions the photo gives radiates a great deal of power (to me and other who prescribe to my past knowledge and assumptions). The fact that an African American is holding a Caucasian child during a time of great upheaval is a display of hope. The extreme contrast between the white child and black woman (due to its black and white nature) echoes the separation of the races at this time. Remember though, the text highlights that these feelings are only inventions of my interpretation. Someone who has a different cultural expectation and understanding of the past may view the image in a completely different light. And they would be justified in doing so. A work of art and the reaction you give it is entirely dependent on your cultural view and understanding of the subject and its origin.