Chapter 2: Viewers Make Meaning

The evolution of viewing is a fascinating topic, especially if you take into consideration the generation, culture, and demographic looking at the image. The meanings (what we, as analyzers, can always count on to exist) will vary in "at least" three different ways and are broken down in this chapter as 1) The fixed nature of an images' structure, 2) The subjective nature of interpretations and experiences, and lastly 3) The context or environment that the image is exhibited or viewed. As an aside, I think it interesting how this foundation for the analysis of viewing, can apply to everything from the paratextuality of a Stephen King novel cover, to an 17th century painting.

The author or creator of any image has very limited control after it reaches the public. Michel Foucault makes a very interesting observation that the author's function is basically limited to giving a set of beliefs or a loose outline to its readers. Likewise, the "producer's function" leads us to have a certain expectation about a work. The most influential entity is therefore the viewer. The viewer rarely has access to the original intentions of the producers and subsequently, determines an images meaning independently. This is not always the case, as in advertisement images where the intention of its producers is typically transparent. Images are increasingly being connected to other images. For instance, if you Google, "ethnicity," you are going to get a huge variety of images, all of which affect your intake of the image to end up choosing.

Marx, as random as he might seem, lends his hand to our understanding of how we interpret images. Basically, he saw the proliferation of ideologies (in our case, the producers of images) as a "kind of false consciousness." In other words, the people in control of these ideologies can manipulate individuals, creating a harmful imaginary relationship to their "real conditions of existence."

Discussion Questions;

1. Are there too many external images (advertisement, TV, the internet, etc) controlling our reality? In other words, are we really the interpreters anymore?

2. Is Marx making a legitimate point about the fact that the individual (us) is in an imaginary relationship with existence? Are the bigtime producers of images (i.e. The News, Advertisements, ...) pulling the wool over our eyes and are we eating out of their hands?

3. Phrases and words evolve over time, like "gay" and "Black is beautiful," how do images evolve over time?