Thursday, 23 October 2014

Study task 2 Critical analysis of an illustration as a triangulated discussion.

Adele Pierce

OUIL 501 Context of Practice
Study Task 2
Critical Analysis of an illustration as a triangulated discussion of texts.

Chosen Illustration : Mr Bingo’s ‘Iron Lady.’
Chosen texts : An incomplete manifesto for growth - Bruce Mau.
First things first 1964 - Ken Garland.
First things first, 2000 - Lasn et al.

I have chosen Mr. Bingo’s illustration because after reading the texts I feel that the purpose of why he makes his work can be questioned from positive and negative angles. I will start by looking at Bruce Mau’s incomplete manifesto for growth and separating which quotes Bingo obides by as an illustrator developing his own personal practice, and which he rebels against. I will then look at both First things first texts against quotes by Bingo about his work and round off the purpose of being an illustrator; whether we make work to sell, conforming to consumerism or work to make a difference and change society.

“Process is more important than outcome. When the outcome drives the process we will only ever go to where we’ve already been” Number 3 in the manifesto for growth. Bingo speaks openly about his process being one based largely on reference material, a lengthy process of gathering sources from the internet to draw from and pull together to create ‘silly’ pieces. In this sense his process is hugely important but at the same time it never changes, he follows the same structure.

“Everyone is a leader. Growth happens. Whenever it does, allow it to emerge.” We definitely get a sense of leadership from this piece but it’s mocking leadership. Mocking women leaders in society to being sexual objects. Margaret Thatcher stripped bare and looking pleased about it. She still wears her badge, ‘Iron Lady’ like her signature persona still exists despite being completely undignified. Outside of this image I feel from looking at interviews of Mr Bingo and hearing him speaking first hand that he definitely has a sense of leadership within his practice. He is a businessman, he knows what work he wants to take on and which work he does not want to get involved with. He manipulates his briefs into work that he wants to create. I feel this myself sometimes if I have a brief I don’t particularly enjoy I will try turn it on it’s head.

Number 14 “Don’t be cool.” I think Bingo definitely mocks being cool through his work and the social subcultures.

Most importantly, “Laugh.” This manifesto reflects Bingo perfectly; he creates work to make people laugh, to mock serious situations and create the shock value. In speaking he is also humorous and light-hearted and has a great attitude. He is surrounded by laughter which seems to drive his work.
All of these manifesto support the purpose of Bingo’s work and how he develops his practice.

Equally, there are contrasting manifesto’s when viewing Bingo’s work. For example, “Go deep. The deeper you go the more likely you will discover something of value.” Bingo’s work is far from deep and conceptual, it is light-hearted fun and playful. We don’t get a sense that he has a real passion about something political. I feel that Bingo has taken his process to a level of perfection when it comes to executing his line work; some are full lines and others simple dots suggesting a curve or dent in the skin. This contrasts to Manifesto 6 ‘Capture accidents.’ We don’t get to see the messy process of accidents being made into something successful or a wide experimentation of media. He simply uses reference, draws it out in the same pen, scans and colours it digitally. There is routine to his work.
Bingo also relies heavily on social media to advertise his work. In an interview with Adobe on Youtube he speaks about using their software quite basically and then networking with the public via Tumblr. He speaks about his creative process when first receiving a brief. He initially brainstorms ideas, works out how he can turn this into work and then draws from reference by using his friends or images from the internet. This seems to go against Mau’s 24^th Manifesto of ‘relying on software.’ Bingo quotes, “For the past 11 years I’ve been working 95% as a commercial illustrator.” Notice how he brands himself commercial, every outcome of his work is to sell or support a product or magazine article. His work seems of no real value or passion invested into a subject he cares about.

These contrasting points about Bingo support all texts about the purpose of creating work as an illustrator. Perhaps we are selling out? When Bingo spoke at a presentation in our University and equally stated on his website he claims he ‘does not work for free.’ He is a businessman constantly thinking about his income and is careful about the kind of jobs that he takes on. Despite being a huge fan of his work after reading the manifesto’s I am slowly realizing that Bingo is more of a businessman than an illustrator. Stylistically and aesthetically his work is rather bland to me now and has no real depth or concept. Bingo picks and choses his briefs based on work that he will enjoy doing, that he thinks will sell and persuades his clients into thinking the same. The First things First original Manifesto in 1964 claimed “We have reached a saturation point at which the high pitched scream of consumer selling is no more than sheer noise.” Bingo was also brought into a culture whereby he is surrounded by the notion of selling, making work to earn a living. “We think there are other things more worth using our skill and experience on.” This completely contrasts to the purpose of Bingo’s work. Mr.Bingo’s work is humorous, has shock value, is playful and often mocking society. He created hate mail for strangers he had never met before. Both Manifesto’s stress the importance of using our skills to better use. We are, as Michael Bierut claims, the ‘Designer puppet masters’ that can influence the world into making a change, not mocking strangers telling them they have ‘fat legs.’

To conclude, I chose this image by Bingo because I think he balances out what it means to be an illustrator in society today; taking an important political subject and turning it on it’s head. I think what is commendable about him is he thinks outside of the box, he is not afraid to take risks with his work, and it is relatable to the public. He doesn’t take himself too seriously either which is important when being an illustrator. It can be argued that he is not using his talent to a more substancial use for society and politics and raising awareness of serious subjects; he is infact doing the opposite and maybe creating a sense of escapism from this (as seen on the image of the Iron Lady). We are asked to laugh at such serious matters. Do illustrators always have to create work that has relevance within society or can we sometimes just make work because it makes us laugh and feel something? Is that not equally as relevant?

