Exercise 2.1: Contextualization & Critical Analysis

BACK

---

Contextualization

Mad, P. (no date) A guide to portrait photography. Available at: http://www.photographymad.com/pages/view/guide-to-portrait-photography (Accessed: 8 April 2016).

(Mad, no date)

“Portrait photography is all about people. Your photos don’t have to be technically brilliant so long as you capture the essence of your subject. Think about what makes your model so uniquely “them” and try to capture that in your portrait. A good portrait photograph will tell a story about the person in it.” (Mad, no date)

Ellard, C. (1991) Does where you live make you who you are?. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mind-wandering/201508/does-where-you-live-make-you-who-you-are (Accessed: 8 April 2016).

(Ellard, 1991)

“Another recently published study by Markus Jokela at the University of Helsinki and a group of international collaborators from the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the United States was based on online surveys completed by residents of the city of London. In this study, a large group of life satisfaction and personality variables was measured to determine their relationship with different postal districts in the city.” (Ellard, 1991)

 

Ellard, C. (1991) Does where you live make you who you are?. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mind-wandering/201508/does-where-you-live-make-you-who-you-are (Accessed: 8 April 2016).
(Ellard, 1991)
“The researchers tried to address this question in a final experiment in which they took individuals to two different types of settings—a secluded, wooded setting or a flat, open area—and engaged them in small group discussions. If the setting influenced variables related to introversion-extraversion, then one would predict that the wooded setting would change the nature of the group conversation. To measure this, the researchers simply recorded the number of times each participant in the group spoke during the conversation. Following the conversation, participants completed a questionnaire that was meant to probe their immediate self-perceptions of introversion or extraversion.” (Ellard, 1991)

Ellard, C. (1991) Does where you live make you who you are?. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mind-wandering/201508/does-where-you-live-make-you-who-you-are (Accessed: 8 April 2016).
(Ellard, 1991)
“This fascinating finding suggests that the kind of terrain in which we live, and the affordances it provides for social interaction or solitude can influence how we feel, but it leaves open an important causal question: Do environments that are conducive to quiet reflection actually change the personalities of their residents, or do more introspective types gravitate to such environments because they feed deep needs for the kinds of situations that are most adaptive for those individuals?” (Ellard, 1991)

 

Ellard, C. (1991) Does where you live make you who you are?. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mind-wandering/201508/does-where-you-live-make-you-who-you-are (Accessed: 8 April 2016).
(Ellard, 1991)
“In a series of five studies, Oishi’s group built the case that introverts are happier in mountainous settings than they are on beaches.” (Ellard, 1991)
“In laboratory studies, more introverted student participants reported that they preferred scenes of mountains to scenes of beaches. In a wider-ranging experiment looking at the personality structure of residents on a state-by-state basis, the researchers found that residents of mountainous states like Washington, Idaho, and Montana showed higher tendencies to introversion than states with flatter terrain like Iowa, Ohio, and Michigan.” (Ellard, 1991)

 

Ellard, C. (1991) Does where you live make you who you are?. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mind-wandering/201508/does-where-you-live-make-you-who-you-are (Accessed: 8 April 2016).
(Ellard, 1991)
“Did a succession of exposures to different kinds of environments help shape my personality?” (Ellard, 1991)

 

Ellard, C. (1991) Does where you live make you who you are?. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mind-wandering/201508/does-where-you-live-make-you-who-you-are (Accessed: 8 April 2016).
(Ellard, 1991)
“A recently published study by Shigehiro Oishi and colleagues at the University of Virginia showed a striking relationship between geography and personality.” (Ellard, 1991)

 

Ellard, C. (1991) Does where you live make you who you are?. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mind-wandering/201508/does-where-you-live-make-you-who-you-are (Accessed: 8 April 2016).
(Ellard, 1991)
“Many of us are very fussy about our spaces. I find that I need one kind of place to read (quiet, small, enclosed and private) and another to write (slightly more open, a little bit of a buzz in the background). When searching for new ideas, I prefer to walk in wide-open spaces like beaches or fields. When trying to solve a difficult problem, give me a winding path through deep forest.” (Ellard, 1991)

