Thursday, 1 December 2011

Hume

David Hume - 1711-1776

  • Scottish philosopher, historian, economist and essay writer
  • Philosophical: empiricism and skepticism
  • Skepticism - no reason to be certain about anything
  • Empiricism - knowledge comes from senses. Taste, hearing, touch, sight, smelling - these are impressions. impressions link to brain and form ideas (individual to a person)
  • Impressions: emotions/sensations - the brain is full of impressions
  • Ideas: faint images of our impressions
Hume questions beliefs - there is not certainty. We cannot be 100% certain that the sun will rise in the morning.

Cause and effect.
Causation  - is where one thing will follow the other, A always follows B. Hume believes that nothing is certain so he disagrees with the causation. Just because something has happened before does not mean it will happen exactly the same again. Our mind connects A and B - there is no casual connection. 

The first cause was God - to doubt the first cause means to doubt God - if there was no first cause nothing would exist (the whole universe). Therefore, God must exist. - Ontological Argument.

Monday, 14 November 2011

Seminar Paper (week 8) - Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz.

Decartes
Rene Descartes - 1596-1650 - was a contemporary of Galileo and is seen to be the founder of modern philosophy and his thoughts were based around and affected by the new physics and astronomy.When Descartes was old enough he travelled around Europe fighting in many wars that were happening in order for action to give him an insight, however, he was disappointed and so he embarked on an ambitious plan: to search for true meaning.  Descartes was mainly a philosopher, but he also worked with mathematics and science. His most scientific book was Principia Philosophiae which was published in 1644, among other books, including Essais Philosophiques which focussed on optics and geometry published in 1637. 
Descartes always wanted to make a discovery in medicine, he began by describing humans and animals as machines - animals = automata and are governed by physics as they have no conciousness. However, humans are different as they have a soul (pineal gland allows contact between the soul and body).


"I had gained nothing but an increasing recognition of my ignorance"


Even though this theory was abandoned by others it links in with the 'two clocks' theory. - ‘If mind and matter can’t interact, why does the body behave as if the mind is controlling it?' Geulincx's (Descartes' disciple) answer was the 'two clocks', if two clocks are kept in perfect time, so whenever one points to the hour the second clock will strike in order for one to seem as if it causes the other. SO with mind and body. Each is wound up by God, physical laws allow an arm to move although the mind has not exactly acted on the body.


Like with many theories, there are problems with this particular theory. 

  1. as Russell states 'it was very odd'
  2. physicality was determined by natural laws and mentality runs parallel so it must be equally deterministic
  3. it would be hard for Christian ethics/the punishment of sin 

As well as this, like many theories, it had its positives too.

  1. it made the soul completely independent of the bod
  2. it allowed 'one substance cannot act on another' - two substances (mind and matter) they are so different which made an interaction seem crazy. 

Mechanics:
Descartes believed that chemistry and biology could be reduced down to only mechanics - when a seed develops into an animal or plant it is a mechanical process. He rejects Aristotle's three souls - there is only one (rational soul) and humans are the only ones who have it.

Discourse on Method and Mediations:
These are Descartes' most important books, published in 1637 and 1642. Descartes begins to explain 'Cartesian doubt'. As Russell says ' he resolves to make himself doubt everything that he can manage to doubt', so basically he doubted everything, well, everything except geometry because that was unchangeable. He regulated his conduct through the used of 'commonly received rules', which left his mind unhampered by consequences of the doubt.

-Cartesian Philosophy: 3 realms: mind/soul, matter (created substances) and God (uncreated substances).-
Doubt everything but God

Descartes started with scepticism, he asked whether he could doubt that he was sitting in a particular place wearing a particular item of clothing. The answer is yes, because he has dreamt that he was in that particular place wearing the particular item of clothing when in fact he was in bed.
Dreams present ideas that have been seen in reality - for example - you may dream of a horse with wings because you have seen horses and wings before in reality. Anything that may be sceptical can be doubted, your senses may deceive you.

Basically, is this all a dream? (the evil demon)
-doubting that you are thinking is still thinking-
This is where The Matrix comes in to it. It is a film based on Descartes' main philosophical way of thinking through the statement:
'I think, therefore I am'
and intellectual autonomy. In The Matrix the characters live a life through sensory information fed to them whilst in a pod which allows them to believe what they are seeing, touching, smelling, tasting and hearing is complete reality. Another filmic example could be Avatar where a whole other world is created through the senses.

