Picture Theory_Blog 6
Picture Theory
Bassim Oshiba
Blog 5
Today’s class took a new twist as the students walked in today. Before class started there was a rumor that Dr Hernandez revealed some of her less pleasant side and kicked asked students to go home for failing to read the readings assigned. As we all waited anxiously, we began to fear that the rumor was true. Finally Dr. Hernandez came into the room with the usual smile. She subtly asked whether we read the reading, Picture Theory, we all raised our hand saying yes. Dr. Hernandez then re-informed us how important the readings are for the class to be effective and productive; she then confirmed the rumor by asking anyone who hasn’t read Picture Theory to exit the room. I found that the theme of kicking people out of class to relate to the reading in a sense that part of the message in Picture Theory is to establish a point, which is exactly what Dr. Hernandez accomplished.
Now enough gabber about the beginning of class and more about the meat of information that was learned from Picture Theory. After each group presented their share of the book, I think I may have grasped the W. J. T. Mitchell’s goal. I believe he was trying to implement that the world’s use of pictures to send and exchange information has evolved and defied history, as we know it. In the beginning of the chapter, Mitchell begins by pointing out the differences between words and images, why are there both and what is the point of images?
In the first chapter, The Pictorial Turn, Mitchell explains how the pictures in history can be interpreted in different ways depending on the text that is involved. The chapter also focuses on how the definition or the purpose of the picture can be altered and changed simply by adding text. We begin to understand that as each artists draws or writes art, he leaves it up to the audience to decide the meaning of the picture by visualizing or glancing at the art work. Mitchell also relates the pictorial turns to words. He shows that as there are different styles and models for reading and writing, there are styles and models for pictures. He poses the question, who is saying these words to explain that a picture can say what is the art work saying. From the presenters of the chapters, it seemed like Mitchell was very fond of communicating with pictures and he lived by the motto of “a picture says a thousand words”; nevertheless, I feel that though a picture may help in visualizing the common theme and time period of the artwork, that no picture could come close in portraying an artists true feelings as the adjectives and nouns that make up a sentence.
In his second chapter, Metapictures, Mitchell defines it as “a picture within a picture” or “pictures about pictures”. This allows him to contrast his first chapter that related texts with in the pictures with secondary pictures changing the image rather than the text. He reiterates that with pictures instead of text that are with in the first picture, he can taunt audiences by counting the infinite amount of meanings that a picture can do as opposed to text. The images that are nested within an image create a unique dialect with each individual who absorbs the art. From the chapter, I also understood the term multistability, in pictures; it is the affect that a picture appears to jump from one image to another, or subsequently a change from one meaning to another. Images like these are what allows the brain to grow its creative side, the development of being able to see images in more than just one angle helps in real life situations when the brain is required to see or think out side the obvious. Personally I consider the being able to differentiate these multi images has to do with a genetic trait. I believe that there must be some scientific reasoning to why some people see one side of the image over the other or non at all. Genetic sequences exist for almost all traits for the human genome, and if they can find a gene that affect whether you taste bitter food or not, there must be a gene that bends the brain in a way to allow to visualize the image as it is meant to be.
The debate of images also takes place when he brings up the painting that theoretically has the audience in the painting looking at the characters. This shows that not images are meant to be seen from the outside, but he confesses that some images can be interpreted from the inside of the image. The class had an hour discussion on where the artist is on the painting, some agreed that he was in the mirror as there was only the father and mother of the painting being reflected in the mirror. Other argued that the painter was in the second room of the painting where he drew the family from a distance. I on the other hand believe that the painter was behind the canvas, he seemed like he was drawing the family from the back as he hid, that’s why there only were two people in the mirror image of the painting, from his angle that’s all he should see. The second painter that was drawn may confuse the audience in making them think that he is the real painter when all that character is just person painting a painting. It is images like this that gives us students sleepless nights in trying to analyze metapictures. It is almost impossible for us to give a true synopsis on this painting not knowing.
One of the main points that were well presented was by our very own Russell, the guy who made the PowerPoint. His presentations showed many facts that Mitchell emphasized in the book. One slide was the comparison of images the depicted the Vietnam War. Russell showed children being burned by napalm and showed another picture showing the great aerospace technology with the F-16s. He explains that picture of the jets was used to bestow a false hope to the American people that the war was being won. The picture of the suffering children was forbidden from bring broadcasted on TV networks like CNN. This shows the type of government that is run here in the US, it is democratic in every possible way, however one much think on whether the democracy is truly a free one or a controlled one that is manipulated by the media and biased journalist. As pictures, topics like these create public debate in households and communities. This is the type of debate that I think that Mitchell tries to show, that in some ways, pictures may bring people together in harmony and peace, but it can equally cause animosity and tension within people who have different opinions over a very subjective subject.
In conclusion, I agree with much of the subjects the Mitchell sets upon the reader, howeve; I must deviate from the idea that pictures can cause the amount of hatred and chaos that is affecting the world today.