 

Jokela, M., Bleidorn, W., Lamb, M.E., Gosling, S.D., Rentfrow, P.J., Sciences, aInstitute of B., Helsinki, 00014, Finland, Psychology, bDepartment of, Kingdom, U., Tilburg, 5000 LE, Netherlands, T., 95616, C. and Lamb, and M.E. (2015) ‘Geographically varying associations between personality and life satisfaction in the London metropolitan area’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(3), pp. 725–730. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1415800112.
(Jokela et al., 2015)
“Recent studies in geographical psychology have demonstrated regional variations in personality—people with similar personality traits are more likely to be found in some regions than others. What is the psychological significance of such spatial clustering? Our study was motivated by the person–environment hypothesis, which postulates that the match between people’s personality and neighborhood characteristics is important for people’s life satisfaction. The results showed that personality traits were differently related to life satisfaction in different postal districts of London metropolitan area, and these varying associations were related to specific neighborhood characteristics, such as population density and ethnic heterogeneity. These findings demonstrate how individuals with different personality dispositions derive life satisfaction from different aspects of their social and physical environments.” (Jokela et al., 2015)

 

Jokela, M., Bleidorn, W., Lamb, M.E., Gosling, S.D., Rentfrow, P.J., Sciences, aInstitute of B., Helsinki, 00014, Finland, Psychology, bDepartment of, Kingdom, U., Tilburg, 5000 LE, Netherlands, T., 95616, C. and Lamb, and M.E. (2015) ‘Geographically varying associations between personality and life satisfaction in the London metropolitan area’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(3), pp. 725–730. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1415800112.
(Jokela et al., 2015)
“In conclusion, the present study extend the burgeoning field of geographical psychology by demonstrating how life satisfaction and personality traits can be differentially distributed and spatially clustered within a metropolitan area. The analysis of personality–neighborhood interactions showed that openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness were differently associated with individuals’ life satisfaction depending on their residential location and the specific characteristics of those locations. Thus, finding the best place to live depends on the match between individual dispositions and neighborhood characteristics.” (Jokela et al., 2015)

 

Jokela, M., Bleidorn, W., Lamb, M.E., Gosling, S.D., Rentfrow, P.J., Sciences, aInstitute of B., Helsinki, 00014, Finland, Psychology, bDepartment of, Kingdom, U., Tilburg, 5000 LE, Netherlands, T., 95616, C. and Lamb, and M.E. (2015) ‘Geographically varying associations between personality and life satisfaction in the London metropolitan area’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(3), pp. 725–730. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1415800112.
(Jokela et al., 2015)
“Residential location is thought to influence people’s well-being, but different individuals may value residential areas differently. We examined how life satisfaction and personality traits are geographically distributed within the UK London metropolitan area, and how the strength of associations between personality traits and life satisfaction vary by residential location” (Jokela et al., 2015)

 

Oishi, S. (no date) Introverts prefer mountains. Available at: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150227181329.htm (Accessed: 8 April 2016).
(Oishi, no date)
“Participants perceived wooded/secluded terrain to be calmer, quieter and more peaceful. In contrast, participants in the flat/open condition perceived the terrain to be more sociable, exciting and stimulating. The study found that when people want to socialize with others, they prefer the ocean far more (75%) than mountains (25%). In contrast, when they want to be alone, they choose mountains (52%) as much as the ocean (48%).” (Oishi, no date)

 

Oishi, S. (no date) Introverts prefer mountains. Available at: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150227181329.htm (Accessed: 8 April 2016).
(Oishi, no date)
“In a series of three studies, researchers tested whether there is a link between personality and an aspect of physical ecology: flat terrain versus mountainous terrain. The study found that only one of the Big Five personality traits predicted terrain preference — extraversion.” (Oishi, no date)

