encoding, decoding. Stuart Hall
“in the moment when a historical event passes under the sign of discourse, it is subject to all complex formal rules by which language signifies. to put it paradoxically, the event must become a story before it can become a communicative event”
This discussion of television’s communicative ‘structure of dominance’ has driven me to think back to significant historical events that I have endured during my 21-year life span. Surprisingly enough the only event that came to my mind was 911, yes this was indefinitely the most traumatic, but why is that that I can only recall one event. When I recall the day when this occurred and the extended period to follow, I’m having a slightly difficult time understanding where the encoding/ decoding comes in. Essentially when it occurred was it merely viewed as tragic event and it wasn’t until later on when the complexities behind the controversy were exposed when we began to view it as a story? Does story signify that you are ‘recalling anything from the past’ because in simplified terms that’s what a story essentially becomes? When an event such as 911 occurs is it considered non-communicative because society experienced it directly? This leads me to Hall’s comments on how the media/ television programming is edited and altered for viewing purposes, which leads me to believe that we as viewers are newer perceiving the entire story. So basically has communication become whatever the middleman says it will be and when we experience it almost first hand as in 911, then is it not communicative? Do we need the middleman in order to communicate because in order to make a story you need a teller and we all know that a story is never told the same twice? Though every communicator and every altered interpretation of the story, the path of communication changes does it not?
This discussion of television’s communicative ‘structure of dominance’ has driven me to think back to significant historical events that I have endured during my 21-year life span. Surprisingly enough the only event that came to my mind was 911, yes this was indefinitely the most traumatic, but why is that that I can only recall one event. When I recall the day when this occurred and the extended period to follow, I’m having a slightly difficult time understanding where the encoding/ decoding comes in. Essentially when it occurred was it merely viewed as tragic event and it wasn’t until later on when the complexities behind the controversy were exposed when we began to view it as a story? Does story signify that you are ‘recalling anything from the past’ because in simplified terms that’s what a story essentially becomes? When an event such as 911 occurs is it considered non-communicative because society experienced it directly? This leads me to Hall’s comments on how the media/ television programming is edited and altered for viewing purposes, which leads me to believe that we as viewers are newer perceiving the entire story. So basically has communication become whatever the middleman says it will be and when we experience it almost first hand as in 911, then is it not communicative? Do we need the middleman in order to communicate because in order to make a story you need a teller and we all know that a story is never told the same twice? Though every communicator and every altered interpretation of the story, the path of communication changes does it not?
No comments:
Post a Comment