Thursday 20 January 2011
Communication Theory Lecture Notes
Human communication is understood in various ways by those who identify with the field. This diversity is the result of communication being a relatively young field of study, composed of a very broad constituency of disciplines. It includes work taken from scholars of Rhetoric, Journalism, Sociology, Psychology, Anthropology, and Semiotics, among others. Cognate areas include biocommunication, which investigates communicative processes within and among non-humans such as bacteria, animals, fungi and plants, and information theory, which provides a mathematical model for measuring communication within and among systems.
Generally, human communication is concerned with the making of meaning and the exchange of understanding. One model of communication considers it from the perspective of transmitting information from one person to another. In fact, many scholars of communication take this as a working definition, and use Lasswell's maxim, "who says what to whom in what channel with what effect," as a means of circumscribing the field of communication theory. Among those who subscribe to the transmission model are those who identify themselves with the communication sciences, and finds its roots in the studies of propaganda and mass media of the early 20th century.
Other commentators claim that a ritual process of communication exists, one not artificially divorcible from a particular historical and social context. This tradition is largely associated with early scholars of symbolic interactionism as well as phenomenologists.
(source: wiki)
Friday 7 January 2011
Bernd & Hilla Becher
The German born Becher couple concentrated on photographing and documenting the disappearing German industrial architecture. They would exhibit their images of barns, water silos, storage silos, warehouses and other industrial features often side by side so as to invite viewers of their photography to compare details in the architecture. Often the differences were few; but their choice of exhibiting style made these differences all the more apparent.
(mariam goodman gallery)
The couple took a very objective approach to their photographs and their use of a large format camera medium suited this almost scientific documentary style very well. With their chosen medium they were able to eradicate any perspective distortions that a single lens plain camera cannot.
The Bechers are clear lovers of the mid 20th century industrial architecture and through their photography have caused others to consider the structures with the same interest and due diligence. They however give us no access to detail in their images, not even an angles perspective on the structures: They are all photographed from a head on, straightforward point of view.
Although some, like the Bechers may consider the structures that they photographed to be beautiful, non were purpose built to meet those ends. They simply serve a purpose and I can imagine most of the communities that saw them on a day to day basis would happily let them blend into the mundane everyday scenery and wouldn't offer them a second glance. However when they are presented as an art form people seem to feel much more at ease scrutinizing them as an art form rather than structures performing a purpose and built to suit that as such.
As individual images I highly doubt these would work. Alone they would be an image of a boring structure shot in a boring way: However as soon as they are placed together the mind immediately attempts to connect them and in doing so analyses their slight differences and compares their resemblances to one another. As a set they work tremendously well together and this is justified in that their 1976 study of cooling towers sold for the grand price of $150,000 at auction in 2004 (pictured below)
(artnet.com)
I think the Becher's style of photography correlates with Baudrillard's notions of simulation and that they are most probably making a satirical comment on the disappearance of these old German industrial features whilst juxtaposing it with the way in which they exhibit their work which is strongly reminiscent of the mass-reproducible copies of items; an example of which that was taking place at a similar time to their work being exhibited might be Andy Warhol's numerous screen prints, which also play on the modern mass consumerist culture.
(mariam goodman gallery)
The couple took a very objective approach to their photographs and their use of a large format camera medium suited this almost scientific documentary style very well. With their chosen medium they were able to eradicate any perspective distortions that a single lens plain camera cannot.
The Bechers are clear lovers of the mid 20th century industrial architecture and through their photography have caused others to consider the structures with the same interest and due diligence. They however give us no access to detail in their images, not even an angles perspective on the structures: They are all photographed from a head on, straightforward point of view.
Although some, like the Bechers may consider the structures that they photographed to be beautiful, non were purpose built to meet those ends. They simply serve a purpose and I can imagine most of the communities that saw them on a day to day basis would happily let them blend into the mundane everyday scenery and wouldn't offer them a second glance. However when they are presented as an art form people seem to feel much more at ease scrutinizing them as an art form rather than structures performing a purpose and built to suit that as such.
As individual images I highly doubt these would work. Alone they would be an image of a boring structure shot in a boring way: However as soon as they are placed together the mind immediately attempts to connect them and in doing so analyses their slight differences and compares their resemblances to one another. As a set they work tremendously well together and this is justified in that their 1976 study of cooling towers sold for the grand price of $150,000 at auction in 2004 (pictured below)
(artnet.com)
I think the Becher's style of photography correlates with Baudrillard's notions of simulation and that they are most probably making a satirical comment on the disappearance of these old German industrial features whilst juxtaposing it with the way in which they exhibit their work which is strongly reminiscent of the mass-reproducible copies of items; an example of which that was taking place at a similar time to their work being exhibited might be Andy Warhol's numerous screen prints, which also play on the modern mass consumerist culture.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)