A reread from quite a while ago.
An interesting discussion of the nature and permutations of images in the west.
Some interesting points about how text changes the perception of the image - how language turns the image into an illustration of the words, nailing down a meaning instead of being a more open extra-lingual (?) experience.
He also points out the frequent cultural referencing of classic paintings in modern advertisements. The classical images have a reference, a weight, a story, a value, that advertisers want to carry into their advert., associate with the product. As if this almost unconscious collection of classical images is a language in itself.
An interesting chapter exploring the nude in western art - inherently voyeuristic. This comes out of a larger tradition in western art, possibly because of its emphasis on realism. The painting as a metaphor of ownership, and thereby of social status. This implies an inherent awareness of the viewer, almost as if the painting is a way of speaking to the viewer. There are some interesting indian illustrations of sexual activity as a contrast. The indian images simply show - the subjects in the images show no awareness of the viewer. This is in sharp contrast to many of the classic nudes, where the subject is looking out directly at the viewer, or presented as if offered to the viewer. This is possibly a mirror of the awareness of self as individual that is so strong in western tradition since at least the Renaissance.
Is there a way to create images, and yet stay outside that tradition that has been so co-opted by the advertising industry. I still feel we have too many images loaded with subliminal fantasy messages.
No comments:
Post a Comment