Ted post 1

Part I:

The first image that I took particular notice of when beginning the assignment was that comprising a magazine add for a relatively new men’s cologne by designer Ralph Lauren. The add consisted of a single photograph of a man in his late-twenties sporting a black leather jacket, black wavy hair, dark eyes, a wickedly confident stare, and all of this against a jet black background. The makers of the cologne, Polo Black, used the image of this man as a representation for the “kind of man” they deemed fit to sport the new scent. Obviously from the description of the man, or from actually viewing the advertisement, one can assume that the makers of the cologne intended for this man to represent what they believed to be a dark, masculine, and rugged new product. Thus the designers of Ralph Lauren advertisements are suggesting that wearing Polo Black will give the buyer a rugged, masculine style that is unique to the fragrance. Obviously, the truth that the designers are trying to portray in the picture, that is that this model is the type of man that would wear their cologne, and that to buy and use their product would better a consumers chance of sporting the same type of image as this particular model, is one that is impossible to prove simply with a single photograph. For all that the consumer knows, this particular model may, during his unpaid free time, prefer to style himself in a much softer, less masculine manner, and more than likely does not even fancy himself with Polo Black. Thus, it is impossible to prove that the man in the advertisement is the “Polo Black” type of man, and in fact, what this really means is that there is no true tangible Polo Black man. He is an idea that supports an image that represents and markets a product.

I followed up my visual and mental analysis of the Ralph Lauren advertisement by taking a close look at a photograph which can be seen by merely logging onto the Rollins College website. When doing this, one will notice that the first picture that pops up in the small slideshow of on-campus photos on the website’s homepage is an image of what appears to be a conversation taking place between a student of Rollins College and a member of its faculty. The student and either professor, advisor, or other similar sort of Rollins faculty member are having a relaxed outdoor chat, and both seem to be extremely comfortable with their setting. This photograph is meant to represent and atmosphere of closeness and interactive work and conversation between students and faculty that Rollins College admittedly prides itself upon. This sort of environment is something that the Rollins powers-that-be believe to be true of their university, and thus they portray it as a truth to those who visit their school’s site. Though I am certainly hopeful that this does prove to be a truth throughout my stay at Rollins College, I would be careful to claim that such a thought can be proven true by a mere photograph that, frankly, appears rather staged.

A third image which I believed was worth mentioning within the assignment was posted on a bulletin board put up in my dorm room by my roommate, Michael. The photograph displays my roommate, as well as about four of his high school companions, dressed in matching gowns and tassels, arms ‘round each other’s shoulders, and beaming joyously for the photographer. Though to one who has never been familiarized with any sort of organized schooling system this picture may appear as nothing more than a collection of young men dressed in matching outfits, to anyone who has or will or is currently going through some sort of a schooling system, most namely high school, this picture represents what is said to be both the happiest and saddest moment in the life of a young adult: graduation. One truth that may appear to be proven by the photograph is that, at the exact moment of the pictures being taken, the five young men of whom its focus is are quite happy. Certainly one would assume that anyone smiling as proudly and widely as these boys were had to have been quite pleased with themselves at that moment in time. Again, as convincing as this argument may appear because of the image in the photograph, one could also always argue that behind the camera, at the time of the picture’s being taken, there was a giddy, gushy, overly-excited mother who, despite any quietly nostalgic or perhaps even somber moods within this group of teens, absolutely insisted upon a great big “Cheese!” so that she might “capture the moment” as she wished to view it in the future.

Yet another image that I found appropriate to discuss in this project was one that I was able to see via the cover of one of my favorite outlets for literature, a gossip magazine! The image was one of a drunken, doped up, and belligerent Lindsay Lohan following the young icon’s recent run-in with the law. In the image, Lindsay is shown with eyes half-closed and head spinning from what appears to be some serious intoxication coupled with the shock that immediately follows any car accident. In the image, Lohan represents what they in the industry call “rock bottom”, which occurs when any young public icon, having risen with unbelievable speed to the top in both their career and celebrity status, seems to jump and run with all of the power and freedom they are suddenly hit with, and through a series of mindless decisions, find themselves shown the very same magazine covers that they once graced with carefully planned poses and glamour shots, but now with mortifying images of failure and stupidity. A thought that the creators and distributors of these images are attempting to prove a truth to their buyers and onlookers is that this young celebrity has truly sunk to the bottom of the barrel in regards to her choices and actions, and awaits the proper consequences for such behavior. I would like to hope that this is a truth, but certainly a photograph in a tabloid magazine is just about that last thing on the entire planet earth that is going to convince me of whether or not an icon is at the end of their success and awaiting to apprehension.

