Semiotic Film Theory

D. Semiotic Film Theory

Semiotic film theory is a theory under the umbrella of film theory which is used to analyze film since film contains many signs which have deeper meaning behind delivered by its filmmakers. Semiotic film theory enables spectators of movies to think what has previously been unthinkable.

Before treading on the range of film, the science of contemporary semiology or semiotics broke fresh ground in the scope of language and it was initiated by the Swiss linguist, Ferdinand de Saussure.

Saussure has stated that semiology or semiotic is “a science that studies the life of signs within society” (Stam, 1992, p. 4). This science is used to show “what constitutes sign and what laws govern them” (ibid). Saussure has defined ‘sign’ as the union of the ‘signifier’, a form which signifies, and the ‘signified’, an idea signified (ibid, p. 8). According to Saussure, sign, the relation between signifier and signified, is arbitrary (as cited in Storey, 1996, p. 55). For example, the word ‘clock’ can produce different kind of sign in every person’s mind. Everyone has her/his own image of clock in her mind because everyone has her/his own mindset about clock. However, what is imagined by the person who hears the word ‘clock’ remains the image of clock, not the image of door, table, chair, or other things. It is because there is a convention in the society of which the people speak English that the word ‘clock’ refers to a device used by people to indicate time, whatever the shape, as long as it is not to be used in wrist as English has the word ‘watch’ to call it.

In his book, Piliang has stated that the relation between the signifier and the signified is not constructed naturally (2003, p. 261). It is constructed based on convention (ibid). Therefore, basically the signifier opens many chances for various signified or meaning (ibid). This is what is meant ‘arbitrary’ by Saussure.

In the development of modern semiotics, Roland Barthes continued the science and he based his theory on Saussure’s semiology. Roland Barthes developed Saussure’s scheme that signifier + signified = sign and added to it a second level of signification. Barthes called it two semiological systems (Barthes,

1999, p. 115). In this scheme, there are two stages of signification which are denotation stage and connotation stage.

The first stage, denotation stage, indicates the relation between the signifier and the signified of which the signified is an explicit meaning or the meaning which can be drawn directly from the signifier itself. Therefore, the sign, which is the total entity between image and concept, is also explicit or literal. For example, the picture of table means the table itself. There is not implicit meaning behind it. The structure of the first stage can be represented diagrammatically like this:

In this first stage, the signification is just in the level of language or linguistic system. Barthes claims (as cited in Storey, 1996, p. 88) that in this second stage, connotation stage, what he calls ‘myth’ is produced. Barthes defines ‘myth’ here as “ideology understood as a body of ideas and practices which defend and actively promote the values and interests of the dominant groups in society” (ibid). In the second stage, the sign of the first stage becomes the new signifier in this stage. And the new signifier has the new signified and the relation between the new signifier and the new signified produces the new sign. The sign produced in this stage is interpretative and depends upon the user’s cultural experience (Turner, 1993, p. 46). For example, number 13 in western society is a In this first stage, the signification is just in the level of language or linguistic system. Barthes claims (as cited in Storey, 1996, p. 88) that in this second stage, connotation stage, what he calls ‘myth’ is produced. Barthes defines ‘myth’ here as “ideology understood as a body of ideas and practices which defend and actively promote the values and interests of the dominant groups in society” (ibid). In the second stage, the sign of the first stage becomes the new signifier in this stage. And the new signifier has the new signified and the relation between the new signifier and the new signified produces the new sign. The sign produced in this stage is interpretative and depends upon the user’s cultural experience (Turner, 1993, p. 46). For example, number 13 in western society is a

II SIGNIFIED Myth

I SIGNIFIER

III SIGN

The development of semiotics continued in 1960s when Christian Metz attributed the science to film. In understanding film, Metz has his own point of view. He has stated:

“We understand a film not because we have a knowledge of its system; rather, we achieve an understanding of its system because we understand the film… it is not because the cinema is language that it can tell such fine stories, but rather it has become language because it has told such fine stories.” (as cited in Monaco, 2000, p. 157)

Film represents something which has meaning which can be understood by its audience. Film does not just consist of language which can be used to tell a story rather it consists of many elements which become unity which then build a ‘language’ that enables audience to understand and get pleasure in watching it.

Metz also argues that film is not a language system “because it lacks the equivalent of the arbitrary linguistic sign” (Stam, 1992, p. 35). The sign in film is interpreted almost the same by each audience because the filmmakers lead them into one interpretation, which is the meaning the filmmakers try to deliver. Film is Metz also argues that film is not a language system “because it lacks the equivalent of the arbitrary linguistic sign” (Stam, 1992, p. 35). The sign in film is interpreted almost the same by each audience because the filmmakers lead them into one interpretation, which is the meaning the filmmakers try to deliver. Film is

“We can’t modify the signs of cinema the way we can modify the words of language systems. In cinema, an image of a rose is an image of a rose – nothing more, nothing less. In English, a rose can be a rose, simply, but it can also be modified or confused with similar words: rose, rosy, rosier, rosiest, rise, risen, rows (ruse), arose, roselike, and so forth.” (2000, p. 158)

In language system, the word “rose” can be interpreted differently for each individual and it is based on each individual’s mind in visualizing the image of rose. The sign of rose is different for each individual because each individual has different culture, social background, experience, etc. In film, the image of rose can

be a sign created by the filmmakers leading to one interpretation for each audience. To do this, the filmmakers have to set the rose in a certain set which can lead audience to have the same interpretation.

Sign is usually given by filmmakers through cinematographic elements. To deepen the reader’s understanding about sign in film, as a closing part of this chapter, the basic terminology in cinematography is explained in the next subchapter.