Big Picture B

Week 3-4: Unit Learning Outcomes (ULO): At the end of the unit, you are expected to:
a. Analyze a visual art using different approaches.

Big Picture in Focus: ULOa. Analyze a visual art using different approaches.

Metalanguage

• Visual Analysis - A visual analysis addresses an artwork’s formal elements—

visual attributes such as color, line, texture, and size. A visual analysis may
also include historical context or interpretations of meaning.
• Artwork Criticism- Art criticism is the discussion or evaluation of visual art. Art
critics usually criticize art in the context of aesthetics or the theory of beauty.

• Approach- A way of dealing with something.

• Semiotic- Semiotics is the study of sign process, which is any form of activity,
conduct, or any process that involves signs, including the production of
meaning. A sign is anything that communicates a meaning, that is not the sign
itself, to the interpreter of the sign.
• Context-context refers to those objects or entities which surround a focal even.

• Image-An image is an artifact that depicts visual perception, such as a

photograph or other two-dimensional picture, that resembles a subject—
usually a physical object—and thus provides a depiction of it. In the context of
signal processing, an image is a distributed amplitude of color.

• Aesthetic-A branch of philosophy that deals with the nature of beauty and
taste, as well as the philosophy of art. It examines subjective and sensori-
emotional values, or sometimes called judgments of sentiment and taste.
• Subject Matter- The term subjects in art refers to the main idea that is
represented in the artwork. The subject in art is basically the essence of the
piece.

Essential Knowledge

THE FOUR PLANES OF ANALYSIS

1. The Basic Semiotic Plane

 Semiotics is the study of "signs"--here the work of art is the iconic or pictorial sign.
A sign consists of a "signifier" or its material/physical aspect and its "signified" or non-
material aspect as concept and value. Related to these is the "referent" or object as it
exists in the real world. A visual work. A visual work, whether it be a two-dimensional
pictorial space or a three-dimensional body, is an embodiment of signs in which all
physical or material marks and traces, elements, figures, notations are signifiers which
bear a semantic or meaning-conveying potential and which in relation to each other
convey concepts and values which are their signifieds. Their semantic potential is realized
in the analysis or reading of the integral work.

The basic semiotic plane covers the elements and the general technical and
physical aspects of the work with their semantic (meaning-conveying potential). It
includes:

1. The visual elements and how they are used: line value, color, texture, shape,
composition in space, movement. Each element has a meaning-conveying potential
which is realized, confirmed, and verified in relation to the other elements which form the
text of the work. While the elements usually reinforce one another, there can also exist
contrasting or contradictory relationships which may be part of the meaning of a work.
The elements and all material features are thus to be viewed in a highly relational manner
and not isolated or compartmentalized.

2. The choice of medium and technique. In contemporary art, medium enters more and
more into the meaning of the work. While the European academies or salons of the
nineteenth century decreed the choice of medium, today the artist exercises free choice
in this respect, a choice determined less by its availability as by its semantic potential.
For instance, handmade paper with its organic allure, irregularities of texture, and uneven
edges is favored by a number of artists because it bears significations conveying the
uniquely personal, human, and intimate, in contrast to mass-produced standard paper.
Technique, of course, goes hand in hand with the nature of the medium. Likewise, there
are techniques which valorize the values of spontaneity and play of chance and accident,
while there are those whch emphasize order and control.

3. The format of the work. The very format of the work participates in its meaning. Again,
in contemporary art, format is no longer purely conventional but becomes laden with
meaning. For instance, the choice of a square canvas is no longer arbitrary but enters
into the meaning of the work as a symbolic element, the square signifying mathematical
order and precision.