 Descartes considered ideas to be significant; here are the kinds:


  1. those that are innate
  2. those that are foreign and come from without
  3. those that are invented by me
Ideas are like outside things, about perception and they seem to be there.

The second type of idea is something that is an outside object - this is natural and it can also be derived by independence of the mind (sensation) 
There may be two different of the same external object - the sun - in the way the senses see it (normal people) and the way astronomers see it. It is the same object but it has two different ideas. 

Spinoza
Spinoza - 1632-77 - 'is the noblest and most lovable of the great philosopher' according to Russell. He wasn't as intellectual as other philosophers but his ethics topped that, which meant people thought he was wicked. His whole philosophy is dominated by God and the idea of God, however, Jews, Christians and Orthodox all rejected him.

Ethics:
Ethics was published after his death. It deals with three distinct matters: metaphysics, psychology of the passions and a ethic based on the preceding metaphysics and psychology. The metaphysics is derived from Descartes, the psychology is similar to Hobbes but the ethics is completely Spinoza's original work.

Metaphysics: there is only one substance - 'God or Nature' - Spinoza did not believe in Descartes' view on three substances: God, mind and matter and that in relation to God's omnipotence, mind and matter were two independent substances. Spinoza thought that thought and extension were attributes of  God.

Everything is controlled by logical necessity. Spinoza believed that there is no free will in the mental sphere and chance in the physical world furthermore, he thought that everything that happens manifests from God's 'inscrutable nature'. There are negatives here, in regard to sin, if everything comes from God and is good then what about bad actions - Adam eating the apple, Nero killing his mother? Spinoza adds that what was positive in these acts was good and what was negative was bad.

Spinoza's emotions:
'the human mind has an adequate knowledge of the eternal and infinite essence of God'
Spinoza goes on to suggest that the 'passions' distract and obscure our intellectual outlook of everything. Love and hate - 'he who conceives that the object of his hate is destroyed will feel pleasure'. So, Spinoza suggests that if hate is destroyed, love is created through passion of the mind and according to Spinoza, self-preservation is the main motive of the passion shown. Self-preservation can alter in terms of its character when someone realises what is real and positive.

In the end section of Ethics, 'Of human bondage, or the strength of emotions and 'Of the power of the understanding, or of human freedom,' the most interesting points are made by Spinoza. Spinoza (like Socrates and Plato) believes that all wrong doing done is because of bad intellect.

Tractatus Theologico-Politicus was published in 1670 and is a combination of biblical criticism and political theory. Tractatus Politicus was published in 1677 after the death of Spinoza and deals with only political theory.
In biblical criticism, Spinoza predicts some modern views. He also shows that scriptures can be interpreted in ways that are compatible with liberal theology.
In political theory, Spinoza's views came from Hobbes. In state of nature there is no right or wrong because wrong is breaking the law, he also agrees with Hobbes that the Church should be subordinate to the state. However, he disagrees with Hobbes' view that democracy is the 'most natural' for of government. Spinoza believes in freedom of opinion but he thinks that religious questions should be answered by the state, not the Church...

Spinoza believes God is a necessary function:
'Love towards God...must hold the chief place in the mind.'


Leibniz
Leibniz - 1646-1716 - was according to Russell 'one of the supreme intellects of all time.' He believed that the world is the best of all possible worlds, because God is good and all powerful and he created and chose this world.
There are two systems of philosophy that are regarded to be part of Leibniz's work, one was 'optimistic, orthodox, fantastic, and shallow' whilst the other was 'profound, coherent, largely Spinozistic, and amazingly logical'.

Substance:
Leibiniz's most interesting philosophy can be found in the Monadology and the Principles of Nature and of Grace. The basis of his theological optimism is found in the Theodicee.
Leibniz based his philosophy on substance (much like Descartes and Spinoza), but his ideas on mind and matter differed. Descartes suggested that there were three substances (God, mind and matter), Spinoza said there was only one (God) and Leibniz suggested there is an infinite amount of substances known as 'monads'. Each of these monads would have some properties of a physical point when viewed abstractly, each monad is a soul. Leibniz inevitably denied the reality of matter.

God's Existence:
Leibniz had a metaphysical approach to the existence of God, which was started by Aristotle and Plato.

Ontological Argument:
This particular argument was rejected by St Thomas.
The distinction between existence and essence - Hamlet does not exist but he has a certain essence to his character - witty, melancholy etc. Here its essence does not mean existence but God is defined as the most perfect being - it is greater to exist than to not exist - so God exists.