A final image that I feel I should discuss is one that can be found by looking up the single word war on the google-images search engine. When doing this, one will see that the first image that appears is one comprised of hundreds of small portraits of American soldiers who have been killed during the current war with Iraq which, with the manner by which they are placed together, create a larger image of George W. Bush’s face. Creating an image of President Bush’s face in this manner is meant to say that he is the man who represents the cause of death for all of the American soldiers who have not returned alive from war in Iraq. The creator of the image is sending the message that, because he declared war on Iraq, and sent American troops over to fight with Iraqi troops, and because those troops subsequently died while fighting Iraqi troops, George W. Bush is responsible for those troops having lost their freedom to live. Thus, though it is arguable that it is merely an artistic statement, the creator of this image of President Bush was trying to present what they believed to be a truth, and that George Bush was the face of death for any of his soldiers who have died in America’s war with Iraq, that their lives were his responsibility and loss.

In a semiotic analysis of the photograph I mentioned from the Rollins College website, one might say that the image of a student and professor having a friendly conversation is the signifier, and that the idea that students have close relationships and conversations with their professors at Rollins College is the signified. Thus, the sign is that, when attending Rollins College, a student will have the opportunity to take part in close and personalized relationships and conversations with his or her professors and advisors.

In the same way, an image of George Bush’s face as having been comprised of smaller images of soldiers who having died in the Iraq War would be a signifier, and the idea of these soldiers having died in a war which was declared by George Bush would be the signified. Therefore, the idea that President George W. Bush is directly responsible for the deaths of those soldiers who have died during America’s war with Iraq would be the sign.

One image on the Rollins College campus which can be deemed as high art is the chapel which exists in the center of the campus. This chapel, with it’s gorgeous and detailed outer stone design, and it’s equally beautiful and intricate inner designs, including the magnificently furnished wood pews and floors, and its stained glass windows, each a work of art in themselves, is quite an aesthetic sight to see. This chapel can definitely be considered high art not only because of the careful attention to craft, detail, and beauty that was needed in order to design and construct it, but because of the fact that it was created for the purpose of being a place where a God could be exalted and praised. Whether or not one is religious, we can all admit that often times, be it the painting of the Sistine Chapel, or one of Bach’s famous Choral’s, what is considered by many to be “high art” is created with the intent to glorify God.

An image on the Rollins College campus that I noticed and that appears to be “low art” is an advertisement advising against advertising for profit on the colleges user accounts. On this advertisement there is a black traced picture of a sort of stick figure looking character holding two bags of money, representing what the advertisement claims to be a myth, and that is that advertising on a user account is a ticket to riches for students. Though the crude piece of graphic art must, in my opinion, still be considered exactly that, it is nonetheless very disposable, and meant only to serve the purpose of aiding in getting a rather weightless message across concerning a trivial problem on college campuses. Therefore, though it is still art, because it is so disposable and replaceable and created with such a simple-minded intent, I believe the particular picture to be an obvious form of “low art”.

Part II:

As was explained thoroughly in much of the reading that has been assigned thus far for the Culture Wars RCC class, it has been a question throughout the history of mass media as to whether or not it is democratic or an oppressive function in society. In my opinion, the mass media, though often times it is able to be used in a very negative way by totalitarian rulers and groups, when it exists in a democracy such as that which we as Americans live in, can be a very democratic, positive, and progressive thing.

If a tyrannical and totalitarian leader were to have control of mass media, for instance, newspapers and television, certainly one can imagine that these forms of media would be used solely to promote this particular leader’s beliefs and power. If this is the case, which it often times has been and surely will be again, then the mass media is nothing more than a negative tool used to support the self-obsessed and self-serving thoughts of one man, or of one counsel, and is thus simply one more way in which the people over whom this regime has are made into fools and puppets. Likewise, if this is the case in a nation, it is my belief that the people of the nation are better off without paying attention to the media at all, that is to say that if the mass media is simply used as a tool of deception by a very small group of people in places of extreme power, then no media at all is a better option.

On the other hand, in a country such as the United States of America, I believe that the mass media, including the internet, newspapers, and television, is a very democratic thing, and the people of such a nation are most definitely better and more up on the current issues of theirs and other countries because of the existence of such media. When there are literally hundreds of television channels at the fingertips of many Americans financially able to afford such a luxury, and when there are literally hundreds of different magazine and newspaper titles to choose from throughout the country, and when there are literally thousands upon thousands of informative websites to choose from when one has the option of internet access, how could one possibly claim that in this type of a situation, the mass media is a negative and oppressive thing? It is because of the fact that there are so many different and often opposing opinions available for the American public to view and choose between due to the mass media that I can say nothing other than that it is a very necessary, and very healthy thing for any nation. This is certainly not to say that the U.S.A.’s version of mass media is perfect, and that it needs not to be kept in check, but that because a person utilizing the mass media has so many different options, opinions, and discoveries to hear about, view on t.v., or read, mass media in a nation that promotes democracy is just that, democratic.