4. Other physical properties and marks of the work. Notations, traces, textural features,
marks, whether random or intentional, are part of the significations of the work.
2. The Iconic Plane or The Image Itself
This is still part of the semiotic approach since it is still based on the signifier-
signified relationship. But here it is not that material elements of the work that are dealt
with as in the basic semiotic plane, but this has to do with the particular features, aspects,
and qualities of the image which are the signifiers. The image is regarded as an "iconic
sign" which means, beyond its narrow associations with religious images in the Byzantine
style, that it is a unique sign with a unique, particular and highly nuanced meaning, as
different from a conventional sign such as a traffic or street sign which has a single literal
meaning.
The iconic plane includes the choice of the subject which may bear social and
political implications. An example in art history is the French realist artist Gustave
Courbet's choice of workers and ordinary people in his paintings, instead of the Olympian
gods and goddesses or heroes from Greek and Roman antiquity that were the staple of
classical and academic art up to the nineteenth century. We can ask the question: Is the
subject meaningful in terms of the socio-cultural context, does it reflect or have a bearing
on the values and ideologies arising in a particular place and time?
Also part of the iconic plane is the positioning of the figure or figures, whether
frontal, in profile, three-fourths, etc. and the significations that arise from these different
presentations. Does the painting show strong central focusing with the principal figure
occupying the center space or is it decentered and the painting asymmetrical in
composition? How do these presentations contribute to different meanings? Does the
subject or subjects have a formal or a casual air? How does one describe the central
figure's stance: poised, relaxed, indifferent, provocative, or aloof? How much importance
is given to psychological insight into character? to costume and accessories? to the
setting, natural, social or domestic? What is the relative scaling of the figures from large
to small? What bearing does this have to the meaning of the work?
Luna's Tampuhan brings to the fore the artist's sensitivity to body language. How do the
postures of the man and the woman convey their emotional attitudes?
In portraits, where is the gaze of the subject directed? This is important not only in
defining the relationship of subject and viewer but also in describing pictorial space.
Degas' painting Woman with Chrysanthemums shows a middle-aged woman beside a
large vase of flowers. More importantly, her intense and scheming look projects an
imaginary line to a figure or figures that are the objects of her gaze outside the pictorial
field of the painting into an implied open and expanded space. This work deconstructs
the classical conventions of portraiture.
Is there cropping of the figure or figures? What is the significance of the kind of
cropping used? Some kinds of cropping are intended to create a random, arbitrary effect
as against the deliberate and controlled. Other kinds isolate a segment of the subject,
such as the hand or the feet, in order to draw attention to its physical qualities--when a
part stands for the whole, a peasant's bare feet can tell us about an entire life of labor and
exploitation. Some artists use cropping as a device to imply the extension of the figure
into the viewer's space.
Here one also takes into account the relationship of the figures to one another,
whether massed, isolated, or juxtaposed in terms of affinity or constrast. A painting may
expand or multiply its space by having not just one integral image but several sets of
images in montage form, from the same or different times and places. These may occur
in temporal sequence to constitute a narrative or may take the form of simultaneous facets
or aspects of reality. Serial images which show an image multiplied many times, as in
Andy Warhol's Marilyn Monroe or Campbell Soup Cans, convey significations arising
from the blatant consumerism of the advanced capitalist societies of the First World.
The style of figuration is an important part of the iconic plane. The figurative style
is not mere caprice, passing fashion, or the artist's personal ecriture; beyond these, it
implies a particular re-presentation or interpretation of the world, a world view, if not
ideology. Classical figuration basically follows the proportion of 7 1/2 to 8 heads to the
entire figure in its pursuit of ideal form, as in a formal studio portrait with the subject
enhanced by make-up, all imperfections concealed. Realist figuration is based on the
keen observation of people, nature, and society in the concern for truth of representation,
thus creating true portraits of individuals or exposing the poverty and squalor that arise
from social inequities. Impressionist figuration is fluid and informal, often catching the
subject unawares like a candid camera. Expressionist figuration follows emotional
impulses and drives, thus often involving distortion that comes from strong emotion.
However, the viewer should not be too anxious to find precise stylistic labels, for
contemporary art has seen the development of highly original styles that have gone far
beyod the School of Paris. It is important to be sensitive to the meaning-conveying
potential of highly individual styles. In the basic semiotic plane which deals with the
material aspect of the work and in the iconic plane which deals with the features of the
