picture perfect
During the twentieth century, just prior to the second world war, the surrealist movement became a popular mode of expression in literature and in art. During this period, Rene Magritte, a prominent surrealist artist, created The Treachery of Images, a work that proposes a problem that exists in contemporary visual culture today. The Treachery of Images “illustrates that the image of the object must not be confused with something tangible and real” (The Art Book 292). In short, The Treachery of Images illuminates the problem that the mass population assumes images to be the real thing when, in fact, they are nothing more than (constructed) images. Current popular culture perpetuates this problem through the images it produces through varying forms of visual media, particularly magazines. Since magazines are readily available to the general public—both economically and intellectually—they have a wide range effect with whom they reach. Through the images that this medium presents it offers ideals that people take to be real; this has negative effects on the individual that can lead to low self-esteem, or in extreme cases, depression, eating disorders, and other mental illnesses. Traditionally, society believes that these problems only affect the female population; however, as time progresses, higher ideals are set for men placing them within the same futile behavior as women, trying to achieve paradigms that cane never be met. Theorists like Jean Baudrillard and Jacques Lacan present various theories that are useful in understanding contemporary visual culture and its effects on society while Réné Magritte provides a useful starting point in applying their theories.
Magritte’s painting is an oil painting on canvass of a pipe, under which he writes “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” (Magritte The Treachery of Images) . Magritte’s phrase confuses the viewer since it appears to be a pipe. As the editors of The Art Book note, “Magritte appears to contradict reality by nonsensically naming something that does not need to be named, at the same time as denying that it is what obviously is” (The Art Book 292). The reason why the viewer becomes confused with Magritte’s painting is because he assumes the image of the pipe to be the actual thing, the referent. The painting itself, however, is not an actual pipe but it is an image of a pipe. Jean Baudrillard, a contemporary cultural theorist, explores the phenomenon of regarding images or signs as the actual things or referents in his book Simulacra and Simulation.
In this book, Baudrillard examines the idea of abstraction, establishing his thesis early in the text, stating:
Today abstraction is no longer that of the map, the double,
the mirror, or the concept. Simulation is no longer that of a
territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation
of models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal. The
territory no longer precedes the map, nor does it survive it.
It is nevertheless the map that precedes the territory—precession
of simulacra—that engenders the territory … (Baudrillard 1,
Baudrillard’s emphasis)
Baudrillard argues that images have become a priori to the actual things themselves—to which he designates the term “hyperreal.” Baudrillard suggests that because we accept the simulacra as what we consider real, ‘reality’ is now without an origin or reality. He continues to argue that “it is no longer a question of imitation, nor duplication, nor even parody. It is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real [itself]” (2). As Marita Sturken and Lisa Cartwright state in Practices of Looking: An Introduction to Visual Culture, “French philosopher Jean Baudrillard has described the late twentieth century as a period during which images become more real than the real” (Sturken and Cartwright 237). Substituting the sign for the real itself is what occurs when a viewer mistakes the image of the pipe for the pipe itself.
Magazines embody Baudrillard’s theories insofar as they present images that people believe are real; however, like his theories of the simulacra they are only images. Like other images, those in magazines are representative of people who exist. Magazines do not readily state the artifice that goes into the pictures that appear within them. First, the photographer chooses a setting where the photographs are taken and establishes the levels of lighting that he wants to create various effects. The model then proceeds through wardrobe, hair, and make-up in preparation for the photographs so any expression of the model’s individuality is negated since many others prepare the model for a pre-conceived image or idea that the photographer already has; subsequently, the images that society views as real are artificial. The artificial quality is repeated to construct new images that perpetuates and strengthens the ideals established by such photographs.
Buadrillard discusses the idea of self-perpetuation of images as signs. In his discussion “The precession of Simulacra,” he argues that reality is “short circuited” through “the duplication [of reality] through signs” (Baudrillard 27). What we take to be real is actually a sign that is constructed from previous signs. Sturken and Cartwright present a similar argument to Baudrillard’s thesis in their discussion of Madonna. During the late twentieth century Madonna appropriated the image of Marilyn Monroe with sheer blond hair and a matching beauty mark. Madonna’s image corresponds with Baudrillard’s theories insofar as Marilyn Monroe’s image was as contrived as any other model through the same process of hair, make-up, and wardrobe that I mention above.
