Skip navigation

  • Reflexivity (Self- consciousness)

Day is aware that she is making a critical comment about the themes that her work negates, however I don’t think there is much reflexivity due to the minimal quotation. The photo isn’t directly quoting a particular media image, yet contains influence of rebellious music, and other themes of the 90s. I think it is very reflexive in the sense of reflecting the 80s disregarding, ‘do it for a laugh’ influence that Day mentions and was influenced by.

  • Alteration (How much has been changed)

I don’t think much has been changed within today’s context. The sort of imagery used by Days doesn’t seem far from what I have grown accustomed, which I will refer back to later in the blog. By the standard of the fashion photography which I looked at before however, a lot has been changed, from the ‘phony poses’ to the extravagant fashion and hyper-sexualized beauty and imagery used at the time. The overall stylistic feel, apparently more raw and unclean is altered in the image, along with the notion of beauty held within the conception of a fashion image.

  • Explicitness (How obvious is it)

I wouldn’t say that the intetextual references are that explicit in Day’s photo here. When I initially looked at the image I wouldn’t have been able to recognise directly Day’s intentions and the alteration and hypotextuality of the fashion image. I suppose this may be the case with the photo in question, such anti-glamorous photos of Kate Moss would have perhaps been more explicitly intertextual in how famous and ever-present in the media.

  • Criticallity to Comprehension (How much pre-cultural knowledge is required)

You have to have quite alot of knowledge of cultural media, in that you need to have some references to fashion imagery to understand the extent to which the photo is hypoterxtualised. This is very critical in Day’s intention, and rests as the main premise. Pre-existing knowledge of other themes related within fashion is also critical to comprehension like notions of perfect beauty, glamour and wealth.

  • Scale of Adoption (How much)

The relation to fashion media has been some what adopted into the photo as so much in with the model, however, Day’s photo dresses down the fashion as an obvious reduction in the scale of adoption. However she adopts the critical nature of some music as explored in a previous post. The criticality of some of these songs reoccurs in Day’s work on a large scale of adoption.

  • Structural Unboundedness (How much it is tied to a larger structure)

The photo is tied quite strongly to fashion as that is the context in which it develops meaning. However, without perceiving it in this way, it can be seen as a domestic, or social documentative photograph. It is unbound in that sense, as well a having qualities of a portrait shot also.

I think the intertextual degrees could be enriched by trying to find similar imagery to that of Days’ Georgina, Brixton.

References:

  • Chandler, D (2002) Semiotics: The Basics Routledge
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: