|
|
| 5. How would our analyses change if we
knew more about the date, engravers, designers, producers, merchants
and distribution of the images in question? What do the images reveal
about class or gender? What can the style and rendering of an image
disclose about the political ideology or psychological predisposition
of the engraver, printer, or patron? How might one get at the intent
of the image makers compared to the reading produced by contemporary
viewers. |
| |
 |
The
Importance of Supporting Information Wayne Hanley,
6-6-03, 9:50 AM |
|
|
the
need for more knowledge Lynn Hunt,
6-23-03, 11:16 PM |
|
on
the need for more knowledge Barbara Day-Hickman, 7-3-03, 4:12
PM |
|
A
different perspective Warren Roberts, 7-9-03,
1:33 PM |
 |
reading the image Vivian
Cameron, 7-26-03,
1:45 PM |
|
| Subject: |
reading the
image |
| Posted
By: |
Vivian Cameron |
|
| Date
Posted: |
7-26-03, 1:45
PM |
|
Knowing more about the date, the artist, the distribution
of a print, and the like, as Claudette Hould has demonstrated,
helps us to stabilize the meaning of a work, as it
were. However, as we all know, images are multivalent
with various readings, and “the reception of
any cultural product is subject always to friction,
resistance, and possible remaking,” as Joan Landes
has shown.
I was happy to read Joan’s comments about intent
(see
Question 1) because
regardless of the artist’s intent,
the image acquires its own meanings, depending on the
sites of its display, who interprets it [here class,
race, and gender can be pertinent], when it is interpreted
(reception theory), and the like.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
