SEMIOTICS
The study of signs.
French linguist Ferdinand de Saussure formulated his theory of language.

SIGN- Signs are events or things that direct attention or are indicative of other events or things. Basically, anything that represents something else is a sign. All other definitions are categories and subcategories of signs. A sign has a certain structure that Saussure first defined as the association between a signifier and a signified.

A 'signifier' - the form which the sign takes; and
The 'signified' - the concept it represents.

Signs can take many forms.
'Nothing is a sign unless it is interpreted as a sign'
(Peirce 1931-58, 2.172).
Anything can be a sign as long as someone interprets it as 'signifying' something - referring to something other than itself.

There are three goups of signs: the Icon, the Index and the Symbol.

ICON
An icon looks like its signified.
For example computer icons, which popularize the word, or the pictographs used on "pedestrian crossing" signs. There is no real connection between an object and an icon of it other than the likeness, so the mind is required to see the similarity and associate the two.
A characteristic of the icon is that by looking at it, we can get information about its signified.

INDEX
An index has a causal connection to its signified. A key to understanding indexes is the verb "indicate".
A directly perceivable event that can act as a reference to events that are not directly seen, or in other words they are something visible that indicates something out of sight. You cannot see a fire, but you see smoke and that indicates that a fire is burning.

SYMBOL
A symbol represents something in a completely chance relationship.
The connection between signifier and signified depends entirely on the observer, or what the observer knows.
Symbols are subjective, words are an example of symbols.
As a spoken word or group of letters, they are only linked to their signified because we decide they are. The connection is neither physical nor logical, words change meaning or objects change names over time.
Symbols are ideas, and whenever we use one we are only pointing to the idea behind that symbol.
A symbol can rarely tell us anything more about its signifier than we already know.

The Icon as Interface

ICON AS INTERFACE

The Concept of Icon:
A greek word meaning likeness.
An icon (from Greek, eikon, "image") is an image, picture, or representation. It is a sign or likeness that stands for an object by signifying or representing it, or by analogy, as in semiotics. In computers an icon is a symbol on the monitor used to signify a command; by extension, icon is also used, particularly in modern popular culture, in the general sense of "Symbol" — i.e. a name, face, picture or even a person readily recognized as having some well-known significance or embodying certain qualities.

Today, words are becoming icons/images. In advertising for example, such as the Nike logo. And also a neon sign, the word is an image.
Advertisers use images because they are more instant, and quicker to 'read'. They compete with sentances.
Another example would be in newspapers, where images are just as important as the text.

The older definition of icon, would be that of a sacred image. An aid to religious devotion. An image was nessecary as some people where illiterate, or found the concept of God difficult. The icon acts as an interface between two things. These 'sacred' images were an incarnation of an abstract concept.

Iconoclasm is the destruction of religious icons and other symbols or monuments, usually for religious or political motives. In Christian circles, iconoclasm has generally been motivated by a literal interpretation of the second of the ten commadments, which forbids the making and worshipping of "graven images".
People who believe this are known as 'iconoclasts'. P eople who favour these religios icons are called iconodules.
ICONOCLASTS
Attack sacred notions, and destroy the images in the name of the sacred. God cannot be an image. These images are false, people are worshiping the image insted of what it refers to.
ICONODULES believe that god had been 'made flesh'. Christ is the image of the invisible God. And that God completed himself by becoming an image. The abstract became concrete.

The image of christ doesn't physically represent, instead it acts as an interface, a link between man, and abstract being/concept. Iconoclasts argue that people worship the image. But, in my opinion, isn't it better that they are doing that and living by christian laws, rather than not at all?

These days, people have a fascination with images, insted of what it represents. The image is acting as a decoy.
Something iconic is not just visual, it can be an individual, or an incident. Some examples are, the '97 election, the tears of Paul Gasgoine.
An example of an iconic moment in a film would be 'The Shining'
"Here's Johnny!"
As Nicholson's character breaks into the bathroom, he ad-libs a line based on the introduction that Ed McMahon used on 'The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson.' The quote was picked as #68 of AFI's 100 Years...100 Movie Quotes.

Iconic images or movies are often lifted from context and reproduced so they become familiar. Or parodied, such as in 'The Simpsons' satirical version of 'The Shining'
















What makes these images iconic? It could be that it reflects the whole mood of the film, or because it is easily quotable, and acts as a 'visual quotation'. It is not seen as a definining or symbolic moment, at which everything changes, and is a key time in the film. This paticular image is iconic in the history of film in general, rather than in the film itself.

CULTURAL ICONS
A cultural icon is a notable individual who has transcended "mere" celebrity to represent a given Zeitgeist. Therefore, a cultural icon is not simply a famous face, but a complex, multi-layered personage who reflects the conflicts and contradictions of his or her time. Modern mass media and popular culture has helped to poplularize these icons.
An icon is often the incarnation of a culture.
The image of Che Guevara is one such example of an iconic image, over time it has begun to represent him less and less, almost becoming an empty image in some cases. It has transformed into a quotable image, endlessly repeatable. Imitations of the image have started to have even less of a connection with the real person and original meaning of the image, people merely recongnize the image as an imitation and nothing more. It has lost any connection with its original context.


Another example is the Hammer and Sickle icon, endlessly repeated to only vaguely suggest revolution.

DENNOTATION - Refers to something in particular.
CONNOTATION - Vaguely refers.
SIMULACRUM - Once referred to something, lost touch with what it referred or represented.

If the iconic image didn't exsist, how else would what it represents be remembered? i.e Che Guevara, Albert Einstein etc....most people know these images, but don't know that much about the person, at least however, they know of them. Without these iconic images, would the person still be iconic?