After writing my first response essay and really contemplating the study of pop culture, I keep returning to the idea that my thoughts may not be more than opinion pieces or critical descriptions.
How do we use semiotics in a more meaningful way? A way backed up with evidence? How do we practice clarity in a study wrought with so much convolution?
Since I've begun writing I've had problems expressing myself concisely. Organization helps, certainly, but this topic in particular has me looking for new ways to bypass my too-complicated, layered and loaded ideas. I re-read and re-structure and re-start this essay to seemingly no avail. I read out-loud and beg for feed back, but have not been yet satisfied with what it sounds like.
I wrote my first response essay on a magazine cover that I treated more as a piece of pop culture art. It was an "art issue" for the magazine, which was pertinent. The subject matter, however, was a bit more layered. It featured a naked female celebrity literally being censored in an artistic manner. In a way the censorship was meant to be a comment all its own on the status of pop culture. If the viewer didn't take the time to research the art, though, the censorship reads as self-indulgent and a reflection of pure base Hollywood. How does one make an art critique into a pop culture story? Maybe part of the problem I'm having is the narratives we are to be looking for. I can ponder for hours the narratives I'm presented with everyday, but its true that when you're closer to something it can be harder to analyze. Objectivity and all that...
You make great points, Sylvie - we are often so enmeshed that we are unable to see the forest through the trees. A strategy I recommend is isolating those values and then defining them. In other words, in addition to saying "this shows how we value happiness," ask: How does this culture define "happiness"?
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by "my thoughts may not be more than opinion pieces or critical descriptions."? I don't understand who bears what worth concerning your thoughts. Are you saying your thoughts are effected by pop culture or that they are only opinions of?
ReplyDeleteI meant my writing could be backed up more with concrete ideas and facts, as opposed to just being editorials of a sort. In any intellectual discourse you should be able to structure your thesis around some sort of common idea/ideal. Not that I need everyone to agree with me, but I need to be able to argue competently about it.
DeleteI guess you bring up a good point about pop culture invading my own thoughts also! It's easy to get caught up in pop culture without having very much to say about it. Conversely, you can say a LOT of pop culture without really saying anything!
Semiotics sort of eludes evidence. A piece can be endlessly interpreted and the conclusions aren't necessarily wrong. Semiotics, after all, have a lot to do with personal appeals. A certain icon or advertisement might strike a person in a certain way, and it may strike the majority of people in the same way. In this case, the semiotic analysis is useful in that it illustrates an apparent focus of the advertisement as it is interpreted by the masses. Then again, the same advertisement could have an entirely different appeal to other individuals. Either way, the interpretations aren't necessarily wrong or right and therefore evidence doesn't really come into play.
ReplyDelete