“Designers then apply their skill and imagination to sell dog biscuits, designer coffee, diamonds...” – (First things First 2000). These are a list of products that are actually creating problems within society and so as designers we are adding to that problem. Contrasting to the 1964 Manifesto claiming designers “Flogged their skill and imagination to sell such things as cat food, stomach powders, detergent.” Things that at the time were a necessity, basic things. Bingo is selling his work to items that are disposable – beer cans, postcards, adding to a throwaway culture. The work Bingo is creating could thus be viewed as unethical if they are designed for ‘inessential’ objects.
The image of the Iron Lady can be viewed as the 2000 manifesto states ‘a harmful use of public discourse’ in the way that we portray a message. This is how we communicate within society today and some people could view this as offensive.
“We have been raised in a world in which the techniques and apparatus of advertising have persistently been presented to us as the most lucrative, effective and desirable use of our talents.” As designers in this day and age, it is all we know, we are surrounded by consumerism and selling our work to the masses. We were brought into a world of showcasing our talent through advertisement and selling. I feel that people are too hung up on trying to make work that has the shock value and being ‘cool’ and being relatable in order to sell more rather than using that shock value to actually make a difference. We cannot blame Bingo for being the businessman that he is; after all he does need to ‘pay the bills’ but I think more consideration into using his skills to better matters in the world could be taken especially as his work is so recognizable now. He has a great social link networking with the public on Tumblr and views of his website where he could be using this to a better advantage; delivering messages urging them to make a change as the Manifesto’s did.
A final message from Mr. Bingo when asked by an interviewer what his book would be called if he were to publish one; he said, "Fucking about for a living" is that Ethical?

References
Texts:
Beirut, 2007.
Garland,1964. First Things First Manifesto
Lasn et al, 2000. First Things First Manifesto
Mau, 1998. Manifesto For Growth
Poyner, 1999. First Things First Revisited

Websites:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUceSMM5G1c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5jh51N_2Vo

Tuesday, 14 October 2014

Study task 2

My Chosen Theme:

Gender Equality & Equal Rights

I really feel strongly about the words that Emma spoke during her speech. I'd never considered myself a feminist until now. I felt the word feminist was so powerful you had to have a certain stance in the world and it is true what she says about how it has a negative light shed on it. People few feminists as lesbians, butch women, who hate men. In actual fact all we ask is that everyone is treat the same. I have the view that we were all born into the world with the same right to live. I feel that we are all humans in the world and so should be treat equally. Some people have these rights taken away from them by others, which is wrong. No human being should have the right to have a hold over someone else's life.
I think it is important to recognise in society today how gender equality is improving; for example same sex marriages. Being attracted to the opposite sex is accepted now and people are concentrating on just being themselves and loving people not because of their gender or race or religion but because they love that person. I really feel strongly that everyone should be who they want to be in the world and not be tied down from living the life they wish to live.

I really enjoyed a lecture we had based on feminism and one thing that stood out for me was a video in the guardian.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/apr/04/everyday-sexism-turn-tables-women-men-video

These are average everyday women making a stance on gender equality. I think this is more powerful than reading a book by a famous feminist author because these are people you would not expect, having their say and making a difference. In this video the girl drives around in a white van hollering at men things that she has encountered herself. You can see by the shock from the men, and their laughter that they don't expect such behaviour from women, yet it is overlooked when men do the same. Why is it such a shock that women act the same as men still?

Quotes from the video from Leah Green :

Would you like to come home with me?
Have you guys ever made out
Are you gay?
Get your arse out mate
I really like your trousers, they'd look better on my bedroom floor
Alright sexy
Are there any women who work here that could help me? They might know a bit more
Can I get a glass of that and a lap dance?

Articles :

Equal Rights: Are We There Yet?

By Karen Kellaher

When John Lewis was growing up in Alabama, he was not allowed to eat at many restaurants or drink from the same water fountain as white children. His parents were not allowed to vote. "I couldn't even go to the county public library and check a book out," Lewis said. "The library was for whites only."

That was more than 30 years ago. Today, John Lewis is a lawmaker in the U.S. Congress. "If someone had told me in 1963 that one day I would be in Congress, I would have said, 'You're crazy!'" Lewis told Scholastic News. Lewis's life shows how much things have changed for African Americans. These changes have not come easily. For years, Lewis and thousands of other blacks have worked hard for equality.

FIGHT FOR EQUAL RIGHTS

African-Americans were freed from slavery in 1865. But they were still not treated fairly in many parts of our country. Many people would not hire blacks for jobs or sell them homes. Blacks could not use many public buildings or even ride in the front of a bus in some places.

In the 1950s and 1960s, that began to change. Blacks were tired of being treated so unfairly. They wanted the same civil rights that whites enjoyed. Thousands of blacks joined together to demand these rights. Many whites joined with them. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and other great leaders made speeches and led marches.

In 1963, more than 200,000 people gathered in Washington, D.C., for the most famous march of all. They asked the government to give blacks equal rights. Many important people, like John Lewis and Dr. King, made speeches that day. "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character," Dr. King said.

STILL A DREAM?

