Week 3- Signs and Symbols

 This week we analyzed Semiology and Visual Interpretation by Norman Bryson. In this paper, Bryson explains to the viewer how he believes all paintings are made up of signs. He also discusses the ways in which his hypothesis disputes Perceptualist theories on artwork. 

Bryson’s opinion that all paintings are made up of signs is an interesting take on a popular question: how does art communicate? In Bryson’s theory, signs within the painting are the communicators. These signs and symbols are a lot like signs in math or letters in writing. Each symbol already has a predetermined meaning. Those who are part of a society, can easily understand the meaning of these signs. This means that when a painting includes a well-known sign, such as clocks or calendars, the viewer automatically realizes the connection with time and the passage of time. Similar signs are very apparent in any works of art.

Since paintings are a mode of communication, they are considered a social act. Bryson reiterated the social communication employed by paintings by stating, “It takes one person to experience a sensation, it takes at least two to recognize a sign.” Since paintings are made up of signs, we can determine that it takes at least two people to recognize the meaning of paintings. This is because signs are a construct of a society, and already have a predetermined meaning. However, not all signs are stagnate. One sign may have many different meanings which are created by necessity. Each artist can use a sign and give it a different meaning by placing it in different contexts. 

However, there are exceptions to the rule that all paintings are intended to be social methods of communication. Some artworks are created with the intent to only bestow a message to whoever can interpret one for themselves. Thus, some artwork will not reveal its message because it does not deliver one to the viewer. Artworks in this category only aim to inspire a message that is already inside the viewer. In this instance, the viewer creates meaning for themselves.

When viewers are asked to create meaning for themselves, most any interpretation of an artwork is valid. This is because a painting with no obvious signs of communication is meant to create context for the viewer who looks upon it. However, in most instances of sign communication within a painting, there is a predetermined interpretation that is considered correct compared to others. Such as the painting The Cyclops by Odilon Redon.

The Cyclops, Odilon Redon, 1914

        This painting is a clear interpretation of the allegorical story of the cyclops in Greek mythology. An interpretation of, “Well I believe this painting is about bluegrass music” would be clearly incorrect. Signs in paintings are modes of communication with set rules when created with the intention to clearly identify the message.

As a future art educator in public schools, I aim to teach students about societal signs in artworks and the meaning within them. An apple, orange, clock, or piece of fabric can hold more context that precedes their external appearance. Definitions of signs within art have been passed down throughout generations of artists and embody the human experience.\

Sources:

Bryson, Norman. Semiology and Visual Interpretation.1991

"Le Cyclope, C. 1914." The Cyclops – Kröller-Müller Museum. Accessed September 08, 2021. https://krollermuller.nl/en/odilon-redon-the-cyclops-1