image itself, one can see that as the signifier cannot be separated from the signified,
concrete fact or material data cannot be divorced from value; in other words, fact is value-
laden and value or ideological meaning is derived from material fact.
3. The Contextual Plane
Here one proceeds from the basic semiotic and iconic planes and the knowledge
and insights one has gained from these into the social and historical context of the work
of art. Resituating the work in its context will bring out the full meaning of the work in terms
of its human and social implications. The viewer draws out the dialogic relationship of art
and society. Art sources its energy and vitality from its social context and returns to it as
a cognitive force and catalyst for change. If one does not view the work in relation to its
context, but chooses to confine analysis to the internal structure of the work, one truncates
its meaning by refusing to follow the trajectories of the work into the larger reality that
surrounds it. One prevents the work from reverberating in the real world.
As has been said earlier, the meaning of a work is a complex that involves
concepts, values, emotions, attitudes, atmospheres, sensory experiences that arise from
the three planes. The experience of a work cannot be reduced or paraphrased to a
statement, such as a moral lesson or message, but is a total experience involving the
faculties of the whole person--not just his eyes or his senses, but his mind and emotions
as well. The work of art has its horizon of meaning which is narrower or larger depending
on the degree of cultural literacy, cultural breadth, art exposure and training, and
intellectual and emotional maturity of the viewer. Art involves cognition or learning; it is
an important way of learning about people, life, and society.
A broad knowledge of history and the economic, political and cultural conditions,
past and present, of a society is called upon in the contextual plane. With this comes a
knowledge of national and world art and literatures, mythologies, philosophies, and
different cultures and world views. The work of art may contain references and allusions,
direct or indirect, to historical figures and events, as well as to religious, literary, and
philosophical ideas and values which are part of the meaning of the work.
The different symbolic systems which are culture-bound also come into play.
Although we have been strongly influenced by western symbolic systems, we have to
move towards a greater awareness of our many indigenous and Asian/Southeast Asian,
Malay animist and Islamic symbolic systems which must be given even greater value for
they are part of our social context. These systems may have to do with color, shape,
design, as well as cultural symbols associated with the belief systems of the different
ethnic groups. Figures may also bear rich and distinct intellectual and emotional
associations built around them during the history of a group.
The contextual plane likewise situates the work in the personal and social
circumstances of its production. The work may contain allusions to personal or public
events, conditions, stages, as well as influences, such as persons and literary texts, that
have been particularly meaningful to the artist. Themes and sub-themes may be derived
from biographical experiences significant to the artist and biographical data may play an
important part in understanding the work and its view of reality.
4. The Axiological or Evaluative Plane
The axiological plane has to do with analyzing the values of a work. After the
understanding of the work is the difficult task of evaluating it. Often, it is facile to say that
evaluation involves the two aspects of form and content. But this division is theoretically
conservative because the two are conceptually separated. It is semiotic analysis involving
the basic semiotic plane, the iconic plane and the contextual plane that shows how
meaning is produced through the interrelationship of the signifiers (material features) and
signified (concepts, values) in the unique pictorial sign that is the work of art. At all points,
meaning is anchored in material form. Again, empirical, physical fact is value-laden, and
value ensues from material fact. Thus, the first consideration in evaluating would be to
what degree the material basis of the work conveys meaning or intellectual/emotional
contents.
. For all visual forms, whether paintings, prints, posters, illustrations, cartoons, and
comics have their standards of technical excellence to which a work may be on par or
below par. Understanding and evaluating the technical side of the work requires a
familiarity with and sensitivity to the properties of medium. Thus, the viewer/critic should
devote time to researching on and observing art-making, even doing exercises of his or
her own. At the same time, one makes allowance for the transgressing of conventional
processes and norms in the quest for new creative and expressive resources.
As has been stated, the meaning of a work is a complex of concepts, values, and
feelings which derive from reality and have a bearing on it. Because of this, the evaluation
of a work necessarily includes the analysis and examination of its axiological content
constituted by values which become fully articulated on the contextual plane although
these had already been shaping on the basic semiotic and iconic planes. And since values
are expressed in the work which holds a dialogic relationship with reality, the assessment
of these values is a necessary part of critical evaluation. It then becomes possible that
the values of the artist and the viewer do not quite coincide or may even be contradictory.