After the march, many laws were passed to give blacks equal rights. One law said that restaurants and other public places must serve people no matter what color they are. Another law made it easier for blacks to register to vote.

Today, these laws help make sure blacks and whites get treated equally. But many people say this country still has a long way to go. Many blacks are still treated unfairly because of their race. Last August, Americans held a new march in Washington, D.C., to celebrate the achievements of the civil rights movement. They also wanted to remind everyone that all people must be treated equally. "I think there is still a distance we must travel," John Lewis told Scholastic News. "I'd like to see an open society where we can forget about race and color and see people as people."

The guardian :

Recently, a young woman asked me how we can make feminism more accessible to men. I told her that I don’t care about making feminism more accessible to men. In truth, I don’t care about making feminism more accessible to anyone.

I care about making the liberties that men enjoy so freely fully accessible to women, and if men or celebrities claiming feminism for themselves has become the spoon full of sugar to make that medicine go down, so be it.

But it irks me that we more easily embrace feminism and feminist messages when delivered in the right package – one that generally includes youth, a particular kind of beauty, fame and/or self-deprecating humour. It frustrates me that the very idea of women enjoying the same inalienable rights as men is so unappealing that we require – even demand – that the person asking for these rights must embody the standards we’re supposedly trying to challenge. That we require brand ambassadors and celebrity endorsements to make the world a more equitable place is infuriating.

Around this time last year, as part of an effort to rebrand feminism – a notion that comes up in far too many discussions, as though there might be a magical combination of words and images that will make gender equality more palatable to the masses – Elle UK invited three British ad agencies to develop campaigns to promote feminist messages. I recognized the motivation behind the campaign but I resented the idea that with a better marketing message, the world might get right with feminism. I don’t truck in magical thinking.

Celebrities, of course, are often used as part of all vague “rebranding feminist” efforts, and in the last year or so, many famous young women – Jennifer Lawrence, Lena Dunham, Miley Cyrus – have openly claimed feminism. This shouldn’t be news, but it is, because all too often famous women – Katy Perry,Shailene Woodley, Kelly Clarkson – denounce feminism because they believe in humanism or they love men or other such reasons that make little sense.

These topics seem to be arising all the time which is good and a step forward but were still not equal?

Let's look at something current in society right now. The phone hacking scandal - 98% womens photos were leaked. Why is there not such controversy over male nudes? What is the big fuss with seeing a woman naked, humiliated, branded, and labelled and made to apologise for her actions. Why not the men? Males are equally as guilty of taking naked photographs to send to their partners. I liked a statement by Jennifer Lawrence about the scandal.

Kashner had first met with Lawrence on Aug. 13, several weeks before the Aug. 31 leak. He contacted Lawrence for comment on the incident because, he said, “I could just sense after having spent a little time with her that she would come out swinging.”

In her comments to Kashner, Lawrence also targeted those who viewed her photos, saying, “Anybody who looked at those pictures, you’re perpetuating a sexual offence. You should cower with shame. Even people who I know and love say, ‘Oh, yeah, I looked at the pictures.’ I don’t want to get mad, but at the same time I’m thinking, I didn’t tell you that you could look at my naked body.”

The actress said she attempted to write a statement addressing the leak, but said “every single thing that I tried to write made me cry or get angry.”

“I started to write an apology, but I don’t have anything to say I’m sorry for,” she continued. “I was in a loving, healthy, great relationship for four years. It was long distance, and either your boyfriend is going to look at porn or he’s going to look at you.”

The actress also decried the idea that, as a person in the limelight, her privacy is inherently compromised. “Just because I’m a public figure, just because I’m an actress, does not mean that I asked for this,” she told Vanity Fair. “It does not mean that it comes with the territory. It’s my body, and it should be my choice, and the fact that it is not my choice is absolutely disgusting. I can’t believe that we even live in that kind of world. ”

I completely agree. Where has her right to privacy gone? Taken by another human being, completely exposing her just because she is a celebrity. I also saw a post about Iggy Azelea supposedly attacking paparazzi because they were following her in a private shopping area when she did not have her security to support her. The people taking photos were shouting 'But you're a celebrity, don't be a celebrity then' like the fact she was famous was an excuse for them to violate her privacy. They don't have the right to take photos of her in private against her wish and I think she was right to attack back at them. It makes me wonder if a male would be treat the same in the situation, like she was only treat this way because she didn't have her bodyguards around her; because she is a woman.

It's still happening around me today, I see it with my friends. I see the struggle of my friends who are gay in coming out, I see my friends of difference races face racism due to narrow minded people. My friend being threatened to be 'skinned like a pig' because her skin is a different colour? I see male friends be called gay when they're straight just because they act a little 'feminine' and equally female friends who are straight get called 'dykes' because they act a little 'masculine.' I wish people could live in peace being whoever they want to be without anyone questioning otherwise.

This is a Facebook post from one of my friends who faces racism still; and he got 238 likes so far and a hell of a lot of comments of positivity and support; yet its still happening? When as a society will we come to terms with being HUMAN and the fact that were all EQUAL?

I have heard a few times also from my parents and other parents how they feel frustrated that their son's as toddlers want to play with prams and irons and dolls yet this is frowned upon and there are not enough of these toys available for little boys, in boys colours - they're all feminine and pink. When these young boys go to nursery they are exploring, and in actual fact when we grow up as adults males are expected to be equal and cook, clean, iron, push around their baby in a pushchair so why shouldn't they play with these things as children?

