Introduction to visual cultures
How the various visual aspects are perceived is not limited to what different individuals see. Such elements are based on the way individuals understood the multiple images and interpreted them based on their culture and their understanding of the subject being addressed. The interpretation of the different visual aspects is based on the ideology of visual culture where individuals interpret the social life of a particular social group based on the tangible evidence of the cultural elements they observe. Due to this reason, the visual ideology maintained by individuals is based on the composite ideas maintained by the individual, the concepts they hold, and the beliefs they have towards the culture observed. Therefore since individuals have a different perception of similar aspects, there develop the challenge of efficient interpretation of various visual elements based on the culture and the society in which the subject is drawn. In this case, culture is perceived as part of the social field of a given group of individuals. Therefore, most of the translations made on observed issues are found in the visual perception and social context addressed by the question. This paper will, therefore, provide the perceived difference between the concepts “social construction of the visual field” and the “visual construct of the social field.”
The visual culture provides a glimpse of the social construct of visual fields. This aspect is associated with the anthropological examination of visual images, and the unhistorical approach towards the vision (Gombrich, 4). This concept provides different regimes containing puzzling images that are overthrown by political critique. In this case, the different social construction and linguistic models offer an interpretation of the various images based on the aspect associated with the people related to such culture. The changes in nature and the styles used in the development of the multiple images to describe the historical timeline of the specific group of individuals according to civilization, kingdoms, and the time the visuals were developed (Gombrich, 5). Gombrich states that despite the style used in the development of art, they provided useful information about the social field of the people who lived during that time.
In this case, Egyptian art used simple illustrations because that was the best style of art they knew during that time, unlike the photographic accuracy associated with the modern art associated with the various movement developed across Europe in the first half of the twentieth century. In this case, the aspect of social construction through the visual field enables the individuals to perceive the different activities associated with a given social group, as portrayed through the paintings and images developed (Geertz, 10). This aspect is compelling since ancient visual representations are considered different and symbolic as compared to modern visual images, which reflect on the issues happening in the society. Contemporary art has made it easy to differentiate between the Chinese landscape painting and a Dutch landscape painting due to the styles used in the development of the paintings or a Greek portrait (Gombrich, 3). Therefore, the social construction of visual fields is a concept that is used to reconstruct the history of the social life associated with a specific group of people associated with such art or images.
On the contrary, the visual construction of the social field is another concept used to learn the different cultures. In this case, the anthropologist utilizes the various visual aspects associated with a specific religion to identify the way of life of the particular group of individuals related to the visuals (Geertz, 10). In this case, the sociologists utilize the various visuals available to store data associated with a specific social group. This aspect utilizes the concept of simulation where the different objects which are contained in particular visuals to identify how such elements looked like when they used to exist. In this case, the aspects use simulators to develop a different perspective portrayed in the images. Such simulators enable the identification of what is right or false (Baudrillard, 168). Such aspects are, therefore, considered as a considerable aspect in the interpretation of the social life to utilize different signs and symbols to perceive a particular meaning. Such images, posters, and visuals portray issues that are understood to have existed. According to Geertz (p.16), the use of visual aspects to examine the social field is relevant in the construction of cultural information. Visuals such as movies and films provide a simulation of the way certain social groups lived and the culture they maintained and which disappeared (Baudrillard, 171). The different visuals are perceived to not only show the author’s ability to capture the image but also their ability to capture the primitive facts associated with the visual presentation.
In conclusion, the two concepts address the same subject but through the use of different methods. Both concepts examine and capture information on the cultural aspects associated with diverse social groups. The “social construction of the visual field” concept utilizes various visual elements to develop data about a given social group. The aspect is associated with the use of ancient paintings to examine the way of life of the people perceived to create the art. On the contrary, the concept “visual construct of the social field” utilizes the information about a specific social group and use visual aspects to present the literature associated with a particular group. In this case, both concepts require high interpretation skills to obtain information from the different visual images related to a given culture and to present information associated with a given culture of invisible objects, respectively.
Works cited
Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and simulations. na, 1998.
Geertz, Clifford. The interpretation of cultures. Vol. 5019. Basic Books, 1973.
Gombrich, Ernst Hans. Art and illusion. New York: Pantheon Books, 1984.