Signs are omnisciently present in society and the codes used to decipher their meanings are firmly entrenched into the human psyche. By using the various language and visual techniques within the system of semiotics, mediators can manipulate signification to convey a certain meaning through their texts. They can also maintain a level of control over the audience’s interpretation and reactions to the text.
Reading a text using this structural method however does have its limitations. The “…media…stimulate perceptions in audience members…at the time he or she receives the message.” (Graber (2006) p.195). Thus, the effectiveness of the techniques relies heavily on the audience’s social, cultural and historical contexts. The receivers find meaning by drawing associations between the message and their previous knowledge and experiences. The context of the text must be taken into consideration in order to fully comprehend the meaning and effect. Failure to acknowledge this would ultimately lead to a very narrow and possibly false reading of the text.
Semiotics is a system theory introduced by Ferdlnand de Saussure concerning the study of signs. According to Mackay, “Any sound, word, image or object…” is a sign and the way in which they are “…organized with other signs into a system which is capable of carrying and expressing meaning is, from this point of view, ‘a language’”. (Mackay (1997) p.135). The two main types of signs are iconic signs (visual signs) and indexical signs (spoken or written signs). Signs are combination of the signifier (the material object conveying meaning) and the signified (the meaning which is communicated). A sign can connote and denote meaning. Denotation is the basic literal meaning whereas connotation is a deeper symbolic meaning. Various techniques are used to create this meaning. Metaphors compare two signs in order for them to be understood similarly for example, “that man is a pig”. This has negative conations implying, gluttony, laziness and possibly obesity. Symbols and images are also used. They are words, gestures, or visual features which represent something else. The difference between a symbol and an image is that symbols are socially established and well known (such as crosses of Christianity) whereas images are created by the mediator (for example, in a poem about child birth, a rope could represent the maternal bond). Metonyms are signs which are so highly symbolic that they become automatically associated to a larger idea. For example, ‘Wall’s Street’ no longer just refers to that particular street in New York; it represents the economic base of America and also the well-known Wall Street crash. Messages can reflect ideologies based on “ideal” systems of thought and concepts by reinforcing ‘myths’; socially accepted notions with no factual basis. They can also be framed within specific genres, (i.e. categories such as horror, comedy and documentary) each with their own specific discourse (or style of representation).
The 2001 television segment presented by Matt Frei from the BBC covering the first 9/11 anniversary in both New York and at the Pentagon employs various semiotic techniques. Frei begins the program with the word ‘remember’. This connotes the simple act of recollecting past events however, in this context, ‘remembrance’ is a significant act of respect, honoring those who had died in the attack. This idea is anchored by the cut in of bagpipe music, which has ceremonial conations. The slow panning towards the image of an American flag, signifies patriotism and national freedom thus, this ‘remembering’ is depicted as a national duty for all American citizens. The focus of the report however “was private grief”, anchored by the close up footage of solemn-faced citizens. Frei describes the crowd of people “heading to ground zero”. After the attack, the media often referred to the site where the world trade center was as “ground zero”, the same name given to the “…epicenter of the Hiroshima atomic bomb that was appropriated to signify the devastation and enormity of the 9/11 attacks” (Kellner (2005) p.28). This allusion further dramatizes the high level of devastation caused.
The video footage of the crowd of New York civilians on their way to the memorial site uses synecdoche through close ups of holding hands and the crowds feet as they walk. The holding hands symbolize unity and connotes that the mourning is not only a personal reflection but is more holistically a time for all American citizens to remember as one nation. The crowd of feet denotes the significant amount of people present at the event, thus highlighting its importance. It connotes the busy city life of New York City. This is anchored in the dialogue: “A year ago at this very hour, these people were rushing to work, coffees and bagels in hand, it was just another Tuesday in Manhattan.” The coffee and bagels are both metonyms of busy New York City life. This is contrasted with the personification of “…the city that never kept quiet was lost for words” emphasising the shock felt by the civilians and their unpreparedness to comprehend such a traumatic event.
9/11 is also represented as an international affront, not solely an American tragedy. Kellner said “The spectacle of terror was broadcast throughout the global village, with the whole world watching…” (Kellner (2005) p. 28). Frei describes the event as “…one of those very rare events in history when almost everyone on the planet remembers exactly where they were and what they were doing…” The inclusive language of “everyone” and the entire “planet” connotes the event’s international significance. The reading of all the names was filmed fragmentally. The footage shifts from first the Mayor then to four pairs of people (two people per shot) who each say a name. The stand is adorned with the United States presidential seal. This signifies the dominance of the American government in the tribute and highlights the formal, official style of the procedure. Half way through this footage, Frei says “…not just Americans, almost 100 nationalities, a dozen religions, citizens of the world and victims of terror.” In the footage, the speakers were of various ethnic backgrounds, anchoring the idea of the event affecting not only a great number but also a large range of people.
