In what ways can an image's context change over time?

Post-Modernism is a way of thinking that proposes that the meaning of a work of art, media
message is not fixed and in fact can have multiple meanings, this is known as polysemy.
"The meaning of each image are multiple(...)"
Sturken, M. Cartwright, L. Practices of Looking, p25.
There are the basic levels of meaning, the denotative and the conotative. In simple terms, the
denotative is what that image is and the conotative is what is the deeper meaning of the image,
and this is often decided through interpretation
"This process of interpretation is derived from semiotics(...)”
Sturken, M. Cartwright, L. Practices of Looking, p28.
Barthes' concept, based on Saussure: every image has a sign. The signifier i.e. the sound, and the
signified which is the thing that the sound makes you think of, together to form the sign (Sturken
and Cartwright, 2001, p.29.) the meaning is what is signified.

The main argument for this essay is the depiction of American presidents, I must show how they
were depicted before their images and media appearances started to get remixed and repurposed.
The President of the United States is supposed to be the figurehead of American societal values.
Someone to be looked towards in times of crisis to resolve the situation effectively. This can
certainly be said of presidents such as John F. Kennedy, whose quick and decisive measures
during the Cuban Missile Crisis helped avert a possible nuclear holocaust. Antonio Gramsci offers
the theory of Hegemony. His theory is as follows, dominant ideologies kept control through
hegemony, where values became common sense. (Sturken and Cartwright, 2001, p54.)
Hegemonic views could certainly be applied to Kennedy, but Presidents that lacked in their
leadership qualities or cleverness such as George Bush would become subjects of ridicule and
criticism through remixing and repurposing.

Moving from the idea of hegemony in cultural society, Stuart Hall and his theories of audience
readings. He develops hegemony but relates it to audience theory. Instead of hegemonic/dominant
reading he theorises that an audience may take any of three potential positions when it comes to
“reading” an image. As I mentioned, there is the dominant hegemonic:
“(...) and receive the dominant message of an image or text (...) in an unquestioning
manner”
Sturken, M. Cartwright, L. Practices of Looking, p57
Negotiating the meaning of an image to find a different interpretation of the image and finally an
oppositional reading, in which the reader or viewer does not accept the meaning of an image by
either disagreeing or rejecting it. There is also the option of polysemy, the meaning of an image is
multiple and can affect viewers in differently, to some it is humorous to others insulting.
Going back to what I mentioned earlier, the US presidents have lost the hegemonic idea that they
represent America at it's most positive. This can be related to Jean-Francois Lyotard and his
theories on post-modernism relating to the “grand narrative.” Now a brief explanation of the grand
narrative, this is an aspect of modernism. The idea that there are these “narratives” such as
religion or science that brings the world together. Lyotard criticises the grand narrative in his book
The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, believing that because of advancement, the
grand narratives are losing what makes them function i.e. “the great hero” (Lyotard, 1979.) In this
instance, it is the president the is the great hero and because of blunders, or errors of judgement
during their term i.e. Nixon and Watergate, Bush and Iraq etc. they lose their status as the
hegemonic representative of America.

Engel's theory, accredited to Marx of the false consciousness has some relevance. The Cold War
was a period of mutual distrust and rivalry between the communist Soviet Union and the capitalist
United States. The interpretation of an image of a political power can differ depending not only on
personal opinion, but global and social values as well. Who is it that determines these social
values? Those in power, and this is where the false consciousness comes in. The concept is very
simple:
“(...) misrepresentation of dominant social relations in the consciousness of
subordinate classes.”
Little, D. “False Consciousness,” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences
2008.
How would the Kremlin wish for their social classes to view their rivals the United States, and by
extension, the president? As capitalist pigs, reinforced through propaganda, through possible
repurposing of images perhaps?

Meaning is constructed by inclusion, by exclusion, by context and by intention, but it is not fixed, it
is open to interpretation through semiology which allows us to interpret this meaning in a
structuralist way. The meaning of an image is often open to manipulation, in order to change the
original message and collapse its context, for critical purposes but equally as often, manipulating
an image to make a joke or have fun. For example, I took an image of the Lincoln Memorial Statue,
juxtaposed with the America flag to which I “painted” signs that would make you think of The Joker
from Batman. My initial intention was to have fun, the result is the banner for my blog pages.
However, other's may see this as a criticism of American social values. Here I introduce the ways
of a meaning changing due to context, reappropriation or repurposing and remixing.