Seeing Signs

I am either really confused or I have actually grasped semiotics. Bal’s article “Seeing Signs” had me thinking of how one interprets different works of art. Many people can look at a still life painting of a fruit bowl and have ten different interpretations. Someone might look at the painting and think of bountiful wealth one might have in order to enjoy such tasty fruit, while others may just admire the beautiful color of the painting. However, the case may be the “object is different for each viewer”.

Another thing that somewhat became clear to me was “basic theory” of icon, index and, symbol. Each represents a different view of one painting. While the Icon is the actual painting the index is the act and the symbol is your own interpretation. As for the narrative, I believe that when you look at a painting and the person looking directly at you (such as Mante’s Olympia) you do get the sense that “I” does become “You”. I had to look at the painting for a while to fully understand what Bal was talking about.

As for the two paintings, I thought that it was interesting how one might view Caravaggio as a homoerotic seductive painting just because he was a man and in the time period this kind of nature was almost ignored. As for the Gentileschi the narrative would be different due to the four hundred years that passed and was not as gruesome or sexual.