Do men not iron?

Do men not enjoy food? Enjoy cooking? Should this not be drilled into children from a young age? This is adding to the view of roles within the household that women should cook and clean and men should be the bread makers which is complete nonsense

Study Task 2 Critical Analysis, Triangulated discussion

My chosen texts are An incomplete manifesto for growth - Bruce Mau. First things first 1964 - Ken Garland. First things first 2000 - Lasn et al.

I have chosen to change my original illustrations because they were too literal to the quotes from the texts and don't supply a good argument for discussion. I have chosen work by Mr. Bingo because I feel this would be an interesting argument for the purpose of why he makes his work; especially hearing it from him first hand.

NOTES :

Incomplete Manifesto for growth - what bits reflect Bingo's work and attitude and what contrast?

Reflects:

3. Process is more important than outcome. When the outcome drives the process we will only ever go to where we’ve already been. If process drives outcome we may not know where we’re going, but we will know we want to be there. ---- Bingo said that his process was very long. It took him a long time to gather up reference material to work from and that most of his work is based on his process; getting the posture right, making sure his work is humorous, gathering up sources.

10. Everyone is a leader. Growth happens. Whenever it does, allow it to emerge. Learn to follow when it makes sense. Let anyone lead. --- I definitely get a sense of leadership within his work, he critiques others like no one else can. He is a business man also.

14. Don’t be cool. Cool is conservative fear dressed in black. Free yourself from limits of this sort. --- I think Bingo definitely rebels against the norm.

41. Laugh. People visiting the studio often comment on how much we laugh. Since I’ve become aware of this, I use it as a barometer of how comfortably we are expressing ourselves. --- This one hugely reflects Bingo. He mocks himself and others constantly whether it be through his work or in his presentation speeches, he is surrounded by laughter and that drives his work.

Goes against:

5. Go deep. The deeper you go the more likely you will discover something of value --- I wouldn't say Bingo's work was deep and meaningful, it's very light hearted and playful.

6. Capture accidents. The wrong answer is the right answer in search of a different question. Collect wrong answers as part of the process. Ask different questions. ---- Bingo's practise is very perfected, each line has been well executed and thought through. His drawing technique has been practiced to develop his own style. We never see any messy accidents on the page. He is improving his visual content which is what the Manifesto is all about exhausting your practise rather than the concept of the practise, individual development.

24. Avoid software. The problem with software is that everyone has it. ---- Despite being initially hand generated, Bingo uses digital techniques to edit and colour his work. He is also a huge networker on social media sites, websites etc to advertise his work.

All of the things that go against the manifesto are what support First Things First's argument about the purpose of why we make work. It is selling out. When Bingo spoke he reiterated how he doesn't make work for free, he is constantly thinking about the money, he is careful about the kind of jobs he takes on. As much as I love his work, he is in my eyes purely making work that will sell and make money. Work that will shock you into making you want to buy it because it's different, yet stylistically and aesthetically it's quite bland and doesn't have any real depth or concept. He does however make work that is sometimes political and highlighting issues of society. I chose Bingo because I believe he is down the middle of the two, you can balance out the things that he does within his practise, laughing being humorous not being cool, being different, being a leader, thinking outside of the box. At the same time he is conforming to consumerism. Bingo makes a stance, shocks, does things outside of the norm but I feel he is not using his talent to do this in a way that has real value and can really make a change to society within his own personal work.

Quotes from First things first 1964

"Applauding the work of those who have flogged their skill and imagination to sell such things as cat food, stomach powders, detergent." ---- Things that are a necessity at that time, basic things. Does he design work for necessities? Where can we see his work? Post cards, prints, cans, newspapers, magazines, books - Throwaway, disposable items.
" We have reached a saturation point at which the high pitched scream of consumer selling is no more than sheer noise. " He is so surrounded by selling that he is able to pick and chose the jobs that he takes on. Everything he makes is to sell.
"We think there are other things more worth using our skill and experience on." - Is that hate mail? Is disposable hate mail mocking someone you never met a good useful way of using your skills? No, but we like it, its fun, light hearted and it sells. Do we as illustrators always have to make work that has relevance within society or sometimes can we just make work because its funny, it makes us feel something? Is that not equally as relevant?

First things First 2000

" We have been raised in a world in which the techniques and apparatus of advertising have persistently been presented to us as the most lucrative, effective and desirable use of our talents." This is all we know, were brought up into a world of advertising and showcasing our talents through selling and consumerism, this is how the world is now.
" Designers then apply their skill and imagination to sell dog biscuits, designer coffee, diamonds, detergents.. " Things that are adding to problems created by consumerism. Bingo did a soda can. Is it ethical? Products that are 'inessential.' A throw-away culture.
"Commercial work has always paid the bills." 'Does Mr.Bingo work for free?'
"Harmful code of public discourse" how we get our message across how we communicate. 'Dear Kerry you fat handed cunt'
"There are pursuits more worthy of our problem-solving skills." Are we problem solvers though? Do we go to university and study drawing and draw daily because we want to solve a problem in the world or purely selfishly because we enjoy it and don't want a real 9-5 job?
"Charitable causes and other information design projects urgently require our expertise and help." Okay that is fine, we know that we are visual and can make work that people want to take notice of and look at, but that's only again because it sells. If it wasn't for the consumer world we wouldn't be able to make work that can be seen just as easily on these disposable items. I think its about getting work out on any product you can in order for it to be seen. Charitable - again the thought of money, this is our living at the end of the day we need to make money just like a doctor, policeman, and politician do within society.