Cosmological Argument: 
This is a form of the First-Cause argument which comes from Aristotle's unmoved mover.
It points out -

  • everything has a finite cause which had a cause and so on...
  • the series of previous causes cannot be infinite
  • the first term in the series must be uncaused (otherwise it is not the first term)
  • There is an uncaused cause of everything = this is God

The Argument from Eternal Truths:
A statement such as - 'it is raining' or 'it is sunny' is sometimes true and sometimes false depending on the context of the day. However, statements such as - 'two + two = four' is always true, it is a fact. These truths are called eternal truths.


The Argument from the Pre-Established Harmony:
-This is only valid for those who accept Leibniz's windowless monads which mirror the universe.-
This argument states that, since all the clocks keep in time with one another without any interaction, there must have been a single outside cause that keeps the clocks like this. (an outside force or helper)

Every substances affects itself. But, because of God's interaction in the world, every substance interacts with every other substance - they all interact with each other. God has created a 'harmonized' world.




'I Think, Therefore I Am' 


Western Philosophy of the 17th and 18th Centuries were divided into British Empiricism and Continental Rationalism.



Rationalists:
Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz all believed in pure reason, the mind alone, or at least the pre-eminence of the mind.

Empiricists:
Locke - believed there were no innate ideas, people are born as a blank slate and that knowledge is gained through experience.
Bacon - the scientific method - believed in avoiding the idols of the mind.
Plato - believed that people are born with knowledge (opposite to Locke)


-Only source of knowledge is your senses.


Solipsists:
All is in an imagination and nothing actually exists.


Idealism:
Deny the existence of matter, everything is ideas.
For example - a chair - When looking at a chair I am aware of how the chair looks to me, not the chair itself. It is the effects that it produces within my mind when looking at it. - This can be used for touching and tasting etc. 
- a falling tree - If a tree falls in a forest but nobody/nothing hears it fall, does it make a sound?
If someone answers yes - Materialist (only material exists)
If they answer no - Idealist
--> Berkeley - things flash in and out of existence, whether you are looking at a particular item/thing or not.

Wednesday, 9 November 2011

Power and Control in and over new and old media..

What is Political Economy?
- Previous theories focussed on text
- Semiology exclusively
- Genre prioritised text but pointed to producers and audiences

Material Conditions

  • Market Pressures
  • Ownership Structures
  • The Drive to Commodify Culture and Information
Material Conditions: impact on text
  • Nick Davies - flat earth news
  • News as a commodity
  • Cost cutting in news room
  • Re-versioning and failing to fault check
  • It's the material conditions of cultural production
Power - Hard power --> control of Capital, Military, Legal systems etc. (ACTION)
Soft Power --> symbols, discourses, the cultural and semiological  

Political Economy and Power 
  • Media hard power exerted through --> ownership structures and concentration (vertical and horizontal integration) 
  • Control of production subsides (advertising, sponsorship)
THREE levels of power -->
  1. the ability to influence decisions
  2. the ability to set agenda
  3. structural power 
Berlusconi
Berlusconi can behave in a certain way because he has 'media power' as well as economic ownership and political power interact with 'media power'. 

  1. building firms
  2. local TV
  3. national newspaper
  4. AC Milan
  5. 3 main commercial TV
  6. Forza Italia
  7. state television 
               ||
               ||

Political Economy and HBO
  • An alternative buisness model to traditional US commercial TV
  • Subscription channel
  • Niche market - educated/affluent people
Hegemony theory 
- Hegemony - when popular ideas or 'common sense' reflects the interests of the powerful - (ideology)-

Genre

GENRE - (from French for 'type' or 'kind') - it is a system for classification - and a widely understood and used form of analysis (many are familiar)

Genre is another way in which to explore how a media text constructs its meaning; it is very developed in terms of film and many television programmes.

'Art VS. Genre'

       |                       --> You expect different things from different genres - Hans Jauss 'Horizons of  Expectations'                               
     
'Elite VS. Mass'

For example - Medical Drama --> Particular location (hospital), accidents, injuries, doctors, nurses, patients, white coats, stethoscope, needles, wheelchairs etc... These are the particular expectations.

'AS FAR  AS GENRE IS CONCERNED, EXPECTATIONS EXIST BOTH TO BE SATISFIED, AND, ALSO TO BE REDEFINED' - Neale

Genres sometimes shift
For example - House - which is inter textual, the protagonist is non-conventional and House (both character and series) offers generic hybridity.