To complicate matters further, at the same time that Madonna appropriates one image—that of Marilyn Monroe—she also appropriates that of another, that of Madonna or the Virgin Mary. Sturken and Cartwright state, “pop star Madonna gained notoriety by playing off both Madonna and Marilyn Monroe” (41). The images of ultimate beauty and ultimate sex(uality) are combined with the images of ultimate purity and piety all within one person. Madonna further emphasizes religious themes as she uses many religious images like the crucifix, as seen in her music video, Like a Prayer. Sturken and Cartwright state, “Not only did she use the name Madonna, early in her career she wore and used as props various symbols of Catholicism, such as crosses” (41). Madonna’s use of crosses and other images demonstrates the flexible nature of the semiotic sign and shows how one sign can play off another, creating a whole new sign.
The idea of the sign that Baudrillard refers to comes from semiotics, which is the theory of signs and how we understand them and their systems. According to contemporary semiotic theory, the words that one uses in language are signs, which can be broken down into three component parts: the referent, the signified, and the signifier. The referent is the actual thing that one refers to. Generally the referent is a physical object in the world that is exterior to one’s self; for the purposes of this discussion, this can also include one’s body since the body is separate from the self as being the center of consciousness. A tree, to use Ferdinand de Saussure’s example, is something outside of the subject’s self. Although the referent is not an actual part of the sign, it is necessary to the nature of the sign since the sign refers to a physical object or abstract idea. New signs cannot be created without an object or idea to originally ground them in reality; one could only use pre-existing signs in new contexts. Baudrillard argues exactly this—because we have replaced signs for the referent, therefore, destroying or “[liquefying] … all referentials” (Baudrillard 2)); reality has become a constant play of signs where we no longer have referents but instead, use pre-existing signs in new contexts.
The signified is the idea of what the referent is; therefore, the word “tree” represents the idea of a tall, rigid plant that has bark, roots, branches, and foliage; this idea is what is being signified. The signifier is the mode in which the idea is transmitted, so, the actual word “t-r-e-e” acts as the signifier for the idea of this particular type of plant. Problems arise, however, when mass culture attempts to define particular signifiers for ideas of a ‘perfect’ male or female form. The problem resides in the fact, that aside from primary sexual characteristics, such as genitals and mammary glands, gender is, as Judith Butler claims in “Imitation and Gender Insubordination,” “a kind of imitation for which there is no original” (Butler 313, Butler’s emphasis). However, despite Butler’s arguments, contemporary visual culture attempts to designate ideal images of gender. The magazine Glamour, for example, portrays famous entertainers on its covers. The March 2003 issue of Glamour’s cover page features Jennifer Lopez . Combining the title “Glamour” and the image of a successful entertainer suggests that one can be glamorous if they look like Jennifer Lopez, which is an unrealistic ideal because of the amount of time and money that Jennifer Lopez can afford to spend on herself, which the majority of society cannot afford.
Another problem that magazines like Glamour present by combining text with images is that magazines further perpetuate myths of ideal beauty and other issues like sex. Surrounding Jennifer Lopez’s image is text that describes headlining articles such as “Introducing the Heart Orgasm …” or, “Your Top 5 Sexual Inhibitions Conquered.” What is interesting here is the continuous reference to sexual imagery. Not only does Glamour establish a particular paradigm of beauty with Jennifer Lopez’s imagery on the cover, but it also reinforces ideas of sex suggesting that, in order to be “glamorous” one must also be sexually active and liberated, as “Conquering “Your Top 5 Sexual Inhibitions” indicates. Glamour, therefore, constructs an equation between beauty and sex suggesting that the two go hand in hand. And yet, incorporated with these ideas of beauty and sex are also images of power and aggression.
The textual images rely on a combination of assertive and passive words or phrases such as, “conquered, gun, risk death” and, “we made.” The headline—“They Pointed a Gun into my Bedroom: Women who get Paid to Risk Death Every Day”—suggests several things: the first being prostitution. Combined with Jennifer Lopez’s image, the idea of prostitution begs the question if Jennifer Lopez—and other celebrities for that matter—has sold herself or a part of herself for a little money and publicity.
