Semiotics: A Discussion Pt. 1

As I sat in class and learned about semiotics and the sort, I was reminded of several thoughts that I have had flowing through my cerebellum for many years. These are things that I have pondered and always wondered if there were answers to my questions. After learning some of the basics of semiotics, I can see where I might be able to have a starting point to find the answers to my questions, but by no means have a had a great revelation of genius in regards to any of my ponderments. I just hope to share a few of my thoughts here.

For several years, one of the most mind boggling questions I have boggled with in my head is this. If a child was taught from the begining that everything was the exact opposite of what everyone is taught, would it be wrong. What I mean is, if a child was taught that red was green and green was red, would the child be wrong if he saw a red rose and said if was green? Of course we must lay the assumption down that this little tot is not red-green color blind. Even deeper than just colors, what if a child was taught that a dog was a cat, and a cat was a dog? Would they be wrong if they called out for the family feline and a ginourmous Great Dane camp romping around the corner? These questions have intrigued me for many minutes, and even hours at some times.

At the base of Semiotics, we have the signifier, and the signified. Also we have the codes that shape and provide a mold for those "significances" to follow. Of course we could go deeper into syntagmatics, and paradigmatics, BUT for the purpose of this simply hypothetical blog, we will stick to the basics of signifiers, signifieds, and codes that they follow. The following is going to be a little abstract, but just stick with me, and hopefully I can help makes some sense of all of it at the end.

Let's name the child...Frankie should do the trick.... Frankie was walking down the sidewalk, on the way home from his 3rd grade endeavors for the day, and he saw a terrible spill that took place between a mailman and a youngster on a bike. Let's assume that Frankie just learned in his semioticly-morphed class, that men who carry mail to houses are called Presidents, and little tikes on bikes are called Bombers. After realizing that the spill wasn't nearly as bad as it looked, Frankie flees the scene of the action, and hurries home to report to his mommy what he just saw. Walking in the door Frankie frankly says to his mother " Hey Mom! Guess what I just Saw?... The president just ran into a bomber and it was terrible..(leaving out the important detail that everyone was fine). Following the rules of our code of understanding the mother would have a rather terrifying image in her head. She would see the president of the United States (from the signifying word PRESIDENT) running into a suicide bomber, and having a rather untimely and terrible death. She would be following every code and rule set out before every commonly schooled American of our day and time. Unfortunatly, Frankie's mother is unaware of his morphed view of the world.

Semiotics: A Discussion Pt. 2

Even though Frankie wasn't wrong by his own standards of education and understanding, he was easily wrong if we match him up against all the implied codes and rules that any normally schooled person would know. So I guess to answer my own question of whether or not a child would be wrong if he was taught a totally different system of learning, my answer would have to be yes, and no. In the first reading for this class, it talked about how an individual can't make up their own thoughts or understandings and expect that the world around them would understand. That is the main reason why I would say no, but the reason I would say yes is because in Frankie's head, it made perfect sense.

We digress, to another thought coming from my fantastical brain. In our language, we take the signifier of the word cat and have an image of a cat (signified) in our minds. Also we turn that image of the cat into the signifier and think about things like warmth and fuzziness. I have always wondered that if people with different languages still have the same types of images, even thought their words are so different. Let's take the Spanish version of cat for example. When a mother says to a child: Donde esta el gato? (Which means where is the cat), what does the child think of when he hears the word gato? Would he simple follow the same rules that we follow with just a different signifier since the signified is still the same object? Or would he have a totally different picture in his head when he hears or sees the word gato. Maybe it is as simple as seeing a different type of cat, such as when I hear cat I think of a black cat, and when the little Hispanic boy hears gato he thinks of a calico cat.
I have to believe that if there is a difference, it is deeper than just the relativity of the type of cat. I think that if there is a difference, it is because of the enormous gaps between our cultures. American culture has a face, or a set of codes and rules and implied meanings, that is totally different from every other culture around the globe. This would provide a reasonable answer to the difference between the two signifieds. Maybe words meaning the same the things and only look differently, doesn't have much of an effect upon the signified its self. I am truly not smart enough to figure that out, but by any means if anyone who reads this could shine some light on either of my subjects, I am more than open to thoughts.