More notes to consider:

Mr Bingo talks about his creative process - youtube. Initially what he does when he gets a brief is thinking, brainstorming, work out how to make the work, draw from reference, search the internet for pictures that might be good to draw from. - This goes against what an illustrators purpose is, he is relying on 'software' which Bruce Mau claims is wrong. Then drawing, scanning in and editing on Photoshop. "I make artwork that I like making and people pay me to do it." "For the past 11 years I've been working 95% as a commercial illustrator." Commerical. He said the outcome of his work was "to sell a product or support a magazine article or something." Doesn't seem work that has real value and making a change?
Source Interview Mr Bingo Illustrator - Youtube. "What would the title of your autobiography be?" "Fucking about for a living." "Turning silly ideas into things that make money. Making jobs out of nothing." Ethics? When asked if he could have his work displayed in any gallery or museum which would it be he could not answer the question because he said "I don't know any galleries really." Sounds like someone who is not in tune with society at all, not cultured, yet making a tidy living. Sort of contrasts the idea that as illustrators we have a responsibility.
Seventy-nine short essays on design - Michael Bierut. 'Designer puppet masters' 'skilled manipulators.' Bingo said in his interview he manipulates the client once given the brief into thinking they need work that he wants to draw himself in order to make work that stands alone on it's own as an illustration he can be proud of, so that he is never making work that he does not want to do. He is not using these manipulation skills to persuade people to give money to charity or stop bullying etc but using them to make money. He is actually adding to these problems by displaying his work on disposable products and sending out 'hate mail' to insult strangers that people have paid for.

This morning I was walking into university when a group of men were walking towards me staring directly at me wanting eye contact and I put my head down, they then whistled at me. Situations like this make me feel really uncomfortable, not being able to make direct eye contact with someone and having to put my head down. I get it at work quite a lot with young men making comments about my appearance, when I am trying to get on with my job.

Carole Rosetti
I love these illustrations because they are encouraging for women to be themselves. I especially like the one about the loose clothing because I was told I 'always wear baggy clothes' 'I should wear more fitted stuff' 'I dress like a hippy' 'I would suit something that bar girl is wearing instead of trousers all the time.' I like to dress smart, I like to look classy, in the day I might want to wear baggy pants, on an evening I might want to chill in a hoody - does this make me less of a woman because I'm not 'showing off' my figure?

I always find it interesting when people say that bisexuals and lesbians are just going through a phase, are just experimenting; like the inevitable will be that they change their mind back to men, have children and live happily ever after. Some people have such narrow views that the only way your life is complete is to marry a man and have children. Some people find happiness elsewhere, and that is their own individual happiness being on their own, with a woman, or a man.

Men being feminine

'REAL MEN' --- I hate these posts I see about 'real men' do this, what defines being a 'man' and the lad culture. I think the beard culture is huge at the minute too 'real men have beards.' I see a lot of comments about how men who struggle to grow a beard aren't real men or are 'gay.'

Real men

Beard culture

Lad culture

Men wearing make up, feminine clothes..

I feel it is becoming more sociably acceptable for men to dress how they wish and wear make up now. I am really pleased about this because they are able to be expressive. I had a friend who once wanted some concealer for his face as he claimed to have really dark circles under his eyes and was going out that night. He asked me if I would go and buy some for him so that the lady on the make up counter didn't think it was for him. I think this is a real shame.

Cop Lectures that have influenced my thinking

I didn't want to just upload my notes from the lectures I am purely posting the lectures that have really got me thinking about gender equality, human rights, and being human.
These are some of my notes about identity, gender and sexuality and subcultures :

Sketches in visual journal

Lad in the news : Dapper Laughs
Dapper laughs originally known for his social media video uploads via Instagram, Facebook and twitter videoed himself speaking to strangers making them feel rather uncomfortable by chatting them up or saying inappropriate things. He is now making a living out of being a 'lad.' I've known my friends attend nightclub events he's put on, and going to his stand ups and I can't help but think why are we encouraging this? Why are we allowing him to take our money, while in return accepting the disgusting sexism he is encouraging towards women.
Dapper laughs then had his own itv2 show 'On the pull' which should never have been allowed. It has now been axed after he sparked outrage by joking about rape. 'She's gagging for a rape' were the words he used towards a female in the show. I am glad that the UK has put a stop to this excuse of a man being allowed to air his ways for others to follow in his footsteps.

Thursday, 9 October 2014

Study Task 1

An incomplete manifesto for growth - Bruce Mau

4) Love your experiments (as you would an ugly child) Joy is the engine of growth. Exploit the liberty in casting your work as beautiful experiments, iterations, attempts, trails and errors. Take the long view and allow yourself the fun of failure every day.

14. Don't be cool. Cool is conservative fear dressed in black. Free yourself from limits of this sort.

Other manifesto's I liked:

18. Stay up late. Strange things happen when you've gone too far, been up too long, worked too hard and separated front he rest of the world.