ART CRITICISM: FOUR PRINCIPAL APPROACHES

Every work of art, such as a poem, a novel, an essay, a play, a musical piece, a
painting, etc., has four basic relationships: 1. the subject matter 2. the artist 3. the
audience and 4. its own form.

These four relationships of a work of art are the bases for the four principal
approaches to art criticism and appreciation. These four approaches are:

1. mimetic (based on the subject matter)

2. expressive (based on the artist)
3. pragmatic (based on the audience)
4. aesthetic or formal (based on the form)

1. Subject Matter

“Art is an imitation of an imitation of reality…”

Plato, Greek philosopher
“Art is a reflection or a mirror of reality.”
Aristotle, Greek philosopher

With respect to subject matter, art is an imitation, depiction or representation of

some aspect of nature or life. That which is imitated, depicted or represented in art is its
subject matter.

Anything in the universe may serve as the subject of art: aspects of nature such
as the sea, the sky, fields, forests, mountains, animals, etc., (often depicted in paintings),
human concerns in the realm of the experience, action and deed (as recounted in fiction,
narrative poetry and the drama), and emotions and moods (lyric poetry) and ideas (the
essay), spatial forms (sculpture and architecture), tonal forms (music) and plastic forms
in motion in space and time (dance).

According to subject matter, art may be classified into two types:

1) Representational or Objective Art portrays or depicts something other than its

own form. Examples are Venus de Milo, Da Vinci’s Monalisa, Prokofiev’s Peter and the
Wolf, Tchaikovsky’s ballet Swan Lake. Literature is principally representational.

2) Non-representational or Non-objective Art represents nothing except its own

form. Examples: the Pyramids of Egypt, Mondrian’s non-figurative paintings, the
symphonies of Mozart. Among the major arts, architecture is most nearly always non-
objective. In non-objective art, subject matter and form are one: the form is the subject.

The concept of art as imitation may be traced back to two Greek philosophers,
Plato and Aristotle. Plato, the idealist, believes that art is far removed from reality which
exists in the realm of Ideals or Universals, of which our world is but an imperfect imitation,
and art is, in turn, only an imitation of our world. He places art on the same level as
shadows and reflections of things on water – all these being mere illusions of illusions of
reality. Aristotle, an empiricist, rejected the belief in the realm of Ideals. He taught that
reality exists right in our own world, around us and within us as perceived by our senses.
Art is “a mirror of reality” and therefore brings us in contact with it.

The approach to art criticism through the subject matter is called mimetic (derived from
the Greek word mimesis, meaning imitation.) The mimetic approach stresses the
importance of subject matter or content in art. According to this approach, the merit of a
work of art lies in its subject; the beauty of the subject and its significance are the basis
for aesthetic judgment. This approach has been discredited by modern critics who assert
that the aesthetic quality of a work of art depends not so much on what is depicted (the
subject) as on how it is depicted (the form).

To modern critics, therefore, a poem in praise of the splendor of God is not

necessarily beautiful than another poem expressing a lover’s complaint about the
horrible smell coming from his lady’s armpits, and a painting depicting a lovely woman
by the sea does not necessarily have greater aesthetic merit than another painting
depicting a drunken old man sprawled beside a huge pile of garbage. What we should
appreciate is not the subject but the manner of presentation of the subject

2. The Artist, Writer, or Creator

“He who touches this book, touches the man.”