These things I have shared make my brain hurt, but I find them to be very interesting thoughts. I am excited that I am able to finally have something to structure these thoughts around. Hopefully as I continue to learn more and more about Semiotics, I will have a greater understanding for these and other concepts that come my way. I hope you were able to make at least a little sense out of all my hypothetical mumbo-jumbo! Enjoy!

~DeLiRi0uS~

Life in the Midst of Media DeLiRiuM Pt. 1

First of all, I want to say welcome to my blog! Throughout my nineteen years of existence, I have been exposed to, and encouraged to participate in, many different types of media. Honestly I have never stopped to examine how many types of media I use one a semi-regular basis, or how those media have affected and shaped my life. Throughout this blog as a whole, and this post individually, I hope to explore the media, how it has affected me and will affect me in the future, and hope it impacts the world I live in.

As I stop and think about all the many different media sources in my life, there are quite a few, at least more than I thought there would be. From music, to television, movies, to theater, books to the internet, and from newspapers, magazines, and the list really does go on. Out of all these separate media indulgences, T.V. has by far been the most influential for me.

Ever since I was young I can remember watching Mr. Rodgers ( for supposed educational purposes), The Reading Rainbow ( I'll never forget Lamar), Saturday morning cartoons, and The Price is Right. These shows provided me with the entertainment that any youth of my age would enjoy. As time progressed my interests have matured in some areas, but stayed the same in others. Nowadays, the Price is Right still makes the list, but it shares my interests with sports television, including live games and the everyday episode of Sports Center) actions shows, such as 24, and reality television.

Thinking about even this shift in my television viewing preferences has shown me something about the media's ability to tailor my specific interests. Along with a shift in my viewing preferences, there has also been a shift in the way that I actually think about television itself. As a child, television was merely a supplement to my everyday activities of " linkin' loggin' ", food consumption, and childhood mishaps. Today, television is a source of information, entertainment, and advancement that I consciously indulge myself in. When I want to learn, I flip to the discovery channel, when I want to see our "great" Cleveland sports teams, Fox Sports Net, and when I want to hear some partisan news-speak, I can turn to any of the sensationalized stations that reside on my basic cable plan.

A Life in the Midst of Media DeLiRiuM Pt. 2

Although these outside recognitions have been made, I believe there is still a greater lesson, and realization beneath all of this seemingly obvious information. I believe, that my interests and beliefs in and about television, have been shape by the medium of the television itself. Growing up not only provided a stimulation of hormones but also a stimulation of curiosity that the television was offering to me without any hang-ups. As I made that shift between the Barney song, to "mature and violent and unrealistic" television, I think I followed the exact pattern that the media had intended for me, and many other teenagers of my generation to follow.

Realizing this opens many new thoughts about television as a media and entertainment source. I think it is important to think about what we ( for all my Christian brothers and sisters out there) take in through the television. Our eyes are the gateway to our thoughts, actions, and even the motivations of our hearts. We can say that it is just for fun, or we know it isn't real, but why not just find another way to glorify God, rather than wasting his precious time on a media trap that we all too easily fall into. I think it is time to make a stand for our selves, and choose to stop falling into that trap, and start falling into Jesus will for our lives.

Please don't for one minute believe that I am never going to watch another minute of television in my entire lifetime. That would be taking things to a definite extreme. I'm just thinking aloud here ( or in print I should say) and I just want you all to maybe think about this for your own lives. I don't think that all television in moderation is bad, and I don't think that most television in and of itself is bad, per say.

My main concern is that we as the livelihood of our families, churches and country, stop ourselves from following what everyone around us wants us to follow, and start following what the Lord has called us to. Even if someone isn't a Christian, I still think it is important to stop and take a new look on this subject of how easily television can shape and morph our thoughts and actions. Lets stop letting media so easily affect us, and start affecting the media in a way that can help us show others how to break out of the tunnel-visioned thought process that so many of us are knee deep in!

~DeLiRi0uS~

Test