24. Avoid software. The problem with software is that everybody has it.

25. Don't clean your desk. You might find something in the morning that you can't see tonight.

Thursday, 8 May 2014

3000 word essay

Adele Pierce
Context of Practise

Write a semiotic analysis of a series of related illustrations. As semiotic texts what sort of reality do these illustrations construct and how do they do so'?

Walt Disney has created many fairytales princesses, of which follow a certain creative structural format. This essay will evaluate how they are perceived from a feminist perspective and focus on how successful these female characters are in fulfilling their duties as role models to children. It will also explore the cultural codes of fairytales; how the female character created within fairytales follows a certain format that is recognizable to people and also the connotations and denotations behind the ‘Princess’ image. This will be done by analyzing illustrations based on these roles; the use of semiotic codes and myths within illustrations, supporting this notion of the ‘ideal’ woman.

Generally, fairytale quests involve a vulnerable young female character, for example Little Red Riding Hood lost in the woods, with a wolf hiding behind a tree ready to pounce at her or again, Cinderella sat by the fire scrubbing the floors under the orders of her wicked step-mother. These are supported by the cultural codes commonly used within fairytales to represent a weak female role that requires a savior in the form of a strong dominant male. Within these types of illustrations the Princesses are often portrayed as getting themselves into danger, for example Little Red Riding Hood is warned by her mother not to stray from the path, which can be suggested as symbolic of what is valued most in this patriarchal society: a heterosexual relationship. In order for a woman to be safe, she must follow the conventional path her mother has, to avoid being attacked by a wolf. The characters are often ‘seen and not heard’, imprisoned in towers, to protect them from all dangers. Daniel Chandler’s ‘Semiotics: The Basics’ states “The power of such myths is that they ‘go without saying’ and so appear not to need to be deciphered, interpreted or demystified.” This is true of fairytales with the employment of codes we do not question, or challenge the misguidance of the image and ideals that are offered. What we know to be a typical ‘Cinderella’ image is apparent to us by the use of codes and signs within the image so that immediately we recognize it as what we know by myth ‘complex sign-systems which generate further ideological signs’ – agreed by a social consensus.

Chandler also added 'Discourses of gender are among the ‘explanatory’ cultural frameworks which have been interpreted by some cultural semioticians as myths or mythologies.' Here, Chandler is suggesting that the myths (fairytales) provide a framework that gender roles adhere to, which imbibes children at an early age of development, of what their purpose is. Marcel Danes also explores myths within fairytales in ‘Of Cigarettes, high heels, and other interesting things – an introduction to semiotics.’ 'Folktales, legends, fairy tales, and fables are the narrative descendants of myth. Similar to myth, these do not mirror what happens: they explore reality and predict what can happen.' 'Fairytales hold a strange magical appeal over every child, no matter what age.' As children grow up reading fairy tales, they are fixated on the notion of happiness being a struggle to achieve. Happiness never comes simply in fairytales; there is always a time schedule or someone to battle against or even the idea of escapism before reaching the ultimate ‘happy ever after.’

In this illustration (fig. 1) by Arthur Rackham we see a young female clasping her hands together by the window as if waiting for someone to come and rescue her. She is dressed in rags, a code often used when representing the clothes of Cinderella. After all she is named after ‘cinders,’ implying she sat in dirt and worth nothing more than burnt-out ash. In order to enhance this filthy appearance the illustrator has used dull tones that almost look as if his brush too was not clean when applying these colors. The colors mix together to create a lot of grey tones within her skin and clothing - it certainly does not portray a strong female that takes pride in her appearance. Looking out of the window we get a sense of longing, and possibility of hope that she may be rescued from her surroundings, which appear to be most uncomfortable – the hard wooden floors against her bare feet. The illustrator is playing on the idea of the ‘damsel in distress’ and a sense of urgency to be freed from these surroundings. However; in true Cinderella style she would not be recognized dressed like this; it takes a fairy, a miracle, and magic to transform her in order to achieve the life she strives for. This miracle also comes with a time limit for added pressure on which she must convince the Prince she is worthy. Rackham portrays Cinderella as an innocent figure, her wispy hair, pure porcelain white skin, her posture and frame suggesting she is a shy, harmless character and is extremely vulnerable reflecting all signs that as a culture are recognized when visualizing Cinderella. The denotation of this image is a vulnerable female character looking out of the window in search of rescue from her surroundings. The image connotes a vulnerable female unable to fend for herself and seek her own freedom but rather relying on the aid of someone else (a male) to escape the nightmare she is living and live ‘happily ever after’. This also connotes women waiting for a chance of happiness.

‘Representation in visual culture is inevitably bound up with ideology. Representation both reveals ideological belief but, it could also be said that representation in visual culture informs and constructs our beliefs and ideas on society’ – Danesi. How we perceive the character of Cinderella is made up of all the codes throughout the years from illustrators, film, books all of these image makers that stick to the same pattern in order to portray the representation of this character so that we recognize her as an innocent, young, hard-working vulnerable female. For example, many illustrations show Cinderella sat by the fire looking miserable or scrubbing the kitchen floors. All of these codes create an ideology, which ‘shapes our understanding’ of what this character should be and this is not questioned. However, it is questioned what this character represents in a modern day society in terms of being a role model. Are we telling our children in order to achieve ‘happiness’ we need a sense of miracle or rescue? Would this bring true happiness? We never see the reality of the female role within fairytales such as divorce, adultery or other problems that could be faced in romantic life. This fulfills the definition of a myth, yet still modern society strives for the ‘ideal relationship’. Prince William and Kate Middleton for example is a real life Cinderella story. A lot of women today could only ever dream of the real life fairytale but we don’t see the complications that comes with that relationship because it is private and kept away from the public eye. After the happily ever after will be the struggle and pressure Kate has living in the public eye and adapting to life within the royal family. Kate is made to fit the representation of how we would wish a Princess to be. Furthermore, Kate was made out to be a ‘rags to riches’ figure, but she actually came from a very wealthy background with a good family and education.

