In an article in the section "Essays" Le Monde dated June 2, 2009, David Zerbib reflects the work of WJT Mitchell entitled "Iconology. Image, text, ideology " appeared in the series" Thinking / cross "published " The Prairie "Ordinary .
Mitchell, professor of literature and art history at the University of Chicago, is considered one of the representatives of "visual studies" born in the United States in the 80 to address the images in the humanities, in conjunction with aesthetics or art history, and disclose it look like political construction.
In his book, Mitchell is more interested in the idea of "imaging" as such at the "material identity images" . Lying on the border between image and language, the book Mitchell claims that, contrary to the word, "image is the sign that says no not be a sign that disguises to impersonate (and, in the eyes of the believer, he does so in effect) for a natural immediacy and presence ". The basic question for Mitchell " How to transform t Are the images and imagination that powers the product worthy of belief and respect? ".
Focusing on systems of power and value, that is to say, the ideology that underlies our report images, Mitchell founded a "iconology" (or the science images) which wants a "political psychology icons" but also a "study of the conflict between those who defend the truth images, and those who pourfendent as illusion ". Rejecting the illusion of any proposed suitor " purge the world of his images ", Mitchell asserts the existence of" hypericônes ", that is to say "imaginary representations that shape our ways of knowing ." Continuing his argument, Mitchell says "modern look" based on trust "blind" in images supposed "natural" or scientifically "real ", allowing him to devote himself to the " idol of reason conquering proclaiming the transparency of the real, while is itself ethnocentric ". Mitchell is a keen observer " power relationships that lurk in our eyes ", especially when they rely more and more looks supposedly objective and universal. Mitchell does not propose another model or another faith. He did as a research project that point and reveal the underlying mechanisms of our modern eyes.
Based on the analysis of Mitchell, how not to think about images the world that are the maps and imagery (satellite and aerial) which abounds our world today?
So when Mitchell wrote "It does a table once before how it shows what can be seen ", we can only implement this analysis to images of the world, especially when you see a " coverage imagined " (as defined coverage of images) systematic world that are images of spatial mapping sites online or virtual globes. As is the case in front of a poster, we think watching the satellite pictures while we are in the grip of a powerful performance. The book Mitchell dates from 1986, is an amazing news with "googlomapisation the world", that is to say the setting of world maps and images from Google. The cards, but most of the space images Google (and everyone else), give to see the world through pictures that claim to total objectivity when these images are constructed from our contemporary perspective on the world. News programs, documentaries, films, commercials, and even replicated in the field of writing novels and comics, these images take ownership of the world and we require more and more as the only possible scientific and objective picture of real world, in a sort of "enterprise iconological totalizing" . Every image carries an ideology and therefore an attempt to seize power over the way these images. It is not about a stance a bit simplistic denunciation of "Big Brother is watching you" of 1984 George Orwell, but only to identify what lies behind the images of the world in terms of power over the world and individuals to whom these images are increasingly presented to point towards a risk of "visual saturation" of our views on the world. To see the world too, we may be unable to discern neither observe.
0 comments:
Post a Comment