Wednesday, September 25, 2013

A Culture Built on Capital


In their chapter “Viewers Make Meaning,” Sturken and Cartwright decipher how audiences uniquely analyze images they see.  They determine that images interpellate viewers and of noteworthiness is how audiences interpellate, defined as “to interrupt a procedure in order to question someone or something formally,” (50).  We, as viewers, are interpellated when viewing a commercial, advertisement, piece of artwork, or billboard.  We are forced to wonder what the purpose of the image is, how it got there, and what it should mean to us.    

Two things that all viewer interpretations involve are aesthetics and taste (56).  Aesthetics rely on one’s analysis of an image’s style or beauty, while taste is a cultural reference.  Taste can be varied among viewers depending upon one’s class, cultural background, or education.  The authors allude to this as a matter of “cultural capital” (60).  This creates a divide between highbrow cultures and lowbrow cultures.  For example, look at Andy Warhol’s “Campbell’s Soup Cans.”



The Warhol print gained notoriety among ordinary people as his art sought to shed a positive light on the novelties of common things.  In my eyes, “Campbell’s Soup Cans” represent a modern, universal message for those of a different societal class than previous artists had sought after.  The Product Marketing Manager even wrote Warhol a note expressing his gratitude and appreciation for the artist along with a case of Tomato Soup!  People could finally relate to this kind of artwork, in a way that only highbrow viewers could previously to artists such as Monet and Van Gogh.  Warhol gave cultural significance to an ordinary class of people that formerly could only dream to associate with those of higher culture!

As social subjects of culture, we are forced to view images in daily life and translate their meanings.  How do images interpellate viewers?  Where is the line drawn between interpellating the viewer and manipulating the viewer? Or are they one in the same?  How else can societal class alter how we view images?

No comments:

Post a Comment