Reading the signs: semiotics

(Previous Lecture on Thurs 20^th October)

Main topics for this lecture are

•  signs and signification: signifier and signified

•  iconic and arbitrary (or symbolic)

•  denotation, connotation, myth

•  paradigm and syntagm

Signification = the process of signs-being-made-noticed-and-understood

Sign = signifier (physical form) + signified (mental concept)

iconic: how close a sign is to ‘the real thing’, how constrained it is by the thing it represents, e.g. a photographic portrait is typically iconic, a doodled caricature less so

arbitrary (aka symbolic): how far away a sign is from ‘the real thing’, how unconstrained it is by the thing it represents, e.g. a person’s name bears little physical resemblance to them, but is less arbitrary than an employee number

denotation: what the sign is, at the most basic level of understanding – what it denotes literally

connotation: what it suggests, a more subtle culturally determined reading – what it connotes

myth: the ‘world-view’ it contains or implies – the ideological or political meaning of the thing – not ‘myth’ as in not true, fictitious, misleading (although it may be all three of these things)

paradigm: a set of signs available to be used in a context (e.g. the paradigm of ‘landscape’, or ‘clothing’, or of ‘food’)

syntagm: the particular selection of signs (from the paradigm(s) which are available (e.g. a coastal landscape, late afternoon, in the rain, from a low angle; red shoes, fish-net stockings, grey jumper, furry hat; cheese, pickle and a wedge of granary bread)

Playing with paradigm/syntagm can subvert signs and create semiotic impact by generating unexpected connotations and appealing to unexpected myth systems

A little introduction to Semiotics ...

Semiotics is the study of signs and the way itself create meaning, three points to emphasise the definition,

•            The study of signs themselves

•            The way the signs are organised into codes or systems (languages)

•            The culture where those languages are used

Semiotics can be defined with texts, could be either written or visual aid as long they portray their own definitions, their meanings.

A text is a collection of signs -- juxtaposition, sequence, relative emphasis and how much it is in agreement with convention and previous examples, creates a (second) set of signs out of the signs and can give the text an overall meaning that may not be apparent from its constituent parts.

There are just a few important notes about this lecture. Ivan have shown us examples (visual aids) to explain each definitions. Which was VISUAL and certainly was exercising our brains. J

A breakdown of communication: the process model and cybernetics

(Previous Lecture on Last Thursday 13th October 2011)

Once Ivan started this topic, I found it really hard to understand but once he explained it, I roughly had a good idea of what this topic is all about.

I’m going to start off this part with the notes I wrote (copied some definitions from the slides) during the lecture, just bear with me because I’m slightly struggling to understand my own notes! J

Definitions from the slides

Noise – anything added to a signal between transmission and reception. In other words, any disruption or distortion or ‘blanking’ of that signal, e.g. crackles on a phone line, snowstorm on a screen, excess of information, background chatter, physical discomfort, wandering thoughts…

Redundancy (redundant information) – predictable/ conventional information - not ‘useless’ – it’s very useful, because it establishes common ground and facilitates communication, e.g. a greeting such as a wave, a handshake or the word ‘Hello’ communicate nothing new, they are entirely predictable, but they open the way to further communication.

Entropy (entropic information) – unpredictable/ unconventional information - also useful because this is where the new information is conveyed, e.g. ‘I’ve just run over your dog.’ This information is unexpected and therefore entropic.

He explained the process model of communication, which were established by Shannon and Weaver during the World War Two, they both were mathematicians who wanted to expand the abilities of the communications and their work are used in our society. Which is pretty cool. Like Einstein with his inventions that we still use now, i.e Light.

Anyway back to the point, COMMUNICATIONS…

Basic Parts of the process model of communication, Transmitter and Receiver, and something that passes between both of them. Between them, it would be “information” passing through, but then again, defining “information” are overrated. So it could be anything passing between them. It could be a text message, it could be a phone call, a Morse code, it could be body language, facial expressions, sign language, it could be anything, as long it’s something we can give, to recognise and response. Once the Transmitter sent an “information” to receiver, then a receiver would “feedback” right back to the receiver, in order to show any understanding, (any type of a hint more like) that they got the message or not. Which now bring us to “noise”, a noise can disrupt something in between of Transmitter and Receiver that would affect the “information” to be sent and received. Now, “noise” can be either physical or personal, i.e. culture: I’m referring ‘physical” to something such as signal, wiring faulties, connection problems etc; and “personal” meaning human connections, anyone can interfere with “information” passing through, for instance, manipulating the information or divert the information which would result “communication breakdown”.

