ITAP2: Semiotics

Recently, Paul Slocombe did a presentation on one of his heroes, Roland Barthes. Roland's speciality isn't entirely in design, but in the exploration of semiotics in photography, and how these meanings composed in various things such as photography/film, design, mythologies and all in-between affect us. Paul developed this theory and really homed in on the hidden messages, making for a very interesting, thought provoking lecture.

One of the first things we looked at, was the use of signs and how even the slightest alteration can dramatically affect how we interpret them, proving the sheer power they have, and how subtle they can be. For example; these two symbols either side are nearly identical. The left one, you might assume he is waving hello/goodbye, calling for help, drowning, about to catch a ball, putting his hand up to answer a question. But as soon as the small teardrop symbol is added on the right, we automatically make the assumption to sadness due to the stereotypical teardrop connotations and semantics behind it. This can be split up almost into Roland's "Studium"(being the man in silhouette) and the "Punctum"(the tear drop, which jumps from the normal to attract the most attention/interest)

As well as these basic introductions to semiotics, we looked a little into an aspect of one of Roland Barthes' books; Mythologies.

"The myths which suffuse our lives are so insidious precisely because they appear so natural. They call out for the detailed analysis which semiotics can deliver." 

~ Roland Barthes

The mythology we looked most at in deconstruction was on soap. Initially we were shown an image of a very dirty and pollutant seeming factory as well as a photo of white powder seeming like cocaine. These two images seemed to cause slight controversy and together connoted a level of backstreet grime, society rather not see. When explanations were given for these images though, we learnt how context is as important in establishing a solid symbol, so the semiotics aren't so ambiguous.

This soap deconstruction lead us to the mythology of cleanliness/healing powers and semiotics to suggest so. One of the biggest factors in soap was actually making it seem authentic; hand made, organic and thus suggest links with herbal remedies/purity/sanitation/chemical free. These myths have been embedded in culture through advertising and media for years, as to address common cultural concern of health, happiness and cleanliness.

"For Barthes myths were the result of meaning being generated by the groups in our society who have control of the language and the  media...

...these meanings are seen as part of the natural order of things, with the political content filtered out of the signification." ~ Paul Slocombe

To represent these qualities people assume to soap, some interesting styles have emerged. Several trends seem the most popular, such as the addition of fruits or organic pieces to both enhance aesthetics as well as reinforcing the chemical free/magical plant ideals. This mythology is backed up by the connotations in description, some brands using lexis like; Zen, antibacterial, handmade, herbal as well as clear presentation of the several natural ingredients. These words carry semiotics of an almost spiritual nature, with the belief that the product will not just clean you, but enrich your body and refresh your 'spirit'. These were somehow shadowed though, by the overwhelming use of brown paper/corrugated card and string forming the mythology that they represent a hugely authentic, hand made, organic and 'down to earth' healthy product. The power of this packaging trend seems to be massive in its connotations of recycling, or to hit a buzz phrase, "eco friendly" audience.


Despite this attention to detail in promoting their product as 'ideal' to the audience through these mythologies and the many methods in doing so, after research into it I am beginning to feel that rather than adding a certain depth of meaning/statement to the product, the overall trends and themes are transforming the use of the item completely. Initially, it was a luxury for the more wealthy, it then became a standard item for all, the use of semiotics and mythology took it thus to an almost medically, message/moral loaded statement of an item, and now with this saturation it seems to be becoming a fashion item, like a piece of art. 

While this may seem absurd, I can also appreciate it for its artistic qualities, innovation and design attributes to overall an interesting theme; whether this view is built from media's portrayal/mythology or my development in appreciation of design I can't vouch, although I do like it and understand its strength from background semiotics.

By understanding more about the depth of semiotics, I feel I can use them in a much more informed/aware manner to achieve visually stronger, more coherent designs. This has also lead me to a fuller understanding to some of my personal hero's work, Adrian Miller, and how it has become so successful.