A film poster from 2011 for Red Riding Hood (fig. 2) whereby Amanda Seyfried poses as the young innocent female draped in red within the middle of the dark scary woods alone, highlights how fairytale codes are still being used today. “Codes are ‘organizational systems or grids’ for the recurring elements and go into the constitution that humans make” – Marcel Danesi.
This image also includes representation. Ferdinand De Saussure drew attention to the fact that representation relies on a ‘shared cultural knowledge’ for understanding to be fulfilled. Is it not our understanding as a culture that Red Riding Hood should be seen in a red cape, in the middle of the woods, looking scared and alone and in danger? This poster ticks each of those boxes and emphasises them. This is done by adding imagery of blood splatters suggesting death. According to Danesi red connotates ‘ blood, passion, sexuality, fertility, fecundity, anger, sensuality.’ The image maker sets the scene within the snow, which suggests that Red Riding Hood is not dressed for the weather; therefore will be freezing cold emphasising her porcelain skin. White skin as Danesi would evaluate represents ‘purity, innocence, virtuous, chastity, goodness, decency.’ The background of the image is black which connates ‘evil’ at night which again adds to the danger as she is sat cradled on the floor. She is looking up to the camera so the viewer feels they are the dominant one, dangerous, looking down on her – the victim. Had this been a different camera angle and Red Riding Hood was dressed in this bloody cape looking down at us, we would feel endangered and that she is infact capable of murder and a powerful female role. Something as simple the composition here completely enhances our understanding of the character. The text ‘Believe the legend’ once again brings to light this idea of beliefs. Why do we chose to believe in fairytales? Who creates these ideologies by which the viewer are so emotionally impacted? Red Riding Hood once again in need of a strong dominant male to free her from this situation she has found herself in as she attracts danger; standing out from her surroundings in the bright red cape. This poster summarises the myth of Red Riding Hood. The basic ‘ingredients’ needed in order to make a representation of the character, with the reoccuring elements most fairytale illustrations or images have that are the predictable aspects of how Red Riding Hood should look and behave.

When looking into fairytale illustrations it appears some modern day representations of the Disney Princess (fig. 3) which plays on the idea of ‘role models’ were portrayed by using celebrities and fashion influences. For example, in 2013 one illustrator Michelle Moricci shows Disney Princesses as if they were behaving like Miley Cyrus – a female pop singer and role model for young girls today that has caused a lot of contreversy with her nudity and sexual behaviour. A complete contrast to the traditional codes used when representing the princess myth. However, it is rather humorous because it is a more realistic, modern view of women today and how women are sexualising themselves and becoming more adherent to standing out and making a statement in order to be seen. It goes back to this notion of Cinderella with the two ugly sisters doing their upmost to fit the bill - often in traditional books seen chopping off their toes just to squeeze into the glass slipper. To what extent are women willing to change for a man?

In 1970, Shulamith Firestone produced The Dialectic of Sex, one of the seminal works of second-wave feminism. In chapter seven "The Culture of Romance," Firestone asserts that Romanticism ensures women’s position in society as second-class citizens. Romanticism, she asserts, is comprised of 'Eroticism,' 'Sex-privatization' and 'The Beauty Ideal.' Romanticism combined asserts the male desire to play the gentleman (usually, by doing things the woman can do for herself like holding the door open), giving women a sense of false-flattery, encourage women to become individuals, paradoxically by doing what makes her the same as every other girl (dying hair, losing weight, getting plastic surgery) and discourage women from developing real character - thus making men appear more irreplaceable. 'The Beauty Ideal' has one specific purpose: 'it is designed to keep the majority out.' Firestone asserts that just when women begin to achieve the ideal, when they've had the plastic surgery, dyed their hair, stained their skin, the beauty ideal changes (to a naturally unattainable figure) to maintain the system. It can be argued fairytales contain codes that emphasize this notion of ‘ideal beauty’ and how women should react within society – especially towards men.

The Princess archetype imposes an ideal of beauty upon children; through the introduction of illustrations, films and books and children often admire these characters as role models. The media plays on this and we see children emulating the Princesses by buying their outfits, purchasing toy characters and recreating this ‘ideal world’ themselves. But what exactly is ‘happy ever after’? Is it the reliance that a Prince will come and save us from our tower, put a glass slipper on our foot and whisk us off into the sunset? One of the most well known fairytales, Cinderella, questions the idea of beauty. Every woman in the town was invited to a ball whereby they were made to look their best in order to impress the Prince. Why did Cinderella go through all of that effort of completely transforming herself in order to please a man? This subtly suggests that if she turned up in her usual rags, the ‘happily ever after’ ending would not have happened. Could she not be a Princess if she was just her usual self? This could potentially induce a complex in children who idolize these princesses. It also instills that anyone can look like this if they worked hard enough towards transformation, which could induce damaging behaviors such as eating disorders. It could then be argued that illustrators or any image-makers of these characters should be presenting a more positive message within their work, such as maintaining a sense of independence as a strong woman in society into these children’s stories. It is interesting to evaluate ‘ugly’ roles within fairytales too; for example the ‘ugly sisters’ in Cinderella, which sends the message that being ‘ugly’ or not beautiful is a bad trait, an evil one.