Hodge and Kress (1988)

  • "Typical forms of texts which link kinds of producer, costume, topic, medium, manner and occasion."

For Producers -->
  • creative or constraining
  • creative tension or 'efficient' communication
  • constructs an audience (established / niche audience)
  • manages expectations
  • possibility of disrupting expectation
  • managing regulation (what's allowed)
For Audiences -->
  • reference and preference 
  • active process of constructing meaning
  • recognition requiress 'cultural capital' - generic knowledge as a 'competencey' 
Archetypal texts inflict new meaning and new media forms borrow from before (older media)
novels-->letter writing
radio-->theatre, concert, music hall
tv-->novel, radio
gaming-->fairy tale, film, documentary

So meaning is produced by a combination of elements in particular ways.
Context require the presence of all possible choices.
Individual texts recognisable generically.
-Yet there are differences within that - different comedies within the genre comedy --> My Family and Peep Show.

  1. Genres change and develop
  2. Combine (hybridity)
  3. Become exstinct

Wednesday, 26 October 2011

The Clockwork Universe

To begin with this is part of Astronomy (not astrology) which is the study of the heavens.


  • Above the moon - the celestial heavens - is close to God and things were perfect and unchanging.
  • Sub lunar world - nothing was constant - elements mixed up and things changed.
  • Ptolemy's system --> the earth was the centre - the sun moved - the stars were fixed and all revolved around the earth in an unchanging motion
NEO - PYTHAGOREAN --> the belief that mathematics was important.

Francis Bacon - 1561-1626 (scientific method)
  1. Mixing religion and science (natural philosophy) = BIG MISTAKE and resulted in a load of confusion and obsession with word play. 
The New Organon --> a direct attack against Aristotle - 4 themes
  1. Knowledge is human power - the ability to harness power, to navigate, to grow crops etc
  2. Must be clear separation between science and religion
  3. Induction - proceeding from the particular to general theories that are then tested through experiment
  4. Science is dynamic (always correcting) cooperative (shared) cumulative (adding to it)
Bacon's methods - scientific and protected the people from the idols of the mind.

Locke - on human understanding
He believed understanding came from experience and was inevitably against the idea of 'innate ideas', our minds are a blank slate at birth. 

Heliocentric Modes
16th century philosopher --> Copernicus --> attempts to reform the calender with the sun as the centre
Kepler --> spent decades working on calculations and data which would prove the heliocentric model.
Galileo --> perfected the telescope and observed that Jupiter has moons.

Newton - 1642-1727
Principia - 1687 --> mathematical demonstration of what came after Copernican and Kepler.

Tuesday, 25 October 2011

Narrative Theory

Narrative - a communicative at which involves a 'teller' and a 'listener' - all narratives include a sequence of events (they are located in time) - all narratives are constructed.

Vladimir Propp - 1928

  • looks at the formal properties of Russian folk tales
  • breaks them down into 'narratemes' (basic narrative units)
  • provides a typology of narrative structures
  • character roles - hero (not necessarily heroic but protagonist) - villain - donor - helper - princess - her father - dispatcher - false hero.
  • functions - overcoming an obstacle - defying a prohibition - punishment of villain - winning of princess
Todorov - Structuralism  
  • supports Propp - stories have these same universal formal properties
  • Todorov analyses classic realist texts
  • he argues that there is an underlying structure in narratives
  • EQUILIBRIUM - DISEQUILIBRIUM - EQUILIBRIUM
  • the new equilibrium is restoring the status quo - what is 'normal' or 'appropriate'
  • it is thought that we wish for an ideologically comforting solution - Want it to end in a certain way.
  •  Non fiction modes - THE NEWS
Barthes - Structuralism
  • stresses the complexity of narrative
  • suggests narrative can have up to FIVE distinct codes
  1. HERMENEUTIC CODE - activates viewer - gets them interested
  2. ENIGMAS (puzzle) - introduced - resolved - reintroduced 
  3. SYMBOLIC CODES - symbolically represented (signs, connotative)
  4. CULTURAL CODES - 'authoritative knowledge'
  5. ASSUMPTIONS - within science/history/law


Wednesday, 19 October 2011

Image Analysis

More elaborate words for relatively straightforward concepts and ideas...

Signs - are made up of signifier and signified
They generate meaning through their place in a system or a code ( words have meaning within the system of language - because everyone agrees on the system)
Signs are therefore relational.

