We live in a world dominated by images. Media forms like television, magazines, newspapers, advertisem*nts, and websites provide a continuous stream of images that are coded in myths of sex, age, beauty, fashion, and many other collective norms of our body politic.
Semiotic theory is a particularly insightful approach to analyzing the influence and power of these images. One relevent and key idea in semiotics is the distinction between signifiers and referents. A signifier is any communicative tool, including images, texts, or spoken words, that effectively points to an idea. The term "chair," for example, is a signifier for a particular kind of thing on which one sits, which is conveniently shaped so as to make sitting its primary use. The actual object here would be the referent, and the word "chair" would be its signifier- the word "chair" itself is not a part of the functionality or the inherent nature of the object, and there is no particular reason why the phonetic sound or written appearance of the word "chair" is matched with it. The word "chair" is only a sign, devoid of meaning until one assigns it the meaning of the referent: that thing we sit on. Our discussion of the word "thing" as a "gathering" is analagous to the gathering of referents that might be implicated in a given signifier (i.e. a stop sign is a signifier for police, government, order, safety, etc.).
The way that this sign theory comes into play with regards to the mirror is that images have the power to construct what is perceived to be real. Michel de Certeau, in his The Practice of Everyday Life, makes a compelling argument that signifiers and referents are easily conflated in a society that contains so many coherent texts. The coherence is de Certeau's key point: the power to define comes from a multiplicity of signifiers that all point to the same referent. There is only one paradigm (for the most part) for ideas like beauty or age in popular media because there is power in a coherent network of meaning and representation. De Certeau claims that it is the constant onslaught of different texts - magazines, billboards, TV - with similar signifiers for beauty, age, gender, etc. that drives the myths surrounding those norms (Certeau 188). Seeing hom*ogenous signs for beauty and age expressed in a variety and multitude of media creates the illusion that those signs are the real, empirical meanings of beauty and age. When this illusion is successfully constructed, "the assumption crumbles that an invisible immensity of Being...lies hidden behind appearances" (de Certeau 187). Instead, one prevalent image paradigm of an idea like beauty takes on the meaning of beauty itself.
This is a very striking quote that resonates profoundly with body image. Is there not an "immensity of Being" that is behind and beyond a person's appearance? Yet in this day, age, and society, people spend a great deal of energy aligning their body images (perhaps with the aid of a mirror) with what they perceive to be their inner personality and character (this is personal style in a nutshell). Intersubjectivity also informs this process - if one accepts body image as a signifier for the referent of the inner personality, then it is a fair expectation to be judged back on the same merit. Again, this relates to de Certeau's argument that this plane of interaction is highly influential because there are so many actors in it.
The next section will be devoted to different body images, and how people use mirrors to construct a visual identity (the signifier) in relation to an inner identity (the referent).
Back to Influence and Rhetoric.
Back to The Mirror project page.
FAQs
The Treachery of Images (This is Not a Pipe) is considered a Magritte masterpiece, a key Surrealist work, and an icon of modern art. A treatise on the impossibility of reconciling word, image, and object, it challenges the convention of identifying an image of an object as the thing itself.
What does the treachery of images symbolize? ›
'The Treachery of Images' cleverly highlights the gap between language and meaning. Magritte combined the words and image in such a fashion that he forces us to question the importance of the sentence and the word. "Pipe," for instance, is no more an actual pipe than a picture of a pipe can be smoked.
What is the meaning of "ceci n'est pas une pipe"? ›
Below it, Magritte painted, "Ceci n'est pas une pipe", French for "This is not a pipe". The famous pipe. How people reproached me for it! And yet, could you stuff my pipe?
Why are images treacherous in Magritte's painting The Treachery of Images? ›
The seemingly dissonant statement under what is a very clearly depicted pipe forces the viewer to confront the distinction between the representation and the thing itself. The treachery refers to the danger involved in confusing the representation with the object.
What does Ceci n'est pas mean? ›
this is not this isn't that is not it is not this is no that's not it's not this does not.
How do the treachery of images convey ideas about truth perception and reality? ›
The Treachery of Images and “The Allegory of the Cave” both convey the message that things are not always as they seem and we must examine things closely to understand what is real and true rather than just our perception.
What does Ceci n'est pas une chapeau mean? ›
In the hat, the words say “Ce N'est Pas Un Chapeau”, which means “This is not a Hat” in reference to Magritte's main points of his work.
What does the word Ceci mean? ›
Ceci ([ˈtʃeːtʃi]) is an Italian surname that literally means "chickpeas". It may also be a given name.
What does Ceci n'est pas une pomme mean? ›
It may also be referring to another artwork done by Magritte, "Ceci n'est pas une pomme," which translates to "This is not an apple." It is obviously an apple, but it isn't really an apple. It's a drawing of an apple.
Is the treachery of images postmodern? ›
In Magritte's The Treachery of Images, representation itself–a likeness in art or referent in language–is undermined and then dismantled. As one of the most famous of postmodern art pieces, the painting highlights a radical postmodern notion: that we cannot authentically differentiate reality from simulation.
It is this 'treachery of images' that, according to Magritte, clouds our perception of reality. We allow representations to superimpose themselves on material objects, and thus, we combine two separate lines of thought – reality and imagination – into one perception.
Why did René Magritte paint the false mirror? ›
The Surrealists meant these kinds of images to make viewers uneasy, to unsettle complacent attitudes about art and life. By replacing the eye's iris with a blue, cloud-filled sky in False Mirror, Magritte challenges us to question what we see and what we think we know.
What was the main focus of surrealism? ›
Surrealism aims to revolutionise human experience. It balances a rational vision of life with one that asserts the power of the unconscious and dreams. The movement's artists find magic and strange beauty in the unexpected and the uncanny, the disregarded and the unconventional.
What medium is used in the treachery of images? ›
The Treachery of Images belongs to a series of word-image paintings by Magritte from the late 1920s. He combined images and text in a style suggested both by children''s books, and by Magritte''s early career in advertising.
