On page 112 of Practices of Looking (Chapter 3, "Modernity: Spectatorship, Power and Knowledge"), Lisa Cartwright & Marita Sturken discuss a GUESS advertisment from the 1990s [Figure 3.10].
This one:
[download PDF file:Download Guess]
They write:
"In this Guess fashion ad, the implied locale of a rice paddy and the use of an Asian model give ordinary women's clothing a peasant quality. Here the hats worn typically by workers in rice paddies in order to shield their faces from the sun are recorded as signifiers of exoticism. We are not intended to think that these women are actually performing the labor of working in the rice paddies; rather, the paddy offers an exotic location in which highly paid models and expensive clothing can be put on display" (112)
Although this interpretation seems to make sense, it actually misses the point by a mile. In fact, the authors did not realize that the advertisers were actually referencing a classic Italian film from the Neorealism era, Riso Amaro (Bitter Rice, 1949). The ad both emulates and replicates the poses and attire of the actresses, Silvana Mangano in primis. The intended setting is the Po Valley, not China.
Should the ad be interpreted as an homage? is it a "remix"? Well, the ad is many different things at once. But what really matters here is that by ignoring the "original source" alluded to/emulated by the ad, the scholars' exegesis is weakened, if not compromised.
Here's a short, but poignant review of Riso Amaro:
"This tale of city women who come to work in the rice fields of the Po Valley, is remembered mostly for the voluptuous Mangano in thigh-revealing shorts and torn nylons, her seductive head held high, standing in a rice paddy. The huge success of the steamy film and the 19-year-old actress, who married producer De Laurentiis the same year, paved the way for other Italian sexpots to join the international scene. Ostensibly a neo-realist exposé of the exploitation of women workers, the film, in reality, only exposes Mangano and exploits the subject." (Film 4)
Cartwright & Sturken's reading of the Guess ad is what Italian semiotician Umberto Eco would define "anaberrant interpretation" - or "aberrant decoding", "aberrant reading" - which indicates a text which has been decoded by means of a different code from that used to encode it. You can find additionally information about the notion of 'aberrant reading" here. (I recommend this book as well)
Aberrant (adj)
- straying from the right or normal way
- deviating from the usual or natural type; atypical
Aberration (noun)
- the fact or an instance of deviating or being aberrant especially from a moral standard or normal state
- failure of a mirror, refracting surface, or lens to produce exact point-to-point correspondence between an object and its image
- unsoundness or disorder of the mind
- a small periodic change of apparent position in celestial bodies due to the combined effect of the motion of light and the motion of the observer
- an aberrant individual
Incidentally, in an endless game of floating signifiers and intertextuality on steroids, famed photographer Douglas Kirkland has recently paid homage to Riso Amaro and Italian classic cinema by replacing the original models with contemporary actresses and actors.
You can see the result on his website. Here's an example:
Actress Luisa Ranieri poses as Silvana Mangano in Kirkland's homage:
Disclaimer: This is not intended as a criticism of Practices of Looking, one of the most convincing introductory books on Visual Culture - I have used it in my classes for several years. My point is that there are countless layers of meaning in the images that we consume on a daily basis and, after the postmodern turn, intertextuality has become the standard way of encoding. Therefore, the process of decoding should not be taken lightly. Tranchant, apodictic interpretations have become extremely vulnerable.
Comments