--> Connotation


  • sings operate on the level of denotation and the level of connotation.
  • "coco cola" denotes a bottle of brown, fizzy drink
  • but what does this sign connote?! 
  • we can see from this coca cola advert  -  
  • Basically they want to show an image of world peace, bringing everyone together through young and happy people... hmm alrighty then.
  • Paradigm choices were made for this advert: age, nationality, expression.
Paradigms refer to the lists of possible signs from which particular signs are selected - these then make a syntagm. 

Myths - when codes are 'naturalised' myths are created. - Barthes. 

Thursday, 13 October 2011

More HCJ!

This HCJ malarky is just non stop! I'm going to talk about the Philosophers Machiavelli, Hobbes and Locke and their ideas on the state in relation to HWP and the lecture.

Why Should I Obey The Law?
Well, Socrates was imprisoned and sentenced to death for corrupting the youth, whilst he was in prison his friend (Crito) attempted to persuade Socrates to escape the prison but Socrates dismissed Crito's arguments. Socrates has a valid reason for this, he does not wish to break the covenant/contract between him and the state. Socrates says that because he has lived in the city and has benefited from the city itself, he should abide by the laws of the state and stay in prison like he is supposed to. Socrates develops this by saying that if he does break the law and escape from prison he is attempting to destroy the whole city completely. This is because he is a role model in society and people admire him and will follow his actions, so what would happen if everyone began to break all of the laws and follow Socrates? The state would not be functional.  Basically, Socrates is merely being good and doing as he is told.

The Social Construct
1651 - Leviathan
-Hobbes- was writing at a time when the King was executed and Cromwell was trying to establish himself after the war in the city.

  • Civil War - 1641-1651
  • Charles I executed - 1649
  • Cromwell then rules - until Charles II - 1660
  • James I - Catholic King
  • Glorious Revolution - 1688 - William of Orange
State of Nature
  • This is People's dominate passions, and are aggressive. 
  • People acting on their own passions will produce a state of war. 
  • Everyone will live in fear of everyone else.
  • No one is safe from others.
  • A constant war
  • "Every man against every man".
In the state of nature there will be "no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, Brutish, short".
The power of Leviathan is limitless (Hobbes called him "Mortal God"). The people agree to be represented by a sovereign - they agree to hand all of the power over to him. So he promised to stop all of the madness and mayhem in exchange for all the power over everything. Fair deal? 

Locke - 1689 - Locke's Treatise of Government
It attacks the concept of the "Divine Right of Kings". 
The idea that God gave Adam the right to rule over everything - "Let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air" - Genesis
Locke had a completely different approach to the state compared to Hobbes, he believed it was more of a positive thing and was not pessimistic about it all! He said that there are 'natural laws' in which all people knew and they believe are from God, everyone knew not to break these laws because of the obviousness of them, people didn't go around killing each. These 'natural laws' created a sense of equality and natural freedom among the people. Locke then introduced the system of taxation and that the people should consent to it, which creates a certain equality between the people and the state.

Hobbes - The State of Nature
In the state of nature - there will be "no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, short". This is what Hobbes believed. He thought like this because his life was in constant war where "every man against every man" was how it went for a very long time.

Hobbes and Locke had different ideas when it came to the state. Hobbes was more pessimistic about the view of the state of nature, whilst Locke believed that the state of nature was good and civilised.. He believed that everyone agrees with what is right and wrong, there are natural laws that everyone knows, a ready made right and wrong.
"Interwoven in the constitution of the human mind".  
However, humans will have disputes which will mainly be about ownership of land and possessions so there is a need for law and state. Locke's idea led to the concept of GOVERNMENT.

Rosseau
He believes that our freedom is to be guided by our own will and he wishes for civil freedom. If everyone is involved in making the laws they will be following their own will. The people are part of the state.

so basically...
Hobbes - complete collapse of society.
Locke - collaborative state.
Rosseau - state of freedom.

Plato's Republic - Dreams of States
Plato believed in forms for a distinct and perfect world.
The soul is divided into three parts:
REASON - knows the forms and therefore reality.
SPIRIT - courage, ferocity, aggression wants honour, but does not know what honour is.
DESIRE - constant craving that is pushed hopelessly from one desire to another like a ruddless boat on the ocean. It will eventually be destroyed by this - this means that reason needs to control desire.

