Apparently, the main idea of Semiology is the study of "signs" and the affect they have on their viewer, listener, experiencer, ect. It sounds like an interesting subject but, unfortunatly, those who appear to have a vauge understanding of what "it" is, these semiotologists, can still only concieve a idea of their own through postmodern babble which was first spewed out of the mouth of their predicessors.
In regaurds to what actually grabs my attention in the area of the introduction article isn't the one, but the many times the author and his kind try to explain to the reader what semiology is. There is, in my opinion, no better way to scare your audience than to talk over they're heads just for the sake of making it seem like you know more than they do. Can the "study of the sign" not simply be explained as {an action/event that causes a predetermined/instinctive reaction in an individual or in a society}? It sounds pretty simple to me once I was able to trim the fat off this word apon a pedestal. It certinly didn't need a 15 page introduction.
PS. Postmodernism is (has become) a tool used by those who have absolutly no idea what they're talking about to confuse their audience. They are the magicians of the artistic world, appearing to become something they are not........intellegent.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Thanks for your comments. While I agree that postmodernism is often adapted in less-than-brilliant ways, the general aim of the construct is pretty useful. Check out Frederic Jameson's Postmodernism or Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish for starters. :)
lol! Jameson was mentioned in a student's final project in media theory last semester. The end result, in that student's opinion, is that every time Jameson tried to piece together a statement, every other word would have to be looked up in a dictionary or even an encyclopedia due to his uncanny delight of turning nouns into adjectives that didn't actually exist. Even after the act of defining (and in some cases, making up definitions) for the words Jameson speaks, the final result is still just as confusing and unimpressive as before the reader even began to try and understand what he was saying in the first place.
Post a Comment