Another image that this headline evokes is one of sex; this is implied through phallic imagery and the idea of penetration as the headline states, “They Pointed a Gun into my Bedroom” (Glamour, my emphasis). This image of sex, however, has a violent overtone that is evoked in the idea of the gun. It implies that the phallus is a weapon and one that can kill. Furthermore, this image also suggests the idea of a gang rape through the use of words that are conjugated in the plural form such as “they” and “women.” The image of a gang rape—or at least an orgy—is mirrored in an advertisement for Fujifilm found within the magazine. I will examine this image later on in the essay.
Women are not the only ones that are inundated by images of ideal form. Visual culture increasingly offers images of men and what they should look like. Magazines like GQ and Men’s Health perpetuate social ideals in their images by presenting one image form: young, muscular, toned, and hairless men with full heads of hair. Magazines of this caliber rarely (if ever) show images that might more accurately represent the male population: toneless shape, balding, and full of body hair. Like GQ or Men’s Health, Blue also presents ostentatiously high ideals of “perfect” male forms such as the section “Just Perfect” implies. All of the models fit the one image of masculine beauty (that I note above). They all pose in a manner to accentuate or flex their muscles both in a literal and metaphorical sense. To flex one’s muscles metaphorically is to assert one’s dominance. Blue’s images also emphasize dominance through the manner in which they pose. The picture of the boxer shows the model holding his loosely formed fists up in preparation to box . This suggests both an aggressive manner—common social conventions dictate that men must be aggressive and not passive—and the willingness to defend his territory, so to speak. A comparison can be made between this image and Madonna’s image (as discussed earlier in this essay) since the model in the image appears similar to a male in the middle of the twentieth century, such as James Dean. Again, this emphasizes Baudrillard’s theory that signs, or images, refer back to previous signs with no referent in reality.
By attempting to identify with the ideal images that magazines and other forms of visual media present, it suggest that society develops a split similar to what Lacan describes in “the Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience.” In his discussion of the mirror stage, Lacan states that we identify the image of ourselves in the mirror. According to Lacan, as children, we identify with the mirror image because the child sees itself as fragmented and we assume the image to be whole and, therefore, more coherent and powerful. Lacan calls this “méconnaissance” or, “misrecognition” (Lacan 737). The role of misrecognition as seen in Lacan’s mirror stage is important because it identifies the problem that subjectivity is never truly accurate.
According to Lacan, subjectivity—as formed through the mirror stage—develops through the child’s identification with the image that he sees in the mirror. This is not totally different from the ideal images that one perceives in the various forms of media in visual culture. The image that the child perceives, however, is nothing more than an image; it is not the actual child. Again, this is similar to Magritte’s painting, The Treachery of Images. The subject identifies himself with the image in the mirror, perceiving it to be himself as a subject but because the mirror only presents an image the child misrecognizes or misidentifies with the image perceiving it to be himself. Now one will not look at a magazine and see Jennifer Lopez or Vin Diesel and state, “That’s me!”; however, because these individuals’ images are in such high demand, they quickly become the ideals by which everyone sets their standards. Thus, the subject’s subjectivity becomes split as they attempt to identify with someone else’s standards of beauty and begin to only know themselves through the other. And yet, by identifying with an image we alienate ourselves since the image is other to our selves. As Hazard Adams and Leroy Searle note, “The mirror stage, symbolized as the child’s discovery of its image, establishes the idea of subjectivity by introducing the idea of alienation of the subject in the image, which becomes other to the self” (Adams and Searle 733). Lacan, therefore, suggests that subjectivity can never truly exist since it is “really an intersubjectivity formed in and as dialogue” (733).
Baudrillard’s theories discuss how images, as signs, proliferate and the results that occur when signs become the referent for new signs. Lacan’s theories present how images can alienate society from itself, and from the composite parts that create it. To help demonstrate both Baudrillard’s and Lacan’s theories, I would like to present a test case. The image in question comes from the March 2003 issue of Glamour and is an advertisement for Fujifilm . The fact that this image is an advertisement for film, a material needed to create more images, emphasizes the image as an image and it reinforces the idea the viewer is looking at a picture. In Picture Theory, W. J. T. Mitchell resents the ideas of metapictures and multistable images. Metapictures are self-referential pictures—i.e., are pictures about pictures. According to Mitchell, “metapictures are pictures that show themselves in order to know themselves: they stage ‘self-knowledge’ of pictures” (Mitchell 48, Mitchell’s emphasis). He continues his discussion by distinguishing between metapictures and multistable images, stating:
Most multistable images are not metapictures in [a] formally
explicit way … They display the phenomenon of “nesting,”
presenting an image concealed inside another image … they
tend to make the boundary between first and second order
representations ambiguous. The ambiguity of their referentiality
produces a kind of secondary effect of auto-reference to the
drawing as drawing, an invitation to the spectator to return
with fascination to the mysterious object whose identity seems
so mutable and yet to absolutely singular and definite. (48)
In short, metapictures are self-referential pictures while multistable images are multilayered pictures similar to a framed-narrative. The Fujifilm advertisement layers its images insofar as the picture of the ad depicts a picture of a woman who is caught by surprise.