Chariot = the soul
Horses represent SPIRIT and DESIRE.
There are three types of soul, so there are three types of state.
REASON - this state is dominated by people who are guided by reason. They control the demands of spirit and desire. IDEAL STATE
SPIRIT - aggressive state which prizes military glory and power.
DESIRE - this state will be a democracy because everyone believes they have the ability to lead. This state will be characterised by an obsession with money - money is necessary to satisfy desire.

Machiavelli - 1467 - 1527
  • From Florence
  • The Prince (book) written in 1513 was a manual on how to acquire and to keep political power
  • How to guide rulers
  • How to get power and how to keep it
  • Key work of Renaissance - key theme: "man is the measure of all things".
  • What is interesting is that some (Rosseau, Leo Strauss, Harvey Mansfield) saw The Prince as a piece of deliberately comical and satirical work which was actually aimed at the common people. 
Machiavelli's views on the state were linked to realism as his 'rules' in The Prince were based on his own experiences with the Medici of Florence.

  1. Armed prophets succeed, unarmed ones fail.
  2. 'It is better to be feared than loved'. 

Wednesday, 12 October 2011

Semiotics

Semiotics seems to be cropping up everywhere at the moment, which is probably a good thing with the amount of fancy words used in it. This lecture was interesting in seeing how semiotics is within everyday life and why it has a certain significance as a tool for analysis.

Meaning is shared and is shown through particular signs.

Previously it was assumed that:

  • There is an external 'objective' word 'out there'
  • Language describes this external world
  • The word 'table' refers to real tables 'out there'
  • Externalism
FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE - 1857-1913 ( he challenged this) - his insights were developed by Levi Strauss, Barthes, Narratologists (Structuralism).
  • Language is not just a way of classifying objects in an external world
  • Language is more complicated than that
  • Systems of shared meaning
  • Meaning are not fixed
  • Words only have meaning as part of systems eg: languages
'DOG' - 'Chien' (in French) & 'Kula' (in Urdu) --> each word works within its system and you have to know the system to understand the word.
--> Saussure asked the question - "why does a word mean what it means?" this is some deep stuff and it links to a shared meaning between everyone which allows us to understand what the word means, items have names so that people understand what is being spoken about or referred to. You must learn the meaning before being able to understand and use it yourself...

Semiology is the study of signs made up of the SIGNIFIER (sound, image or marks on the paper), the SIGNIFIED (the concept) and the REFERENT (the real item). 

More key terms...

LANGUE and PAROLE.
- langue refers to the system or language
- parole refers to the actual utterance of words (when we select words from langue and use them by speaking or writing.)

Signs are ARBITRARY - "The arbitrary nature of the sign" - Saussure.
  • Signs only have meaning within a particular system of meaning
  • The same symbols may have very different meanings within different systems
  • The principle of semiology apply to all systems of meaning - not just written or spoken languages
  • All signs are relationships. 
Did you know if a chimp is smiling, it is not good. The poor thing is absolutely bricking it, really really nervous.   This guy from the PG tips advert is in reality a very unhappy monkey :( 
This shows that different signs have different meanings in some situations - meanings are not fixed. 


Levels of meaning
  • the level of denotation
  • signs acquire new secondary meanings through cultural practice
  • the level of connotation
  • for example - a heart denotes a vital organ, but it now connotes a romantic love through secondary meanings (deeper level of connotation) 
C.S PIERCE - 1839 - 1914
  • he was interested in signs and perception
  • distinguishes three types of sign: 1. symbolic 2. iconic 3. indexical
Symbolic signs - are signs in which the relationship between the sign and its meaning are totally arbitrary. 
(red=stop - culturally known)

Iconic signs - are signs that resemble their meaning in some way.
(picture of the Queen on a coin)

Indexical signs - are signs that indicate what they stand for by some kind of casual link.
(smoke signifies fire & daffodils signify spring)

that is all for now. 

Sunday, 9 October 2011

Time for Media..

I came out of the Monday afternoon lecture feeling pretty proud of myself for actually keeping up with what was being said and scribbled down 3 whole pages of notes on high, popular and mass culture.

The focus of the lecture was:
  1. To explore what / how taste is constructed
  2. What the distinctions between high art and popular culture is
  3. Power within high art and popular culture
It is said that many believe that popular is not worth studying at a high level because it is seen as a 'soft' subject, but by studying it you can understand the world and your positioning within the world through popular culture. Also, as tuition fees for UK universities are increasing it is thought that a huge number of prospective students will reject media related subjects because they carry less value to some people..

