Abstract
From a semiotic point of view, photography is still considered a different kind of sign. Then, how can imagetext works be studied, formed by photography and word? This article argues that fictional texts expose the semiotic nature of photographs, showing that photographs are signs, different from their referents. The fictional, intermedial texts studied here are John Heartfield’s, Bertolt Brecht’s, and W.G. Sebald’s: three authors linked by German history. In the light of Umberto Eco’s semiotics, photographs can also be considered metaphors, enable to provide a new kind of iconicity and to overcome their realistic weight.
Highlights
Das war ein Vorspiel nur, dort wo man Bücher Verbrennt, verbrennt man auch am Ende Menschen.[3](A prelude only that
How can imagetext works be studied, formed by photography and word? This article argues that fictional texts expose the semiotic nature of photographs, showing that photographs are signs, different from their referents
This article will focus on the second kind – the intermedial combination – as was seen in the two representations of the books burning event above, that of photography and literature
Summary
Das war ein Vorspiel nur, dort wo man Bücher Verbrennt, verbrennt man auch am Ende Menschen.[3]. His works can be read by the sign production that Eco calls symbolic mode, for instance, the one that shows the books fire in Bebelplatz on 10th May 1933 These are the authors that this essay explores thorough and as can be seen, the image of the books burning will be the common thread. Based on this analysis, the argument of this article is that fictional texts expose the semiotic nature of photographs by treating them as types, not as tokens. The first section revolves around Eco’s semiotics, in order to define the nature of signs and sign-functions
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have