The image in the advertisement suggests several other things. First, the image represents ideal images. The woman in the picture is surrounded by mannequins, all of which have very sculpted bodies, both literally and in the sense that they depict very lean, muscular men with full heads of hair and no body hair. These mannequins suggest that the ideal men are not real and that they do not exist outside of the context of props for the image. The woman herself also suggests something similar since she too becomes a prop for the image. Her looks are just as unrealistic as those of the mannequins as she perpetuates another beauty myth that, in order to be beautiful, a woman must be curvy and yet slim, have blond hair and blue eyes. The manner in which this image portrays ideals of beauty alienates the subject from the audience since the image portrays ideal images, not realistic ones. This image suggests Lacan’s idea of a split within the subject in other ways. The first being that the image’s subject is alienated from other humans; her only company are the mannequins within the boarders of the image. Her alienation is reinforced since she becomes split from the rest of society be becoming an image.
The woman’s look of surprise suggests that she has been caught off guard. Her leg up into the mannequin’s crotch insinuates that the woman is caught in a sexually suggestive act with the mannequin. Like the headline on the cover page, this advertisement suggests group sex. The pose of the mannequin that the model has her leg around reflects an image in Blue where both the mannequin and the male model have their fists on their hips, implying pride and strength of character . The mannequin’s pose in the Fujifilm advertisement, however, is in direct contrast to the female model; whereas his pose implies pride, her look of shock depicts an image of surprise and horror of being caught in a sexual act. Not only does this advertisement depict ideal masculine and feminine beauty, but it also depicts stereotypical gender roles. Masculinity—as represented in the mannequins—is represented as cold and stern and does not show any expression of emotion while the woman shows a look of horror from being caught in a sexually intense situation. The image portrays the idea that men do not show any emotion and even hints that they can not while the woman is the only one who shows emotion. The men are all ‘studs’ while the woman can be seen as promiscuous since she is surrounded by male images.
The Treachery of Images illuminates the problem that plagues post-modernity: people recognize images or signs as the actual object or idea. According to Baudrillard, signs have replaced all referents and have become referents themselves. Pictures, like the ones found in magazines, present ideals that society assumes to be real and establish paradigms based on these pictures; however, because of the high goals, society alienates anyone who falls short of these ideals. People begin to try to change their bodies instead of having the images changed to more accurately reflect them. Severe mental illness and self-abuse quickly sets in as people continue to fall short of established ideals. Magazines make matters worse whereas they are readily available both intellectually and economically. Unless society changes the images that circulate in high rotation, more and more people will tend towards self-destructive tendencies trying to achieve ideal looks that cannot be met without great pain and suffering.
Works Cited/Consulted
Adams, Hazard and Leroy Searle. Editor’s Notes. Critical Theory Since 1965. Ed. Hazard Adams and Leroy Searle. Tallahassee: Florida State University Press, 1986. CTMP 4301.03 Course Reader: Freud to Lacan—A Critique of Psychoanalysis. Prof. Mark Meyers, Halifax, 2003.
Blue: Issue 42, January, 2003. Editory-in-chief Marcello. Sydney: Grand Studio Magazines Pty, Ltd., 2003.
Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation. Trans. Sheila Faria Glaer. USA: The University of Michigan Press, 1994.
Butler, Judith. “Imitation and Gender Insubordination.” The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. Ed. Henry Abelove. New York: Routledge, 1993. Engl. 4407 Course Reader: Queer Theory. Prof. Natasha Hurley. Halifax, 2002.
Glamour: Issue 24, March 2003. general ed. Jo Elvin. London: The Condé Nast Publications Ltd., 2003.