Iconography:

Encyclopædia Britannica

The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica (2016) ‘Iconography | visual art’, in Encyclopædia Britannica. Available at: http://www.britannica.com/art/iconography (Accessed: 10 April 2016).
(The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, 2016)

“The term can also refer to the artist’s use of this imagery in a particular work.” (The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, 2016)

“In the 19th century, iconography became divorced from archaeology and was concerned primarily with the incidence and significance of religious symbolism in Christian art. In the 20th century, investigation of Christian iconography has continued, but the secular and classical iconography of European art has also been explored, as have the iconographic aspects of Eastern religious art.” (The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, 2016)

“Iconography, the science of identification, description, classification, and interpretation of symbols, themes, and subject matter in the visual arts.” (The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, 2016)

Mirriam Websters

Merriam-Webster (2015) Definition of ICONOGRAPHY. Available at: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/iconography (Accessed: 10 April 2016).
(Merriam-Webster, 2015)
“1: pictorial material relating to or illustrating a subject” (Merriam-Webster, 2015)
“3: the imagery or symbolism of a work of art, an artist, or a body of art” (Merriam-Webster, 2015)
“2: the traditional or conventional images or symbols associated with a subject and especially a religious or legendary subject” (Merriam-Webster, 2015)
“the images or symbols related to something” (Merriam-Webster, 2015)

Blue Twig Studio

Prewitt, D. (2011) Personal Iconography. Available at: https://bluetwigstudio.wordpress.com/2011/05/28/personal-iconography/ (Accessed: 10 April 2016).
(Prewitt, 2011)
“We all have a personal iconography list, but we don’t always realize it, or perhaps we don’t even know what it is.” (Prewitt, 2011)
“Your personal iconography is really just motifs and symbols and ideas that have personal meaning for you.” (Prewitt, 2011)

Semiotics:

The Oxford English dictionary defines semiotics as

Oxford (2016) ‘Semiotics’, in Oxford Dictionary. Available at: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/semiotics (Accessed: 4 June 2016).

(Oxford, 2016)

“semiotics The study of signs and symbols and their use or interpretation.” (Oxford, 2016)

“Origin Late 19th century: from Greek sēmeiotikos ‘of signs’, from sēmeioun ‘interpret as a sign’.” (Oxford, 2016)

 

Sign Salad is a semiotics and cultural insight agency offering high-level thinking for street-level application this is their definition and some thoughts on Semiotics:

Sign Salad Ltd (2011) Semiotics explained. Available at: http://www.signsalad.com/semiotics-explained/ (Accessed: 4 June 2016).
(Sign Salad Ltd, 2011)

“In other words, we need to understand the context in which a sign is communicated in order to comprehend its real meaning, and hence act appropriately. What is going on around the sign is usually as important for us to know as the sign itself in order to interpret its meaning.”
(Sign Salad Ltd, 2011)

“Semiotics is an investigation into how meaning is created and how meaning is communicated. Its origins lie in the academic study of how signs and symbols (visual and linguistic) create meaning. It is a way of seeing the world, and of understanding how the landscape and culture in which we live has a massive impact on all of us unconsciously.”
(Sign Salad Ltd, 2011)

“Everyone is a semiotician, because everyone is constantly unconsciously interpreting the meaning of signs around them – from traffic lights to colours of flags, the shapes of cars, the architecture of buildings, and the design of cereal packaging.”
(Sign Salad Ltd, 2011)

Theodora Petkova:

in her own words

“I am a philologist fascinated by the metamorphoses of text on the Web. Curious about the ways the semantic Web unfolds, I explore how content writing and search are changing with time.”

