The public sphere is an environment where the public can speak freely on politics. The definition, according to Habermas, is, “a realm of our social life in which something approaching public opinion can be formed. Access is guaranteed to all citizens.” A public sphere is established whenever individuals assemble to speak freely on topics of politics as they comment on the Daily Koz; a blog devoted to daily politics and the idea of free speech.
The Daily Koz is considered a public sphere because it gives people a virtual area to congregate and comment on the political issues of the day affecting the lives of all Americans. It is not restricted thanks to the first amendment right and there is discussion among the commentators, therefore placing in it the realm of the public sphere.
The discussion is heavily weighed to one side in that Koz is bringing up a topic, whether referencing to a news article and summarizing the main idea, or he does it with YouTube and posts a video and comments on that, beginning a discussion. Often times, if the subject is particularly controversial or popular, the amount of comments on the subject can reach into the hundreds.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Blog 4 Barthe's Essay
“At the level of the literal message, the text replies – in a more or less direct, more or less partial manner – to the question: What is it? (274)”
“The absence of code disintellectualizes the message because it seems to be found in nature the signs of culture. This is without a doubt an important historical paradox: the more technology develops the infusion of information (and notably of images) the more it provides the means of masking the constructed meaning under the appearance of the given meaning. (279)”
“Italianicity is not a Italy, it is the condensed essence of everything that could be Italian, from spaghetti to painting. By accepting to regulate artificially – and if needs be barbarously – the naming of the semes of connotation, the analysis of their form will be rendered easier. (282)”
In Barthe’s essay, Rhetoric of the Image he dissects the art of dissecting an image and its literal meanings and the messages they are trying to convey. He points out the difference between paintings and photographs and how they portray an object with symbolism behind it regardless of the medium.
I chose these three quotes because I felt they pertained and summarized the semiotic process that can be applied to all images, advertisements and other forms of general media withheld from the essay.
The first quote addresses the usage of text compiled over an image and its overt meaning - the blatant message it is supposed to convey to the audience. The text can be subtle, simple or more or less direct with whatever is written. The text for example, Made In America, refers to the American Dream – the hard working American ideal that we are the strongest country and so if it’s made in America, you can’t count on it’s quality. The time and the title are also present though much of the ad and it power stems from the phrase below it. The title answers the question, “What is it?”
The second quote however convoluted it may appear to be, is actually simple in what it means. When Barthes was addressing the differences between a painting and a photograph and how they depict an object he brings up this point that as technology progresses, it gives greater power to the producer, to take away the reality of the object and “mask” its real meaning, substituting it for something of their own. In other words, paintings and photographs are done to replicate a sort of reality though they always fail because it can never be truly re-done. Although the photo was taken probably because this character was merely looking around or behind him, his facial expression gives him this “badass” persona to him. The photo kind of “masks” this meaning and one has to dig deeper in order to truly understand the reason for its usage. These fallacies behind the photograph and paintings allow for greater symbolism within a piece that may not have been the producer’s intentions though it is possible.
Further on in Barthe’s essay I selected the third quote which addresses a much wider aspect of semiotics. The fact that advertising assumes that the viewer can associate and image with a culture, although stereotypical, is effective in selling the product is an interesting point to make clear. In the advertisement for the Sopranos, they have the seagulls flying in front of the Statue of Liberty which symbolizes New York, the tough city, of the American Dream, home of the Italian Mobsters. These symbols and their stereotypes are used on a daily basis to cross cultures and borders in order to appear to broader audiences and more potential customers that may not understand.
“The absence of code disintellectualizes the message because it seems to be found in nature the signs of culture. This is without a doubt an important historical paradox: the more technology develops the infusion of information (and notably of images) the more it provides the means of masking the constructed meaning under the appearance of the given meaning. (279)”
“Italianicity is not a Italy, it is the condensed essence of everything that could be Italian, from spaghetti to painting. By accepting to regulate artificially – and if needs be barbarously – the naming of the semes of connotation, the analysis of their form will be rendered easier. (282)”
In Barthe’s essay, Rhetoric of the Image he dissects the art of dissecting an image and its literal meanings and the messages they are trying to convey. He points out the difference between paintings and photographs and how they portray an object with symbolism behind it regardless of the medium.
I chose these three quotes because I felt they pertained and summarized the semiotic process that can be applied to all images, advertisements and other forms of general media withheld from the essay.
The first quote addresses the usage of text compiled over an image and its overt meaning - the blatant message it is supposed to convey to the audience. The text can be subtle, simple or more or less direct with whatever is written. The text for example, Made In America, refers to the American Dream – the hard working American ideal that we are the strongest country and so if it’s made in America, you can’t count on it’s quality. The time and the title are also present though much of the ad and it power stems from the phrase below it. The title answers the question, “What is it?”
The second quote however convoluted it may appear to be, is actually simple in what it means. When Barthes was addressing the differences between a painting and a photograph and how they depict an object he brings up this point that as technology progresses, it gives greater power to the producer, to take away the reality of the object and “mask” its real meaning, substituting it for something of their own. In other words, paintings and photographs are done to replicate a sort of reality though they always fail because it can never be truly re-done. Although the photo was taken probably because this character was merely looking around or behind him, his facial expression gives him this “badass” persona to him. The photo kind of “masks” this meaning and one has to dig deeper in order to truly understand the reason for its usage. These fallacies behind the photograph and paintings allow for greater symbolism within a piece that may not have been the producer’s intentions though it is possible.