Lacan, Jacques. “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience.” Critical Theory Since 1965. Ed. Hazard Adams and Leroy Searle. Tallahassee: Florida State University Press, 1986. CTMP 4301.03 Course Reader: From Freud to Lacan—A Critique of Psychoanalysis. Prof. Mark Meyers. Halifax, 2003.
Magritte, Réné. “The Treachery of Images.” The Art Book. London: Phaidon Press, 1994
Mitchell, W. J. T. “ Picture Theory. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Sturken, Marita and Lisa Cartwright. Practices of Looking: An Introduction to Visual Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Magritte’s painting is an oil painting on canvass of a pipe, under which he writes “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” (Magritte The Treachery of Images) . Magritte’s phrase confuses the viewer since it appears to be a pipe. As the editors of The Art Book note, “Magritte appears to contradict reality by nonsensically naming something that does not need to be named, at the same time as denying that it is what obviously is” (The Art Book 292). The reason why the viewer becomes confused with Magritte’s painting is because he assumes the image of the pipe to be the actual thing, the referent. The painting itself, however, is not an actual pipe but it is an image of a pipe. Jean Baudrillard, a contemporary cultural theorist, explores the phenomenon of regarding images or signs as the actual things or referents in his book Simulacra and Simulation.
In this book, Baudrillard examines the idea of abstraction, establishing his thesis early in the text, stating:
Today abstraction is no longer that of the map, the double,
the mirror, or the concept. Simulation is no longer that of a
territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation
of models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal. The
territory no longer precedes the map, nor does it survive it.
It is nevertheless the map that precedes the territory—precession
of simulacra—that engenders the territory … (Baudrillard 1,
Baudrillard’s emphasis)
Baudrillard argues that images have become a priori to the actual things themselves—to which he designates the term “hyperreal.” Baudrillard suggests that because we accept the simulacra as what we consider real, ‘reality’ is now without an origin or reality. He continues to argue that “it is no longer a question of imitation, nor duplication, nor even parody. It is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real [itself]” (2). As Marita Sturken and Lisa Cartwright state in Practices of Looking: An Introduction to Visual Culture, “French philosopher Jean Baudrillard has described the late twentieth century as a period during which images become more real than the real” (Sturken and Cartwright 237). Substituting the sign for the real itself is what occurs when a viewer mistakes the image of the pipe for the pipe itself.
Magazines embody Baudrillard’s theories insofar as they present images that people believe are real; however, like his theories of the simulacra they are only images. Like other images, those in magazines are representative of people who exist. Magazines do not readily state the artifice that goes into the pictures that appear within them. First, the photographer chooses a setting where the photographs are taken and establishes the levels of lighting that he wants to create various effects. The model then proceeds through wardrobe, hair, and make-up in preparation for the photographs so any expression of the model’s individuality is negated since many others prepare the model for a pre-conceived image or idea that the photographer already has; subsequently, the images that society views as real are artificial. The artificial quality is repeated to construct new images that perpetuates and strengthens the ideals established by such photographs.
Buadrillard discusses the idea of self-perpetuation of images as signs. In his discussion “The precession of Simulacra,” he argues that reality is “short circuited” through “the duplication [of reality] through signs” (Baudrillard 27). What we take to be real is actually a sign that is constructed from previous signs. Sturken and Cartwright present a similar argument to Baudrillard’s thesis in their discussion of Madonna. During the late twentieth century Madonna appropriated the image of Marilyn Monroe with sheer blond hair and a matching beauty mark. Madonna’s image corresponds with Baudrillard’s theories insofar as Marilyn Monroe’s image was as contrived as any other model through the same process of hair, make-up, and wardrobe that I mention above.
To complicate matters further, at the same time that Madonna appropriates one image—that of Marilyn Monroe—she also appropriates that of another, that of Madonna or the Virgin Mary. Sturken and Cartwright state, “pop star Madonna gained notoriety by playing off both Madonna and Marilyn Monroe” (41). The images of ultimate beauty and ultimate sex(uality) are combined with the images of ultimate purity and piety all within one person. Madonna further emphasizes religious themes as she uses many religious images like the crucifix, as seen in her music video, Like a Prayer. Sturken and Cartwright state, “Not only did she use the name Madonna, early in her career she wore and used as props various symbols of Catholicism, such as crosses” (41). Madonna’s use of crosses and other images demonstrates the flexible nature of the semiotic sign and shows how one sign can play off another, creating a whole new sign.