Walt Whitman, an American poet
“Leaves of Grass”

From the point of view of the artist (poet, essayist, fiction writer, dramatist, composer,
painter, sculptor or architect), art is a means of expression, a medium for communicating
an idea, an emotion or some other human experience, an impression of life, a vision of
beauty. And because the artist puts something of himself into his art, it becomes an
extension of himself, an objectification of some aspect of his personality. Our experience
of a work of art, therefore, brings us in contact with the personality of the artist. The
individuality of the creator is revealed to us through his creation. However, the degree to
which the artist has revealed himself varies from one form of art to another, from one
particular work of art to another.

The expressive approach to art criticism stresses the relationship of the artwork to its
creator. In this approach, the artist himself becomes the major element generating both
the artistic product and the norms by which the work is to be judged. Interpreting art in
the light of the knowledge that we have about the artist has some degree of validity: it is
an admitted fact that something about the artist, his life-history, his philosophy and beliefs,
his character, certain circumstances in his life which may have influenced the creation of
the artwork in question, his background, the era during which he lived, and other pertinent
information places us in a better position to interpret and evaluate his work. While the
possession of such knowledge certainly enhances our appreciation, modern critics assert
that it is unnecessary. They question the validity of the expressive approach and insist
that an artwork be judged according to its intrinsic qualities and merits and in judging its
aesthetic value, we must not take into account its relationship to its creator.

Moreover, in passing judgment on the aesthetic merit of an artwork, we must not be

influenced by our personal regard for its creator or his reputation. Hence, we should
appreciate a symphony by Mozart, not because this composer is one of the most delightful
and admirable personalities in the world of music, but because that symphony has certain
aesthetic qualities which make it worthy of appreciation for its own sake, regardless of
who composed it or what sort of man he was. Richard Wagner, another composer, was
an extremely disagreeable person – selfish, conceited, arrogant – but the fact remains
that his music is glorious!

3. Audience or Readers

“Literature, to be of importance, must be simple and direct and must have a clear moral
purpose…”
Leo Tolstoy, Russian novelist and short story writer
“The purpose of literature is to teach, to moralize, to instruct…”
George Bernard Shaw, Anglo-Irish wit and playwright

From the viewpoint of the audience (readers in the case of literature, viewers in
the case of the visual arts, and listeners in the case of music), art is experience; for what
is a poem unless one can read it; what is a painting unless one can see it, and what is a
sonata unless one can hear it? Art always has an audience, even if this audience is none
other than the artist himself.

One aspect of art, which is of importance to the audience, is its value, function or
significance. Aside from its essential value (aesthetic), art may have secondary values:
religious, philosophical, moral, historical, political, social, scientific, commercial,
sentimental, practical, etc.

The approach to art criticism, which emphasizes the value and importance of art
to its audience, is known as the pragmatic approach.

Pragmatic critics attach little importance to the aesthetic value and instead judge
art according to how useful it is to the audience. For instance, they are partial to artworks
that have moral value – that aim to teach, to instruct, to ennoble, or to mold the moral
character of the audience (this view may be traced back to the Romans, Horace, and
Cicero), or else they have preference for those for those objects of art that are useful or
have practical value. Marxist-Leninist-Maoist critics are classified as pragmatic because
they assert that the role of art in the socialist order is to contribute to the fulfillment of the
objectives of the state, to serve as a vehicle for propaganda in the people’s struggle
against imperialism, etc. Again, modern critics reject the pragmatic approach because
they consider all the values of art, aside from the aesthetic value, as merely secondary,
therefore incidental, non-essential.

It is the prevailing view in the field of art criticism that the merits of art are found in
its own form and that these merits are there regardless of whether they are grasped and
appreciated as such by the audience or not; only an enlightened audience can appreciate
great art. Pragmatists attack this view on the ground that it is “elitist”—that it confines art
to the enjoyment of the favored few and shuts out the great masses of people who are
not “enlightened”. The Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy, a pragmatist maintains that a work
of art attains more greatness the more it gives moral upliftment and pleasure to the
greatest number of people.

