Sociology of Iconoclasm: Distrust of Visuality in the Digital Age

Abstract

Visual sphere as an object of sociological study may be understood in several ways. The fi rst one defi nes pictures as messages and thus interprets them as an element of communication processes. This procedure-referring for example to the semiological or content analysis (Rose 2001:54-99)—is based on the assumption that pictures are created in social contexts and that their meanings are “mirrors of the society.” It is always the participants of social life who interpret a picture, and their interpretation is based on social norms, values, or beliefs; that is why it may be the subject of sociological research. Second, the broader context of the creation, production, and usage of pictures may be taken into account. A sociologist may research such topics as the materiality of pictures (Edwards and Hart 2004), the relationship between pictures and memory or identity (Burgin 1996; Hirsch 1997), and the role of pictures in (re)producing social inequalities and social ties (Bourdieu 1984[1979], 1990[1965]). The third way of understanding the visual sphere goes beyond the pictures. In this context, sociology may be interested in, for example, visual aspects of social interactions (Goff man 1963, 1971), social rules of usage of the sense of sight (Garland-Thomson 2009), mental images (Mitchell 1984; Forrester 2000), or axionormative systems concerning the role of visuality in social life and its historical variation (Lalvani 1996; Crary 1999). Visual sociology refers also to the methodological aspect of social research, but this will not be discussed in details in this chapter.