Tastes are basically what people prefer and what people like and enjoy. Constructions of taste and quality constructed as a series of Binary Opposites, for example, good V bad, high V low, us V them etc..
One example of this is through the images of two celebrity women from two different eras yet in similar poses. - Audrey Hepburn and Katie Price AKA Jordan - together they represent the binary opposition of natural V unnatural and therefore, we make a judgement upon them which tells us about our tastes in relation to the naturalness of a women's image.
Or this?

This?


This linked in with the idea of taste or personal preference. Why are some tastes seen to be 'better' than others? Is there such a thing as 'Good taste'? Taste can also show a sense of individuality and/or a particular group identity, for example, many youth subcultures - 'emo'.
'Poor taste' - is usually associated with low culture and 'mass' appeal whereas 'good taste' is usually linked with high culture which have small and niche audiences.

PIERRE BOURDIEU - key theorist

  • challenges notions of innate taste or 'authentic' sensibility 
  • tastes and notions of quality are socially constructed and are used by different groups in order to gain status
  • we learn taste - socially constructed
  • cultural preference works as a form of cultural distinction 
  • cultural knowledge and competence is displayed through consumer choice. 
CHOICES about who we are...
- cultural capital can be 'invested' into consumption practices
- producing symbolic capital or power
- cultural taste and notions of good quality organised as hierarchies of values
- characterised by different ways of perceiving and responding to culture

High culture can sometimes be referred to as being 'pure' with a distant appreciation of it from usually the highly educated.
Popular culture is described as something that is immediate with a close to proximity to the 'masses' along with a clear emotional response.
From these types of definitions I get a clear sense of stereotyping, people are instantly linked with a particular type of culture because of their education or their way of life. Is that fair? I, for one, like some forms of popular culture whilst enjoying and respecting forms of high culture as well.

The next part of the lecture focused on shocking pieces of art from two eras: Breakfast on Grass by Manet and Man in a Polyester Suit by Maplethorpe.
Whilst Manet's painting is not necessarily seen to be at all shocking in the 21st century, I can see why Man in a Polyester got some stick for being a bit out there... is it porn? is it art? or is it just a challenge?  
Manet's Le déjeuner sur l'herbe is now considered a highly valued piece of art, but in its day a naked prostitute in a park with two gentlemen was considered a taboo subject for a painting and highly controversial. The modern Man in a Polyester Suit by Maplethorpe was seen to be controversial when it first came out, being banned in some American states, does this mean it will be a masterpiece in several hundred years? Do taboo subjects loose their shock factor after a long period and become high culture? or is it a form of high culture in the form of high art? This can be said for anything that is now high culture, the majority of which have 'stood the test of time' and have become highly valued after its creator has passed and/or it has been around for a very very long time... Will Tabloids and The Xfactor be high culture one day? hmm, just worth thinking about...


Stuart Hall suggested that cultural items can shift in meaning. Nessun Dorma is an example of high culture (opera) that has been recognised by many through a form of popular culture (football ads). It shifts the meaning when two cultures are mixed together. Another example is in The Beatles, who shifted from a very small teen band into cultural icons. But who is it that decides what is good culture and what is bad culture? Hall suggested that popular culture becomes the 'site of influence' basically through a power struggle of hierarchy on what is 'the best'. 

"CULTURE IS ORDINARY" - RAYMOND WILLIAMS

Saturday, 8 October 2011

Philosophy - HCJ

So, after thinking I wouldn't remember ANY of what I read from Mr. Bertrand Russell's hench book about the History of Western Philosophy, I recognised (and mostly understood) what Chris was saying! Having never studied any kind of Philosophy before its all very new stuff... the focus was on European Civilisation.



  • 700BC - Greek Alphabet, allowed writings from Homer, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle etc.
  • People then thought differently about the universe
  • "Classical Antiquity" - earth=globe, particles made up matter, evolution, political, economic and architectural skills - ALL OF WHICH WERE ESTABLISHED BY PHILOSOPHERS
  • And all of which were assumed to be discovered in 18th and 19th centuries, but how/why did the knowledge disappear until later? 
  • This resulted in the collapse of Rome - meant dominant ideology was now Christianity (which meant NO SCIENCE)
  • 400AD onwards - complex teachings of the Greco-Roman period were replaced by Christianity - DARK AGES
Pre Socratic Philosophers

-Thales - beleived everything was made from water. (no gods)
-Anaximander - disagreed with Thales, everything comes from a single primal substance, there are many worlds and we are justs one of them.
-Pythagoras - used maths to explain the 'order' of the world and he emphasised FORM not MATTER.