Frei says: “Hundreds of bodies have not been found, will never be found.” By using the word “hundreds” instead of an estimated amount, it highlights that since there were so many fatalities, the exact amount is immeasurable. The shift from “have not” to “will never” denotes that under the circumstances, many people will not ever be accounted for. It also connotes that many families will never receive a full explanation thus leading to a lack of closure to their grief. During this dialogue the camera focuses on an older woman holding a portrait of a police officer, presumably her son and flowers. The laurel of flowers signifies both a sign of respect for either great accomplishment or as a means of paying homage to the dead. The photograph establishes the woman as a family griever. The fact her son is wearing his police uniform in the photograph makes the picture a symbol representing all of the police officers who died in the event who were also loved sons. As Frei says “…will never be found…” woman drops her head and starts to cry, emphasising her strong sense of anguish. Frei describes the memorial as “...still a masquerade”. The word “masquerade” signifies the act of dressing up, or in this context, pretending. This metaphor anchors the idea of a lack of closure and, more widely, the ineffectiveness of the ceremony in regards to achieving the justice. It only appears as a vehicle towards emotional resolve however, like a mask, this is fictitious.
President George Bush’s international address is depicted. As he comes to the stand, an establishing shot is used showing the stand in the center surrounded by red, white and blue and American flags highlighting the importance of patriotism in the form of national unity especially during crisis. George Bush wears an American flag pin, anchoring this idea of patriotism. As he speaks, the camera is close up, connoting a sense of intimacy, as if he is personally addressing each viewer. He also talks while making hand gestures, connoting his emotional investment into the event. He says “The enemy who struck us are determined and are resourceful. They will not be stopped by a sense of decency or a hint of conscience, but they will be stopped.” The use of very definitive ‘matter of fact’ sentences connotes a profound understanding of the problem and how it must be solved. His self-assured tone in his address gives him a sense of credibility and depicts him as a determined and committed leader. As he says “they will be stopped”, the camera cuts to two United States marines. They each nod their head denoting their agreement and connoting the United States military’s commitment to their duty of carrying out the President’s regime.
This text is a significant part of the history of representation in 9/11. However there are limitations in regards to using the system of semiotics in order to understand it. As said by Hall, the process of finding meaning from a representation “…does involve the use of language, of signs and images which stand for or represent things. But this is a far from simple or straightforward process.” (Hall (1997) p. 15). Semiotics as structural system of analysis relies on elements of textual construction such as selection of material, language and visual techniques. However, by solely focusing on these aspects, the context which shapes the text’s reception and interpretation is largely ignored. A receiver’s reading of a text is entirely dependent on their cultural, social and historical context. The only way a reader can find meaning within a text is through relating it to their past experiences. Each individual responder has “a mental model of the expected style… (recognised using)…prior learned knowledge… (and with this can)…read into it the values it embodies”. (Fowler (1991) p. 40). Thus; by not acknowledging these factors, this approach can lead the analyzer making a narrow and simplistic judgment of the text’s possible meaning.
Another issue relating to semiotic analysis is the concept of polysemy: “a process by which a sign bears multiple meanings.” (Danesi (2000) p.178). When relying only on the structural aspects of the text, it can sometimes become difficult to comprehend what exactly is being said. For example, the word “freedom” (Davis & Walton (1983) p.280) can have many different meanings. Considering the context of the text provides a much needed frame work for understanding what meanings would be relevant to the situation. For example, blue can signify sadness but in American politics, it signifies a political party. A major problem within the semiotics approach is that it can be overly analytical. When semantically breaking down a text, you are not reading it in the way the audience typically would have. “The way we read (quickly, slowly, superficially, attentively etc.) has significant effects on how signs are decoded.” (Bignell 2002) p. 63). Thus, carefully analyzing each frame could lead to the discovery of meaning not normally recognised by the original viewer leading to a possible overestimation of its level of influence.
Therefore, by using the various language and visual techniques within the system of semiotics, mediators can manipulate signification in their texts to convey a certain meaning. They can also maintain a level of control over the audience’s interpretation and reactions to the text. However, interpreting a text using this method does have its limitations. The effectiveness of the employed techniques heavily depends upon the individual receiver’s social, cultural and historical contexts. The only way a receiver can find meaning is through drawing parallels between the message and their previous knowledge and experiences. The context of the text must be taken into consideration in order to fully comprehend the meaning and effect. Failure to recognise this could ultimately lead to a misjudgment of the text’s significance for the targeted audience.
References
Books
Bignell, J. (2002), Media Semiotics: An Introduction, Manchester University Press
Danesi, M., (2000), Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics, Media, and Communications, University of Toronto Press
Davis, H. & Walton, P. (1983), Language, Image, Media, Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell Publisher Limited
Fowler, R. (1991), Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press, New York, USA: Routledge
Graber, D. (2006), Mass Media & American Politics, Washington, DC, USA: CQ Press, a division of Congressional Quarterly Inc.
Hall, S., (1997), ‘The Work of Representation’ in Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices,London: Sage
Kellner, D. (2005), Media Spectacle and the Crisis of Democracy, Colorado, USA: Paradigm Publishers
Mackay, L. (ed.) (1997) Consumption and Everyday Life, London, Sage/ The Open University (Book 5 in this series)
Video
BBC Journalism (2010, July 7) Matt Frei- 9/11 anniversary, New York. Retrieved May 5, 2014, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGgyUqcCfNs
コメント