Modern critics assert that the aesthetic judgment of the masses is far from reliable,
the masses being for the most part uneducated, ignorant; that the greatness of a work of
art does not depend on, and cannot be measured by, its popularity with the people; that
a gaudy painting of Mayon Volcano from a shop on Mabini Street is not necessarily
greater than an abstraction by Picasso simply because it is understood and appreciated
by a greater number of people, or that My Way by Frank Sinatra is superior to Mozart’s
Symphony No. 40 for the same reason.
 4. Form

“There are no moral or immoral books; they are either well-written or badly written.”
Oscar Wilde, Anglo-Irish wit and playwright
Preface to his book, Picture of Dorian Gray

With respect to form (the manner of imitation, how the subject matter is handled
and presented), art is a composition, a whole consisting of various parts or elements; the
selection, organization, and integration of these elements according to certain formal
principles and employing certain techniques constitute that which we call the form of art.
Hence, in poetry, the organization of such expressive elements as imagery, figures of
speech, tone, movement, symbols, sound values of words, meter, rhyme, etc., using
language as medium, creates poetic form. In music, the integration of such expressive
elements as rhythm, melody harmony, tempo, dynamics, and timbre, using tone as
medium and following the basic principles of organization – repetition, variation and
contrast – results in the creation of musical form. A film in achieving its objective to tell a
story (the subject matter), employs and combines many elements: screenplay, acting,
direction, cinematography, pacing, editing, set design, background music, costuming,
make-up, casting, etc. How the story is presented in terms of these elements constitutes
cinematic form.

Modern critics, advocating the formal and aesthetic approach to art criticism, stress
the importance of form in a work or art. They uphold the motto, “Art for art’s sake,” which
is attributed to the English playwright, Oscar Wilde. This view seeks to liberate art from
the chains of morality, religion, political propaganda, social, reform, etc., and sets up art
as something worthy of appreciation for its own sake. The formal approach considers the
form as the basis of aesthetic judgment and other considerations are secondary. This
approach requires that the audience be knowledgeable, which is the reason why
pragmatists charge that it encourages snobbery and elitism. Analyzing the form of a
painting (or any work of art for that matter) is an intellectual undertaking that employs a
systematic method to arrive at aesthetic judgment.

Every work of art involves an element of choice; certain possibilities have been
employed; others have been rejected. It is essential to consider alternatives to see what
these choices are and why they occur. One may begin by considering the physical
properties – size, shape and medium – of the work of art. How do these affect its
immediate personality as an object? One can then explore the more complex qualities of
the work. For the sake of convenience, try to isolate factors, but keep in mind that they
have an organic or functional relation to other aspects and to the whole.

Self-Help: You can also refer to the sources below to help you
further understand the lesson:

Guillermo, Allice. “The Four Planes of Art Analysis.” 15 June

2018,http://asymptotik.net/artweb/.reading_the_image_3.html
“Four Basic Relationships of a Work of Art (Approaches).” PinoySandbox,www.
Pinoysandbox.com/midterm/four-basic-relationships-of-a-work-of-art-approaches/

Let’s Check

Activity 1. Analyze each photograph/painting using the Four Planes of Analysis.

Semiotic Plane:

Iconic Plane:

Contextual Plane:

Evaluative Plane:
Semiotic Plane:

Iconic Plane:

Contextual Plane:

Evaluative Plane:

Let’s Analyze

Interpret the images. Choose an approach to justify your interpretation.

In a Nutshell

Knowledge Inventory. List down all the things your learned from this unit.

1.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________

2.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________

3.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________

4.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________

5.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________

Question & Answer (Q&A)

You are free to list down all the emerging questions or issues in the provided spaces
below. These questions or concerns may also be raised in the LMS or other modes. You
may answer these questions on your own after clarification. The Q&A portion helps in the
review of concepts and essential knowledge.

Questions Answers
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Keywords Index

• Basic Semiotic • Contextual • Principles

• Iconic • Evaluative • Approaches