1. Look at this image.
What do you think is
going on? Most people
assume the man is from
a country in the Middle
East. His appearance
and the background
suggest this. But what is
he doing?
2. Now what does it look
like he's doing?
Is he wiping his mouth
on a large cloth, perhaps
after having had lunch?
3. How has your
understanding changed
now?
Physically, it's still possible
that he was wiping his
mouth, but most people
don't think that; because he
has a flag (and because of
the position of his head and
expression), most people
conclude that he is kissing
the flag.
4. Here's where the image
came from: the front
page of the weekend
edition of USA Today,
March 1-3, 1991 -- the
end of the Persian Gulf
War. Now how do you
understand the picture
of the man?
5. The important point here
is this: Your different
interpretations of the
man's actions came not
from his image, but from
what you assumed based
on what surrounded his
image. The image of the
man did not change, but
the context of the image
did.
6. So the reason you now understand
the man to be kissing the
American flag has little or nothing
to do with his image itself.
It has more to do with the
relationship between his image
and things that surround it, its
place in a system of signs.
Assumptions we make based on
the image of the flag, and its
placement on the front page of a
newspaper at a particular time --
not his expression or the position
of his lips or anything about the
photo of the man himself --
ultimately determine how we
understand what he is doing.
8. Kissing any flag, for most
people, would connote
respect and gratitude for
the nation the flag signifies.
So one connotation of this
photo is that this particular
man has respect for and
gratitude toward the United
States because of its part in
the Gulf War.
9. The next question, however, is
whether this image is just
about this particular man?
What do you actually know
about this man, his life, and his
relationship to the war?
The caption refers to him
simply as "a Kuwaiti." So if
the particulars of this man's
life are not known or
considered newsworthy, why
was his image selected for the
front page of this national
newspaper?
10. Is the key connotation
of the photo that this
particular individual
kissed the flag out of
gratitude to the US?
Or, does it suggest
something more?
11. In actuality, an
immensely powerful
myth is being invoked
here, whether
intentionally or
unintentionally. The
combination of the signs
on the page sends a
message about the
situation being
described here.
12. Many people
undoubtedly glanced
at this USA Today on
March 2, 1991. How
do you think it was
interpreted?
13. In that moment of seeing, a
lot happens: you make
sense of the image and
interpret it, by applying
your existing knowledge of
the connotations of kissing
the flag, the narratives of
victory, and the entire story
of subjected peoples
grateful for military
intervention.
14. So the notion that the
Kuwaitis were grateful for
military intervention at this
point in time is invoked in
your mind, not because it is
stated in so many words, but
because it is part of the
framework you use to make
sense of the image, part of
its conditions of intelligibility.
The image promotes the
myth, not by making an
explicit argument for it, but
by getting you to fill in the
details.
15. Something peculiar is
happening here. In part because
of the image, but also because
of its context, when you
glanced at this picture you were
not likely to think you were
reading a controversial
proposition: after all it is "just"
a picture. So the photo seems to
be two things at once: on the
one hand, an elaborate
mythology; on the other, just a
picture of a man kissing a flag.
16. Ideology is the point where
semiotic systems and codes
intersect with the exercise of
power in social life. It is the
process whereby codes reinforce
or become congruent with
structures of power.
What the peculiar character of
this image illustrates is how
ideology in this sense works, not
by persuading people of the value
of particular ideas (e.g., an
editorial stating that all Kuwaiti
people are grateful for military
intervention), but largely by
creating forms of "common
sense," of the taken-for-granted in
everyday life.
17. The preceding analysis of signs in the media suggests that
people's attitudes and actions in cases of things like war may
not be simply a matter of facts, lies, and distortions in the
media, of truths and falsehoods.
It suggests that structures of cultural common sense addressed
and reinforced in the media – the "folklore" of the industrial
world – operate less on a level of truth and falsehood than
on a level of association and imagery.
We should aim to become more aware of, and thus less
susceptible to, the forms of common sense these images
promote.
18. This slide show is a combination of slides taken
from
www.understandingnewmedia.com/slides/se
miotics.ppt and from the Powerpoint
presentation of Tom Streeter, University of
Vermont.