Further on in Barthe’s essay I selected the third quote which addresses a much wider aspect of semiotics. The fact that advertising assumes that the viewer can associate and image with a culture, although stereotypical, is effective in selling the product is an interesting point to make clear. In the advertisement for the Sopranos, they have the seagulls flying in front of the Statue of Liberty which symbolizes New York, the tough city, of the American Dream, home of the Italian Mobsters. These symbols and their stereotypes are used on a daily basis to cross cultures and borders in order to appear to broader audiences and more potential customers that may not understand.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Blog 3
The first quote applies to the Blair Witch Project because the producers of the film tried to create a sense of fear using the woods and the rest of the landscape around the main characters. The beginning of the film was used to establish the witch’s boundaries and what was acceptable to the townspeople. The student documentarians pushed the limits of those boundaries. This creates a real fear for the characters in the film, which crosses over into the viewing audience. In doing so, this eliminates the notion that the aura vanishes when a camera is introduced into the equation mentioned in the quote.
Because the main characters in the film reach out to each other for comfort and a sense a safety from the witch by looking straight into the camera during the movie (in reality trying to look at the person behind the camera), it breaks the fourth wall and puts the audience in the position of the actor. This tactic puts the audience subconsciously into the film. The aura eliminated by the introduction of the camera and the subtraction of the presence of the audience within the vicinity of the actors in the same room, is re-introduced into the mix. We feel the fear from being chased through the woods with these other students. It is like we are sitting in a theatre watching the events unfold, as the students get more and more lost in the woods.
However, with regards to the second quote in the prompt, The Blair Witch Project attempts to cross into the realm of true reality where one feels as though they are in the woods with the actors. Attempting to personify the witch and shooting it with a handheld digital camera draws the audience closer to the students. The choice of a consumer handheld camera helps the audience relate to the actors because most people use them on a daily basis, so we can familiarize and therefore grow closer and feel emotions that help to break down the wall between reality and fantasy.
Because the main characters in the film reach out to each other for comfort and a sense a safety from the witch by looking straight into the camera during the movie (in reality trying to look at the person behind the camera), it breaks the fourth wall and puts the audience in the position of the actor. This tactic puts the audience subconsciously into the film. The aura eliminated by the introduction of the camera and the subtraction of the presence of the audience within the vicinity of the actors in the same room, is re-introduced into the mix. We feel the fear from being chased through the woods with these other students. It is like we are sitting in a theatre watching the events unfold, as the students get more and more lost in the woods.
However, with regards to the second quote in the prompt, The Blair Witch Project attempts to cross into the realm of true reality where one feels as though they are in the woods with the actors. Attempting to personify the witch and shooting it with a handheld digital camera draws the audience closer to the students. The choice of a consumer handheld camera helps the audience relate to the actors because most people use them on a daily basis, so we can familiarize and therefore grow closer and feel emotions that help to break down the wall between reality and fantasy.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Tokyo Story Realism
Tokyo Story was a film unlike any I have ever seen. There was a blatant moral in the end about appreciating your family, reminiscent of Aesop’s Fables from when I was a child. I enjoyed the film, though the breaking of the 180 degree rule from classic Hollywood films threw me off a little bit. The fourth wall was broken to the point where I felt uncomfortable at times.
Practices of Looking had an extensive chapter on the prominent continuity editing technique. It went into great detail on the subject.
Tokyo Story conveys realism in every sense of the word, though a classic Hollywood film edited with continuity in mind only gives the illusion of realism. Tokyo Story to me represented all that a film can portray in real life, the conversations that we have among ourselves and the daily lives that we live. Even though I liked the message, I found it difficult to sit and watch the film because there was a lot included that didn’t need to be included in order for the film to work. Tokyo Story brought us through every word of every conversation through every action, every movement and the unnecessary facets of life that I wasn’t used to seeing in a movie. Maybe its just because I’m so used to the classic Hollywood American style of editing a film.
On the other hand, classic continuity editing cuts down the realism of a film and condenses the actions that in reality would take much longer and much more effort than the film actually conveys to the viewer. This works because our eyes interpret the information that we see and “fill the blanks” so to speak, and the plot continues even though we didn’t see the protagonist go down ALL the flights of stairs. Cutting was always down on action so as to further give the illusion of reality within the subject.
I enjoyed both the reading and the film because they both added a new aspect to keep in mind when creating my films and writing my scripts.
Practices of Looking had an extensive chapter on the prominent continuity editing technique. It went into great detail on the subject.
Tokyo Story conveys realism in every sense of the word, though a classic Hollywood film edited with continuity in mind only gives the illusion of realism. Tokyo Story to me represented all that a film can portray in real life, the conversations that we have among ourselves and the daily lives that we live. Even though I liked the message, I found it difficult to sit and watch the film because there was a lot included that didn’t need to be included in order for the film to work. Tokyo Story brought us through every word of every conversation through every action, every movement and the unnecessary facets of life that I wasn’t used to seeing in a movie. Maybe its just because I’m so used to the classic Hollywood American style of editing a film.
On the other hand, classic continuity editing cuts down the realism of a film and condenses the actions that in reality would take much longer and much more effort than the film actually conveys to the viewer. This works because our eyes interpret the information that we see and “fill the blanks” so to speak, and the plot continues even though we didn’t see the protagonist go down ALL the flights of stairs. Cutting was always down on action so as to further give the illusion of reality within the subject.
I enjoyed both the reading and the film because they both added a new aspect to keep in mind when creating my films and writing my scripts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)