
This icon shows how differently a sign can be interpreted amongst people, even those who live within the same community. While Americans may all live in the same country with its own, distinct culture, each American is immersed within his or her own subculture. A large portion of Americans do not even know who the Velvet Underground is. To these people, the name Velvet Underground itself may also sound very strange and foreign as well.
This brings up another point learned from semiotics: when we begin to associate a linguistic signifier with a signified concept, we stop thinking about the arbitrariness of the actually word we are using. In the mind of a Velvet Underground fan, the arbitrariness of the band's name does not matter as much, for name can be linked to many things: the music the band produced, the band's artistic image, the album cover you see above, etc. And so the listener stops thinking about the "Velvet Underground" for what its name may imply, but rather the musical and artistic work that it is linked to it.
--Ryan
2 comments:
I really like this entry. The very name "Velvet Underground" has a kind of arbitrariness to it that only the "initiated" can see beyond. It lets you enter into a kind of secret world of signification...Warhol, of course, takes the popular and rejiggers it to center its commodification with The Factory's work. Again, who can "really" read a Warhol? Just a soup can? A vital corrective to capitalism? The vain posturings of a no-talent star? Which one?
Warhol always said that "making money is art" and insisted that his art was truly factory work...I wonder where we can go with this? Does this play into your thinking about signification?
Post a Comment