From her discussion on the Semiosphere:

Petkova, T. (2015) Intertextuality. Available at: http://www.teodorapetkova.com/thing-finding/semiosphere/ (Accessed: 13 June 2016).
(Petkova, 2015)

“The term semiosphere [from Greek sēmeion ‘sign’ (sēma ‘mark’) + -sphere] was originally introduced in 1984 by Yuri Lotman to denote space within which constantly function and emerge processes of signification” (Petkova, 2015)

“In his words this is “a specific sphere, possessing signs, which are assigned to the enclosed space. Only within such a space is it possible for communicative processes and the creation of new information to be realised.”” (Petkova, 2015)

From a Wiktionary definition of Semiosphere:

Semiosphere (no date) Available at: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/semiosphere (Accessed: 13 June 2016).
(Semiosphere, no date)

“semiosphere English Noun semiosphere ‎(plural semiospheres) (semiotics) The sphere of semiosis in which the sign processes operate in the set of all interconnected Umwelts.  [quotations ▲] 2003 Iu. M. Lotman, Edna Andrews – Conversations With Lotman: Cultural Semiotics in Language, Literature, and Cognition Lotman’s conceptualization of the semiosphere was inspired by Vernadsky’s and Teilhard de Chardin’s vision of the biosphere and the noosphere.” (Semiosphere, no date)

Note: Wiktionary is not considered a safe reference however this is a useful definition so it is included because it is a reference to Lotman’s work on the subject

Definition of Umwelt in the Oxford English Dictionary

Oxford (2016b) ‘Umwelt’, in Oxford Dictionary. Available at: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/umwelt (Accessed: 13 June 2016).
(Oxford, 2016b)

Origin German, literally ‘environment.  (Oxford, 2016b)

Definition of Umwelt in English: Umwelt noun (plural Umwelten /ˈʊmvɛlt(ə)n/) (In ethology) the world as it is experienced by a particular organism: the worlds they perceive, their Umwelten, are all different (Oxford, 2016b)

Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere

Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere (no date) Available at: http://www.zbi.ee/~kalevi/jesphohp.htm (Accessed: 13 June 2016).

(Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere, no date)

“Umwelt is the semiotic world of organism. It includes all the meaningful aspects of the world for a particular organism. Thus, Umwelt is a term uniting all the semiotic processes of an organism into a whole.” (Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere, no date)

 

“Semiosphere is the set of all interconnected Umwelts. Any two Umwelts, when communicating, are a part of the same semiosphere.” (Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere, no date)

 

“Organisms are themselves creating signs, which become the constituent parts of the semiosphere. This is not an adaptation to environment, but the creation of a new environment.” (Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere, no date)

Critical Analysis

Much of the above research is based on psychology rather than the work of photographers, but it begs the question is there a relationship between the person and the location, the research by Elland, Oishi and Jokela is not conclusive in the question of does the location shape the person or is the personality drawn to the location, but for the purpose of this exercise, I don’t think it matters too much what is key from this research is that location has a reflection on the type of person.

The next question I have been wrestling with both in part one and in the start of part 2 is can the camera show the personality of the person, clearly a camera has no mystic power or strange xray ability to look into a persons soul and demonstrate their personality, however portraits often do convey something about the person.

I gathered together a series of images on Pinterest Here. The images are all of serial killers, I asked several people what they thought the people had in common without reveling the class to them, interestingly the opinion was that they were a sinister bunch of people. I have the opinion that this is because of the way the images were taken, a bit like Sander in the previous part there is a look that is associated with the class, probably one that the media and society has assigned to to it, this seems to play into the idea of a group iconography, similar to showing a bunch of people standing against a white wall holding a board with data on it referring to people who have been arrested.

I am beginning to believe that the camera does not in fact revel a persons character by some natural process but by the careful or accidental way that the photographer sets up the image, coming back to pose background and props.

I am also starting to think that the topic of semiotics and iconography is in some way wrapped up in this problem, this is probably not the traditional view of semiotics as normally studied by photography students, I came across some reseach into the semiotic world and a concept of the Semiosphere, this research is buried in the world of biology and the way organisms communicate but it is never the less interesting.