The idea of the sign that Baudrillard refers to comes from semiotics, which is the theory of signs and how we understand them and their systems. According to contemporary semiotic theory, the words that one uses in language are signs, which can be broken down into three component parts: the referent, the signified, and the signifier. The referent is the actual thing that one refers to. Generally the referent is a physical object in the world that is exterior to one’s self; for the purposes of this discussion, this can also include one’s body since the body is separate from the self as being the center of consciousness. A tree, to use Ferdinand de Saussure’s example, is something outside of the subject’s self. Although the referent is not an actual part of the sign, it is necessary to the nature of the sign since the sign refers to a physical object or abstract idea. New signs cannot be created without an object or idea to originally ground them in reality; one could only use pre-existing signs in new contexts. Baudrillard argues exactly this—because we have replaced signs for the referent, therefore, destroying or “[liquefying] … all referentials” (Baudrillard 2)); reality has become a constant play of signs where we no longer have referents but instead, use pre-existing signs in new contexts.
The signified is the idea of what the referent is; therefore, the word “tree” represents the idea of a tall, rigid plant that has bark, roots, branches, and foliage; this idea is what is being signified. The signifier is the mode in which the idea is transmitted, so, the actual word “t-r-e-e” acts as the signifier for the idea of this particular type of plant. Problems arise, however, when mass culture attempts to define particular signifiers for ideas of a ‘perfect’ male or female form. The problem resides in the fact, that aside from primary sexual characteristics, such as genitals and mammary glands, gender is, as Judith Butler claims in “Imitation and Gender Insubordination,” “a kind of imitation for which there is no original” (Butler 313, Butler’s emphasis). However, despite Butler’s arguments, contemporary visual culture attempts to designate ideal images of gender. The magazine Glamour, for example, portrays famous entertainers on its covers. The March 2003 issue of Glamour’s cover page features Jennifer Lopez . Combining the title “Glamour” and the image of a successful entertainer suggests that one can be glamorous if they look like Jennifer Lopez, which is an unrealistic ideal because of the amount of time and money that Jennifer Lopez can afford to spend on herself, which the majority of society cannot afford.
Another problem that magazines like Glamour present by combining text with images is that magazines further perpetuate myths of ideal beauty and other issues like sex. Surrounding Jennifer Lopez’s image is text that describes headlining articles such as “Introducing the Heart Orgasm …” or, “Your Top 5 Sexual Inhibitions Conquered.” What is interesting here is the continuous reference to sexual imagery. Not only does Glamour establish a particular paradigm of beauty with Jennifer Lopez’s imagery on the cover, but it also reinforces ideas of sex suggesting that, in order to be “glamorous” one must also be sexually active and liberated, as “Conquering “Your Top 5 Sexual Inhibitions” indicates. Glamour, therefore, constructs an equation between beauty and sex suggesting that the two go hand in hand. And yet, incorporated with these ideas of beauty and sex are also images of power and aggression.
The textual images rely on a combination of assertive and passive words or phrases such as, “conquered, gun, risk death” and, “we made.” The headline—“They Pointed a Gun into my Bedroom: Women who get Paid to Risk Death Every Day”—suggests several things: the first being prostitution. Combined with Jennifer Lopez’s image, the idea of prostitution begs the question if Jennifer Lopez—and other celebrities for that matter—has sold herself or a part of herself for a little money and publicity.
Another image that this headline evokes is one of sex; this is implied through phallic imagery and the idea of penetration as the headline states, “They Pointed a Gun into my Bedroom” (Glamour, my emphasis). This image of sex, however, has a violent overtone that is evoked in the idea of the gun. It implies that the phallus is a weapon and one that can kill. Furthermore, this image also suggests the idea of a gang rape through the use of words that are conjugated in the plural form such as “they” and “women.” The image of a gang rape—or at least an orgy—is mirrored in an advertisement for Fujifilm found within the magazine. I will examine this image later on in the essay.