I've just thought of old example in ancient history, well not that ancient, but in old times, they used to have old telephone method, which were cans and strings, if the strings weren't straight, (meaning noise) would interfere with the spoken message that was passing through the can to the strings, resulting a failure of decoding from the receiver.

Other example to apply this to a real life situation, I’m a Deaf person, I can lip-read and speak (sometimes it can be difficult to speak especially if I’m really nervous) I’m also a strong BSL (British Sign Language) user. As a deaf person, if one would communicate with a hearing person, it would be difficult as both sides would face invisible barriers (could be referred as “noise”) if a hearing person struggles to understand my spoken language, and have no knowledge of BSL, we would have a communication breakdown. For example, if I say something to receiver, and the noise (invisible barriers) would stop the receiver from receiving my “information”. And wont be able to feedback to me.  I find it bit hard to explain this as I’m trying to put down my personal experience to explain this process of communication.

Caves, Shadows, Lanterns and the Fear of Trains: An Archaeology of Animation Technologies

“Animare”

It’s in Latin, which means, “to give life to”, from this, it sparked a question in our mind, how did the Animation started? According to Ivan, he mentioned this man named Lucretius, apparently he wrote the poem called “De Rerum Natura” in c.70 BC (which is really in c.65 BC) about this “device” that project the hand drawn moving images. I wanted to see if this is actually true, I know that anything teachers/lecturers say, must be true, but not all the time. So I searched for his poem, it’s mighty long! It was a very interesting poems, he talked about particles, universe, the water and the wind and so on. But I couldn’t find which device Lucretius precisely mentioned, but he did describe the principle of “persistence of vision” where the optical effect of continuous motion produced when a series of sequential images were displayed, with each image lasting only momentarily. Even though he interpreted that theory from his dreams. That’s quite a finding Lucretius made. 
 

But according to the film history, it was not Lucretius who supposedly started the idea of Animation. If we look at the Greek Philosopher, named Aristotle, he actually was the first person to observe and literally describe how he saw a light after-effect; a persistent image (that slowly faded away) after he gazed into the sun. In a way, that’s kind of relevant to Animation. So I would say he started it all.   

However yet again, if we go all the way back to Palæolithic Age (which means “old age of the stone” in Greek) in around 40,000 BC, their paintings portraying the perception of motion within the paintings of animals which had multiple sets of legs in superimposed positions. 

 

Referring back to Lucretius, I have just came across to the Greek astronomer and geographer named Ptolemy of Alexandria in 130 AD, he reinforced the theory of Lucretius, he actually discovered Lucretius theory and proved the Lucretius' principle of persistence of vision 200 YEARS later! Reminded me of Leonardo Da Vinci where he drew accurately blueprints of hydraulics, war machines and the flight and so on, then five centuries later, his inventions were made reality. Amazing!

Now looking at Egyptian Era in 1600BC, when Ivan mentioned about this, I felt I want to get on chariot riding past those columns. Pharaoh Ramses II built a temple of Isis and it got 110 columns. Amazingly, each column had a painted figure of the goddess Isis in a progressively change position. So when horsemen or charioteers were riding past, they would see motion of Goddess Isis.

There is a Greek version of the columns but without an adventure on chariot, and that is “The Parthenon Frieze” (5^th century BC, and it’s forming the major part of the Elgin Marbles) it is displayed in British Museum.  

I will pick out few things that ignite the perception of Animation; read below…it’s basic AND interesting stuffs from the history.

Magic Lantern:

The Magic Lantern or “Laterna Magica” is an early type of image projector developed in the late 16th century.

Camera Obsscura

The Camera Obscura (Latin; "camera" means "vaulted chamber/room" & "obscura" means "dark" therefore "darkened chamber/room") is an optical device that projects an image of its surroundings on a screen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDtQm-Qlmao&feature=related

Thaumatrope

A thaumatrope is a toy that was popular in Victorian times. A disk or card with a picture on each side is attached to two pieces of string. When the strings are twirled quickly between the fingers the two pictures appear to combine into a single image due to persistence of vision.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vypEOfWjzv8&feature=related

Zoetrope

A zoetrope is a device that produces an illusion of action from a rapid succession of static pictures. The term zoetrope is from the Greek words "ζωή – zoe", "life" and τρόπος – tropos, "turn". It may be taken to mean "wheel of life".

