What is an Index (for)?

Artists pursued the realism and individual freedom from 1960s with Pop Art movement. Pop Art was a base for upcoming art movements in 1970s. 1970s art introduced a new era of contemporaneity; 1970s featured fundamental art movements such as: Feminism, Minimalism, Expressionism, Abstract, Post-Modernism etc. Post-Modernism shined amongst others, it was mostly selected artistic movement due to political and social directions in America. Thus, Post-Modernism is also known as Post-Movement Art in America. It was a radical freedom to art and design where style was everything, it was a very related to philosophy and universal preciseness. To be a philosopher or understand the philosophy, we need to be curious, keep asking questions and never get satisfied with the answers. A logician Charles Sanders Pierce (one of the greatest philosophers in America), approached the first indexical term. The theory was called Semiotics, Pierce’s Theory on Signs. Pierce’s theory has put forward that signs do not all work in the same way. There are three types of signs: Icon: a literal sign, Index: an implied sign and Symbol: a learned sign. And the theory of signs developed, especially index. It has found value and purview in linguistics and art-ology/visual arts. Many years later on the ‘index-concept’ regained a meaning with Rosalind E. Krauss. “Since Rosalind Krauss introduced the term to characterize appropriative rather than mimetic strategies in American art of the 1970's, the term has gained momentum especially in the theory of photography. As an epistemological category, the index makes an essential point of departure to investigate art historical and media theoretical issues of ‘reproduction’, copy, trace, and proximity in a triple way: as a theoretical and heuristic paradigm in image history, as a category of image production, and as a core phenomenon of material culture.” (https://arthist.net/archive/1120.).

An American designer Vito Acconci who also studied literature has formed the index of narcissism and art notions as a centre of his work called Air Time, “… where for 40 minutes the artist sits and talks to his reflected image.” (Rosalind Krauss, Notes on the Index: Seventies Art in America, 1977, pg.68). Acconci used monitor as a mirror to use the linguistic index form of art, but unfortunately after a certain time the sense of art exited from stage and his center became about himself. The use of ‘I’ and ‘You’ in his work were pronouns and shifters. ‘I’ is felt, it’s real and ‘You’ is a separation, reflection of his image/icon. Altering the real and imaginary (index) of himself as he is talking created a double image, an object. It must not be forgotten that an empty sign always stays empty as long as we do not supply signification to it. Therefore, shifter becomes a linguistic sign, it is changeable; it depends on who or what have a control over it.

The similar indexical notions and shifters iterate in language and bilingualism.

“The internationalized art world relies on a unique language. Its purest articulation is found in the digital press release. This language has everything to do with English, but it is emphatically not English.” (https://www.canopycanopycanopy.com/contents/international_art_english).

English Language is an indexical and symbolic linguistic art. It is the number one language globally which evolves with itself and other used dialects. Physically and significantly changes occur in the meaning of words or texts as the language or digital press changes. These changes show up on speakers too; because speaker’s impression is an indexical to their social classes and cultures. Then in this case is speaker an index, what or who is a shifter? Speaker again? Or language is a shifter and not an index? It is a very complex act but, sadly signs have created and still cause a misunderstanding, discrimination, character and emotional switches (in a person) at this constituted earth system. It is a very bizarre event that the real you or thoughts, emotions of you only depends on a language and when you translate, it loses its sense or notion. You’ll be limited; substance can never be the same as it is in a native language. Majority of the time I wonder if animal whistles have semiotics too; I guess they are much modern than human being, sometimes I wish we could be free as animals.

If we go back to the gist: before searching about index and reading Rosalind Krauss notes, discussions on index forms, I’ve never thought of indexical signs in different forms of art media such as photography, video (filming), sculpture, painting etc.

Much the same as digital press, the pictorial signs such as photography, painting and drawing have semiotics too. Photography is a representation where it freely represents a work, body or story art. That is the reason for photography (photo-realism) in 1970s was a unique movement. Through the medium of this movement photographic signs became different than drawing and painting. “… the photographic sign would differ from other picture signs, which are mainly grounded in icons, by being based on another one of the three elementary signs types, the index; and this would bring the issue of photography very much to the core of sign theory.” (Göran Sonesson, Semiotics of Photography – On tracing the index, 1989, pg.5&6).

There have been many arguments in time over photographic sings and nature of photography. If we get into the roof of the meaning of photography: it means drawing with light, it is a process of an image with light effects. You capture and create an object or icon how you want, as well as being able to use many lenses and having different camera brands/pixels. These all affect the 'made' image so, for me photography fits into a subjective. “Iconic and indexical features of a photograph often come together to illustrate ‘indexicality’ that ensures its dissimilar iconic contents and realism. A photo is a witness to many of the events that pass by at lightning speed, which one’s memory may not be able to apprehend.” (https://writepass.com/journal/2015/03/the-indexical-nature-of-photography/)

It is an unrepeatable process like other forms of art. However, in my opinion the indexical elements must be found in drawing more than photography because in photography the created image or an object is not produced by hand. Yet the rise of digital technologies has intermixed this subject and I guess it contains more augmentative notions.

Picture 1: Foot Print from (http://dismagazine.com/discussion/41736/a-discursive-mask/)

#photography #index #icon #symbol #1970s