Petkova, T. (2015) Intertextuality. Available at: http://www.teodorapetkova.com/thing-finding/semiosphere/ (Accessed: 13 June 2016).
(Petkova, 2015)

“The term semiosphere [from Greek sēmeion ‘sign’ (sēma ‘mark’) + -sphere] was originally introduced in 1984 by Yuri Lotman to denote space within which constantly function and emerge processes of signification” (Petkova, 2015)

“In his words this is “a specific sphere, possessing signs, which are assigned to the enclosed space. Only within such a space is it possible for communicative processes and the creation of new information to be realised.”” (Petkova, 2015)

I am struggling to find the right terms for my thoughts but Semiosphere seems to work as does the term Umwelt:

Oxford (2016b) ‘Umwelt’, in Oxford Dictionary. Available at: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/umwelt (Accessed: 13 June 2016).
(Oxford, 2016b)

Origin German, literally ‘environment.  (Oxford, 2016b)

Definition of Umwelt in English: Umwelt noun (plural Umwelten /ˈʊmvɛlt(ə)n/) (In ethology) the world as it is experienced by a particular organism: the worlds they perceive, their Umwelten, are all different (Oxford, 2016b)

And

Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere (no date) Available at: http://www.zbi.ee/~kalevi/jesphohp.htm (Accessed: 13 June 2016).

(Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere, no date)

“Umwelt is the semiotic world of organism. It includes all the meaningful aspects of the world for a particular organism. Thus, Umwelt is a term uniting all the semiotic processes of an organism into a whole.” (Kalevi Kull – on semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere, no date)

 

In my thinking there is a semiotic system surrounding every person that contains a series of signs icons and indexes that enable us to interpret what we see, further there is conceptually a set of semiotics in each of us that have no meaning to anyone else this is our own personal or private semiosphere. This semiosphere or possibly umwelt is the place where we have an internal dialogue with ourselves and our surroundings it is where we are reminded of things through personal experience that are not available to others. For example if I sat under an apple tree when I was 5 and an apple fell on my head the sight of an apple may for ever mean pain to me, so a picture of a red apple may talk to me and suggest great pain, this will not have the same effect on anyone else because they do not have the same experience.

Similarly groups of people have similar experiences and a group semiosphere is created, people who belong to the scouts have a series of signs and symbols that belong to them and may be meaningless to others, thus there is a second level of semiosphere that is the signs symbols icons and indexes belonging to a group.

Potentially there is a third semiosphere which relates to universal signs symbols, icons and indexes that everyone recognizes, this semiosphere is the subject of much academic debate as to it existence, the theory of some is that there is no such thing as there is nothing truly universal and the things we consider universal  are just huge groups, I am not well read enough to decide which is true but for my purpose it is useful to consider this third semiosphere as any thing that has so many members we can assume it to be public.

in this exercise we are trying to investigate how much location tells us about character and I think that this is really about the way we read the surroundings in a semiotic way to assign a perceived character to the subject. Thus it is possible for me to shoot a deeply meaningful image that no one gets because the signs we interpret are strictly part of my personal semiosphere.

If as a photographer I want people to understand and interpret my work in a certain way I must either introduce the audience to my personal semiosphere or use signs from a group semiosphere to which they belong or use signs that belong to the public semiosphere. I may also like to make work that sits firmly in my own head and enjoy the reactions of others as they assign a totally different meaning from their own semiospheres either way an understanding of semiotics and how it divides into peoples own understanding is central to making work with meaning.

To explore this further while still completing the exercise I am going to attempt to shoot three portraits, one that draws from my own personal semiosphere, one that attempts to tap into a group semiosphere and if possible a third that uses the universal semiosphere.

If I am successful the first image will not convey the meaning I intend until explained the second will be obvious to members of the group but need explanation to people outside that group and the third should be universally obvious.