Chris highlighted in the lecture the main points from The History of Western Philosophy, whilst referencing The Iliad, The Odyssey and the much later Beowulf. The Greeks were always way more advanced in most fields during early civilisation. I found it very interesting how the Greeks knew much more in terms of logic, atoms, geometry and astronomy through a philosophical outlook compared to the power hungry Romans who knew much less. I am now much more aware of the relationship between the Greeks and the Romans and how crazily advanced the Greeks were for their time.


I'd always heard that the Greeks had a huge influence in all aspects of life, but I really never knew how much! The Greeks were amazingly good thinkers and philosophy was definitely their strong point, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were obviously the main guys, so here we go...


Socrates - 469 BC–399 BC
Socrates is a main philosopher in terms of Greek civilisation but he didn't actually write anything himself, but he had students who made his ideas known - Plato and Xenophon who both wrote about Socrates.  


Plato- 427 BC-347 BC
Plato and Aristotle are seen to be the best philosophers of ancient and modern time, ever. So Utopia came from Plato, i always thought it was some kinda Disney film..:/ basically, noone knew who their parents were and they had to call everyone older than them 'mother' or 'father' and anyone the same sort of age 'brother' or 'sister'. There could not be marriages between a 'father' and 'daughter' or 'mother' and 'son' and 'brother'/'sister' marriages were to be prevented. hmm, so who married, exactly? 
Plato learnt from Socrates, being his student and all, including the subject of ethics. Ethics at this time were completely different to what we see as ethical today, naturally. What would you say is ethical if a baby was born with a disability? throw it in a 'deep pit of water' or take care of it? I hope everyone would take care of it, but not the Greeks...oh no. This was all influenced by Sparta.


Aristotle
Aristotle came after Plato, which makes his writings an follow on from Plato's. Aristotle was the guy who 'invented' logic, it was actually adopted by the Catholic church, and the the main idea pulled from HWP is:"All men are mortal, Socrates is a man, so he is mortal."


The reading from HWP is tricky, but, after great persistence, i am beginning to remember and understand what has been said by the main philosophers. 

Wednesday, 28 September 2011

First Lecture...

So after being pretty nervous about actually starting my degree, it wasn't scary one bit. Well I'm sure it'll become more strenuous in the coming weeks.

First things first, swipe your ID card... Always remember to swipe your card.
Really thought a lecture hall would be crazily different but i think i'm kind of used to it already. I love the high tech foldy chairs which come with a cute little foldy table! May have got way too excited about that. Once the lecture began i found myself understanding the basics of what was being said, this part of the course will focus on particular module themes -

  • Power and Control
  • Meanings and Culture
  • Audiences and Effects
  • 'New' and 'Old Media
Within all of these themes there are key areas of media concepts -
  • Production - Media industries produce goods and services. To what extent should media production be compared to other patterns of industrial production? 
Media production is imaginative, unique and creative where the producer has to think, whereas industrial production is manual and requires less creativity in the production. 
  • Consumption - Media audiences consume media texts and services. How much control do  media consumers have over media production? 
  • Representation - Media texts structure symbols and images in particular ways to represent meanings.
  • Identity - Media texts frequently draw on images and ideas to construct identities to do with locality, gender, class, ethnicity, sexuality, 'otherness' etc...
  • Regulation - Practices are established to shape or encourage media production and media representation to occur in particular ways.
Now, in terms of advertising, power and control is important. It is such a huge industry, with a whopping $663.4 Billion spent on advertising globally in 2008. This shows that advertising does control peoples decision into spending.. even when some resist the power of advertising, the industry is becoming bigger. Old media becomes more vulnerable as new media is introduced and attracts more people.

Meaning and culture is related to power and control by the need to address the 'core buyers' for the product. For example, when looking at a L'Oreal advert everyone recognises the target buyers to be young women with disposable income, so when a picture of pensioners was placed on the advert it is an example of resisting the power of advertising. 

Trying to regulate advertising is deemed impossible with online and viral ads everywhere - addressing audiences in different ways - Parody and Humour. 

Friday, 23 September 2011

Me

Hi im tasmin, i am 18 years old and i live in worthing, alot of people dont know it nearest best place is Brighton. I am studying film studies with journalism studies and the university of winchester. Only just moved in to uni halls, so im still getting used to the lack of parents and responsibilities.