These illustrations are succesful in raising that question to society. It is asif they are purposely challenging the stereotypical view of the Disney Princess , but also it supports this notion that women have to sexualise ourselves to men for success. These illustrations go against the ideology of how the usual Disney princess is seen; it is never expected to see them dressed provocatevly and having fun. Using such bright colours enhances this play and it is a strong message being delivered about happiness as a female within society today against the relevance of fairytales.
‘ We do encourage our children’s fantasies; we tell them to paint what they want, or to invent stories, but unfed by our common fantasy heritage the folk fairytale, the child cannot invent stories on his own which help him cope with life’s problems’ Bruno Bettelheim – ‘The Uses of Enchantment’. This questions the power of fairytales as influence to children today and whether they affect them mentally or support and guide them through life and the issues they may face. It also highlights the impact that the fairytale has, and illustrators creating these images have the responsibility of how these images will be viewed and the effect they will have.

James Finn Garner’s ‘Politically Correct Bedtime stories’ is a fantastic example of how fairytales are not true to life, and how over the year’s women have become less dependent on men and gained a sense of dominance, almost to the point of role reversal. If fairytales were created today this is how they would be written. “I find your sexist remark offensive in the extreme, but I will ignore it because of your traditional status as outcast from society.” James Finn Garner creates a story whereby the woman here solves her problems with the wolf independently and finds it offensive that a male thinks he can save her. “How dare you assume that womyn and wolves can’t solve their own problems without a man’s help!” The story ends with the Grandma chopping the male’s head off; and little Red Riding hood, Grandma and the wolf coming to a housing agreement living together after feeling a ‘certain commonality of purpose’ - a much more influential message for children of today’s society.

However, it must be said that fairytales are improving equal gender roles by providing female characters with more power and dominance. For example, Walt Disney’s 2010 advertising film poster for ‘Tangled’ (fig. 4) shows a far more dominant role of women than seen in previous fairytales. It still incorporates the stereotypical Rapunzel codes of the girl’s long hair and being trapped in a tower by her wicked Step Mother role; but in terms of being freed she has just as much to offer the Prince in return of her price of freedom. There’s a sense of balance, she has something the Prince wants and bargains with him - they both need each other. In the Tangled posters we get the sense that the ‘Rapunzel’ character is the heroine. However it still includes codes that are similar to the traditional fairytale structure such as her magic being limited once her hair is chopped off she then becomes vulnerable, but it gives a real sense of power from this character and determination to succeed individually. This is feel is a far more effective lesson to be passing on in terms of folklore, tales, and stories to teach children in today’s society.

“Barthes suggests in Mythologies that ideology is a condition of false consciousness promoted through fictions.” False consciousness is not really awake thinking or real world, which is what fairytales are they are, a tale, they are not true to life – so why are we so lead by them within our life and strive to achieve the same goals as the fairy Princesses?
To conclude there seems to be an underlying logic behind the system of representation of gender. A format by which fairytales adhere to in order to plant seeds in our brains when looking at the images that we find recognizable. This is due to pre-existing cultural codes that as a society we have accepted to be true.
James Finn Garner wrote, “Red Riding Hood, however, was confident enough in her own budding sexuality that such Freudian imagery did not intimidate her.” Should this powerful approach towards being a Princess not be explored much more in order to create more of a reality and prepare children for life’s real issues? I feel as a woman that images such as this ‘Tangled’ poster for the Disney film is more relatable and influential than that of the original image of Cinderella in rags awaiting her Prince.
“Parents wish to believe that if a child sees them as Stepmother’s, witches or giants, this has nothing to do with them and how they at moments appear to the child, but is only the result of tales he has heard. These parents hope that if their child is prevented about learning of such figures, he will not see his own parents in this image.” ‘Uses of enchantment’ – Bruno Bettelheim here questions how fairytales tie into parenting skills and the scary dominant roles of women that mothers wish to not teach their children in case they view them as the same. This is an interesting approach to the effect fairy tales have on children. Bettelheim talks of other fairy tales such as Hansel and Gretel and the role of women within this - tying it to neglect. For example, the mother being ‘source of all food to the children’ and how children feel disappointment and abandonment when reading Hansel and Gretel to find they too have been betrayed by such a motherly image. “A weak father is of little use to Snow White as he was to Hansel and Gretel. The frequent appearance of such figures suggests that wife-dominated husbands are not exactly new to this world”- an interesting take on strong dominant female roles within fairytales.
‘Myths function as a ‘metaphysical knowledge system’ for explaining human origins and actions. And this system is the one we instinctively resort to even today for imparting knowledge of the world initially to children. But even in contemporary adult life, the mythic personification of natural events continues to be an instinctual strategy for making sense of things.’ – Danesi’s Understanding Media Semiotics reminding us the impact fairytales have. Illustrators produce images for a purpose, to evoke emotion and execute an interesting concept – what are fairytale illustrations trying to subconsciously tell us about the role of women?

Figure 1.