Key theorists

Usually in most media, cultural and communication courses there are three main theorists that are examined and applied:

• C S Pierce
• Ferdinand De Sausure
• Roland Barthes

And generally the following key language is part of this process:

• C S Pierce – icon / index / symbol
• Ferdinand De Sausure – signifier / signified
• Roland Barthes – denotation / connotation / myth

Overview

To provide some context and overview I will provide a brief explanation for each one:

C S Pierce

Pierce  (1839 -1914) was also a Linguist. Also interested in Language. Also therefore appropriate to Semiotics, when you are looking to use some key language to deconstruct a cultural text. Again he was looking to develop an understanding of the way in which Language is a way of connecting meaning to different signs. Often he is used to identify different types of sign, which can be categorised into three distinct categories:

1. An iconic sign – which has a direct connection to its’ object (ie it looks or sounds like the object)
2. An indexical sign – which has an indirect link to its’ object (think smells)
3. A symbolic sign – which has a random or arbitary link based on a shared knowledge or an agreement, for example, a shared culture or language (think letters, words, writing, shapes, squiggles, colours, sound effects, facial expressions, hand gestures, clothing, hair styles, etc)

TASK 1: Go to your blog post that has your summer induction task and identify 6 x iconic signs, 6 x indexical signs & 6 x symbolic signs. Is it possible that a single sign may be in more than one category? In other words, is the colour red a symbolic and indexical sign?

Ferdinand de Sausure

Ferdinand Sausure (1857-1913) was interested in Linguistics, in other words, he was interested in Language – so you can see why we look at him in Media Studies. As a brief overview, he was interested in the connection between’ a thing’, ‘an object’, a something’ and the meaning that human beings then attach to ‘this thing’.

He wanted to explore this area, as it seemed to suggest that things don’t have an innate meaning, rather that meaning is given to things, often through some form of interaction – hence, the notion of symbolic interactionism.

Sausure then developed an approach to understanding the way in which meaning is created by detaching the signifier (the thing, the object) and the signified (the meaning). So it is important to try and use these two terms when referring to Sausure, when you are discussing key elements or signs in a text.

Roland Barthes

Roland Barthes (1915-1980) is often seen as a founding father of Media Studies, as many of his books look at the way in which media texts hold meaning. For example, Mythologies (1957) looks at wrestling, Roman films, soap powders and detergents, steak and chips, striptease, plastic . . .

Roland Barthes is often seen as a structuralist in other words, he was interested in tracing the relationship between significant societal structures, like the media and popular culture and identifying how they made an impact on society and individuals. In particular, he was interested in the ways in which dominant structures created dominant ideologies. To that end, he was keen to encourage a reading of cultural texts from an analysis of what they were (analysing the object), which operates at a denotative level (think for examples elements and signs that are in a newspaper, or radio programme, film, television, advert or web-page), to what they might mean, which is at a connotative level.

Beyond this Barthes felt that by understanding a range of meanings (connotations) from a range of similar texts (paradigms) it was possible to develop an understanding of an overarching dominant ideology or at a point that Barthes identifies as a myth. In other words, an argument is presented that suggests that the mass media contribute to a dominant ideology around gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, religion, class and status, which are actually are myths. It could be then argued that these myths are actually in-line with the dominant ideology (attitudes, values and beliefs) of the dominant groups in society.

This aligns his views to a Marxist interpretation of society (one based on the ideas of Karl Marx), where the dominant ideology of society is actually the ideology of the dominant groups in society, which may not necessarily be in everybody’s interest or benefit.

The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas.

Marx, German Ideology (1845)

Following this line of thought, cultural texts that appear to support the dominant ideology can the therefore referred to as ‘reactionary’ as opposed to texts which challenge the dominant ideology which can be referred to as ‘radical’. Although, what soon becomes apparent in any textual analysis is that most texts usually appear to have elements that are both radical and reactionary. As such, it may be necessary to think further about where meaning comes from, because if we think about it with reference to the theory of symbolic interactionism, then we need to consider the role of the audience in constructing meaning, as well as thinking about the role of the author of a text, or even the institution that made it. This idea can again be referenced to Barthes in his proposition of the ‘Death of the Author‘ and will be explored in another post. For now here is an excellent animated video that helps to explore some of the ideas that I have put forward.

TASK 2: Write up a blog post that provides a short definition and / or explanation for the following terms:

1. Roland Barthes (his ideas of dominant signs / dominant ideology)
2. C. S. Pierce (and his categories of sign)
3. Ferdinand de Saussure (the separation of object and meaning)
4. Semiotics,
5. Sign,
6. Signifier,
7. Signified,
8. an iconic sign,
9. an indexical sign,
10. a symbolic sign,
11. Code,
12. Dominant Signifier,
13. Anchorage,
14. Paradigm,
15. Syntagm,
16. Signifcation,
17. Denotation,
18. Connotation,
19. Myth,
20. Dominant Ideology,
21. A radical text
22. A reactionary text.