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3yarT_h2ws

3d Zoetrope

The Ghibli Museum hosts a zoetrope using 3D figures on a rotating disk. Rather than slits or mirrors, a strobing LED is used. The animation on this zoetrope is inspired by My Neighbour Totoro.

Pixar created a 3D zoetrope inspired by Ghibli's for its touring exhibition which first showed at the Museum of Modern Art, featuring characters from Toy Story. Two more 3D Zoetropes have been created by Pixar, both feature 360' viewing. One is installed at Disney's California Adventure, sister park to Disneyland and the other is installed at Hong Kong Disneyland.

The original Pixar Toy Story 3D Zoetrope still travels worldwide and has been shown in London England, Edinburgh Scotland, Melbourne Australia, Seoul Korea, Helsinki Finland, Monterrey Mexico, Taipei Tawain, Kaohsiung Taiwan, Singapore, and is currently at Oakland California.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gjTWIYsLLU&feature=related

Praxinoscope

The Praxinoscope was an animation device, the successor to the zoetrope. It was invented in France 1877 by Charles-Émile Reynaud. Like the zoetrope, it used a strip of pictures placed around the inner surface of a spinning cylinder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOItdZOGnx8&feature=related

Introduction: "Rough Magic"

Media Histories and Culture [MHC]...

I checked the Brief and it is mentioned that one of our assignments, that we are to create a research blog. So I thought why not to start the blog in advance. I then went to its module teaching resources in the Studynet before the first lecture on Thursday 6th October 2011 to be prepared. And there was an attachment named "This Rough Magic", so I guess it’s giving us a better understanding of what MHC is all about.

This Rough Magic:

We always seek independence in our mind, in our decision-making and in everything we do. We like to think that we create our own decisions, our own fate without any sort of influence that modifies our independence thinking in a way. But that’s not true in my opinion, because I believe that everything we do is always inspired by something in our lives, both good and bad. Prospero in Shakespeare’s The Tempest, said 

“To the dread rattling thunder,

Have I given fire and rifted Jove's stout oak,

With his own bolt; the strong-based promontory,

Have I made shake and by the spurs pluck'd up,

The pine and cedar: graves at my command,

Have waked their sleepers, oped, and let 'em forth,

By my so potent art. But this rough magic,

I here abjure.”

C.W. Sharpe, Caliban. Miranda. Prospero. The Tempest. (1875.)

So ‘This Rough Magic’ is reinforcing the idea. Because the humans are born with an instinct, striving us to achieve something we want to accomplish.

The quote is basically means (in English) that Prospero have “this rough magic” ability to control nature, he can do anything he want to do with it because he fictionally can control the nature with his spells, fiddling the nature to his tunes. But Prospero at the end has chosen to reject his rough magic. 

In a way we, as the animation students, are like Prospero because all of us have a Medium (Medius), but instead of his magic staff, we have our own technology to give us many abilities to make things happens, and not to reject our abilities.

I have shown this blog to my father to double check if he understands what I’m trying to say. He then pointed out many interesting points. He felt that Prospero is the past and we’re the present. As we know this famous quote, the past made us who we are now. It had given me a clear sense of what Ivan is trying to tell us by using the example of Shakespeare’s works. With his work, Ivan is empowering Prospero’s words to inspire us to embrace our individual medium/tools. My father also used the example of Avatar movie (2009, directed by James Cameron) to enlighten the Prospero’s theory, the Avatar’s storyline reminded my dad of the Native Americans’ history where the “Americans” stole the land and the gold from the Native Americans. Avatar is similar to that historical event but modified to a sci-fi and much updated version. But in overall it is similar to the history of Native American. He made me think that The Making of Avatar could be strongly influenced by the Native Americans' past so from there, avatar movie is like the present version of that past event. This is an interesting point that my father made. And I agreed with my father. Hope that does make sense to you all.

So coming to the conclusion, may the words of Prospero in Shakespeare's past to light the inspiration in our present to empower and to enlighten those in the future.