Women are not the only ones that are inundated by images of ideal form. Visual culture increasingly offers images of men and what they should look like. Magazines like GQ and Men’s Health perpetuate social ideals in their images by presenting one image form: young, muscular, toned, and hairless men with full heads of hair. Magazines of this caliber rarely (if ever) show images that might more accurately represent the male population: toneless shape, balding, and full of body hair. Like GQ or Men’s Health, Blue also presents ostentatiously high ideals of “perfect” male forms such as the section “Just Perfect” implies. All of the models fit the one image of masculine beauty (that I note above). They all pose in a manner to accentuate or flex their muscles both in a literal and metaphorical sense. To flex one’s muscles metaphorically is to assert one’s dominance. Blue’s images also emphasize dominance through the manner in which they pose. The picture of the boxer shows the model holding his loosely formed fists up in preparation to box . This suggests both an aggressive manner—common social conventions dictate that men must be aggressive and not passive—and the willingness to defend his territory, so to speak. A comparison can be made between this image and Madonna’s image (as discussed earlier in this essay) since the model in the image appears similar to a male in the middle of the twentieth century, such as James Dean. Again, this emphasizes Baudrillard’s theory that signs, or images, refer back to previous signs with no referent in reality.
By attempting to identify with the ideal images that magazines and other forms of visual media present, it suggest that society develops a split similar to what Lacan describes in “the Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience.” In his discussion of the mirror stage, Lacan states that we identify the image of ourselves in the mirror. According to Lacan, as children, we identify with the mirror image because the child sees itself as fragmented and we assume the image to be whole and, therefore, more coherent and powerful. Lacan calls this “méconnaissance” or, “misrecognition” (Lacan 737). The role of misrecognition as seen in Lacan’s mirror stage is important because it identifies the problem that subjectivity is never truly accurate.
According to Lacan, subjectivity—as formed through the mirror stage—develops through the child’s identification with the image that he sees in the mirror. This is not totally different from the ideal images that one perceives in the various forms of media in visual culture. The image that the child perceives, however, is nothing more than an image; it is not the actual child. Again, this is similar to Magritte’s painting, The Treachery of Images. The subject identifies himself with the image in the mirror, perceiving it to be himself as a subject but because the mirror only presents an image the child misrecognizes or misidentifies with the image perceiving it to be himself. Now one will not look at a magazine and see Jennifer Lopez or Vin Diesel and state, “That’s me!”; however, because these individuals’ images are in such high demand, they quickly become the ideals by which everyone sets their standards. Thus, the subject’s subjectivity becomes split as they attempt to identify with someone else’s standards of beauty and begin to only know themselves through the other. And yet, by identifying with an image we alienate ourselves since the image is other to our selves. As Hazard Adams and Leroy Searle note, “The mirror stage, symbolized as the child’s discovery of its image, establishes the idea of subjectivity by introducing the idea of alienation of the subject in the image, which becomes other to the self” (Adams and Searle 733). Lacan, therefore, suggests that subjectivity can never truly exist since it is “really an intersubjectivity formed in and as dialogue” (733).
Baudrillard’s theories discuss how images, as signs, proliferate and the results that occur when signs become the referent for new signs. Lacan’s theories present how images can alienate society from itself, and from the composite parts that create it. To help demonstrate both Baudrillard’s and Lacan’s theories, I would like to present a test case. The image in question comes from the March 2003 issue of Glamour and is an advertisement for Fujifilm . The fact that this image is an advertisement for film, a material needed to create more images, emphasizes the image as an image and it reinforces the idea the viewer is looking at a picture. In Picture Theory, W. J. T. Mitchell resents the ideas of metapictures and multistable images. Metapictures are self-referential pictures—i.e., are pictures about pictures. According to Mitchell, “metapictures are pictures that show themselves in order to know themselves: they stage ‘self-knowledge’ of pictures” (Mitchell 48, Mitchell’s emphasis). He continues his discussion by distinguishing between metapictures and multistable images, stating:
Most multistable images are not metapictures in [a] formally
explicit way … They display the phenomenon of “nesting,”
presenting an image concealed inside another image … they
tend to make the boundary between first and second order
representations ambiguous. The ambiguity of their referentiality
produces a kind of secondary effect of auto-reference to the
drawing as drawing, an invitation to the spectator to return
with fascination to the mysterious object whose identity seems
so mutable and yet to absolutely singular and definite. (48)
In short, metapictures are self-referential pictures while multistable images are multilayered pictures similar to a framed-narrative. The Fujifilm advertisement layers its images insofar as the picture of the ad depicts a picture of a woman who is caught by surprise.
The image in the advertisement suggests several other things. First, the image represents ideal images. The woman in the picture is surrounded by mannequins, all of which have very sculpted bodies, both literally and in the sense that they depict very lean, muscular men with full heads of hair and no body hair. These mannequins suggest that the ideal men are not real and that they do not exist outside of the context of props for the image. The woman herself also suggests something similar since she too becomes a prop for the image. Her looks are just as unrealistic as those of the mannequins as she perpetuates another beauty myth that, in order to be beautiful, a woman must be curvy and yet slim, have blond hair and blue eyes. The manner in which this image portrays ideals of beauty alienates the subject from the audience since the image portrays ideal images, not realistic ones. This image suggests Lacan’s idea of a split within the subject in other ways. The first being that the image’s subject is alienated from other humans; her only company are the mannequins within the boarders of the image. Her alienation is reinforced since she becomes split from the rest of society be becoming an image.
The woman’s look of surprise suggests that she has been caught off guard. Her leg up into the mannequin’s crotch insinuates that the woman is caught in a sexually suggestive act with the mannequin. Like the headline on the cover page, this advertisement suggests group sex. The pose of the mannequin that the model has her leg around reflects an image in Blue where both the mannequin and the male model have their fists on their hips, implying pride and strength of character . The mannequin’s pose in the Fujifilm advertisement, however, is in direct contrast to the female model; whereas his pose implies pride, her look of shock depicts an image of surprise and horror of being caught in a sexual act. Not only does this advertisement depict ideal masculine and feminine beauty, but it also depicts stereotypical gender roles. Masculinity—as represented in the mannequins—is represented as cold and stern and does not show any expression of emotion while the woman shows a look of horror from being caught in a sexually intense situation. The image portrays the idea that men do not show any emotion and even hints that they can not while the woman is the only one who shows emotion. The men are all ‘studs’ while the woman can be seen as promiscuous since she is surrounded by male images.
The Treachery of Images illuminates the problem that plagues post-modernity: people recognize images or signs as the actual object or idea. According to Baudrillard, signs have replaced all referents and have become referents themselves. Pictures, like the ones found in magazines, present ideals that society assumes to be real and establish paradigms based on these pictures; however, because of the high goals, society alienates anyone who falls short of these ideals. People begin to try to change their bodies instead of having the images changed to more accurately reflect them. Severe mental illness and self-abuse quickly sets in as people continue to fall short of established ideals. Magazines make matters worse whereas they are readily available both intellectually and economically. Unless society changes the images that circulate in high rotation, more and more people will tend towards self-destructive tendencies trying to achieve ideal looks that cannot be met without great pain and suffering.
Works Cited/Consulted
Adams, Hazard and Leroy Searle. Editor’s Notes. Critical Theory Since 1965. Ed. Hazard Adams and Leroy Searle. Tallahassee: Florida State University Press, 1986. CTMP 4301.03 Course Reader: Freud to Lacan—A Critique of Psychoanalysis. Prof. Mark Meyers, Halifax, 2003.
Blue: Issue 42, January, 2003. Editory-in-chief Marcello. Sydney: Grand Studio Magazines Pty, Ltd., 2003.
Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation. Trans. Sheila Faria Glaer. USA: The University of Michigan Press, 1994.
Butler, Judith. “Imitation and Gender Insubordination.” The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. Ed. Henry Abelove. New York: Routledge, 1993. Engl. 4407 Course Reader: Queer Theory. Prof. Natasha Hurley. Halifax, 2002.
Glamour: Issue 24, March 2003. general ed. Jo Elvin. London: The Condé Nast Publications Ltd., 2003.
Lacan, Jacques. “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience.” Critical Theory Since 1965. Ed. Hazard Adams and Leroy Searle. Tallahassee: Florida State University Press, 1986. CTMP 4301.03 Course Reader: From Freud to Lacan—A Critique of Psychoanalysis. Prof. Mark Meyers. Halifax, 2003.
Magritte, Réné. “The Treachery of Images.” The Art Book. London: Phaidon Press, 1994
Mitchell, W. J. T. “ Picture Theory. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Sturken, Marita and Lisa Cartwright. Practices of Looking: An Introduction to Visual Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.