11 Representation

Dr. Saradindu Bhattacharya

Section 1: Introduction – Definition and Scope

Representation, in a broad sense, refers to any act, process or product of verbal, auditory and/or visual portrayal of human experience. In a fundamental sense, all representation is about language. The term ‘language’ has been used here to mean not just a mode of communication based on the spoken or the written word but any system of signs that stand in relation to one another and are used, based on common agreement, to represent certain objects and ideas. For example, a variety of pictorial ‘signs’ are used in mathematics to indicate basic functions of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division and constitute a specific ‘language’ that represents relations between numbers. Similarly, the use of different kinds of tunes as background music in films to indicate the ‘mood’ of various scenes is an exercise in language as sound itself functions as a ‘sign’. There are different kinds of signs, namely, icons, indices and symbols. An icon is a sign that bears a certain resemblance to the object or the idea it represents. Thus, for example, the pictorial markers on the doors of men’s and women’s toilets, or those meant for the disabled, resemble, in a diagrammatic way, the outward physical form of the user and function as signs. An index is a sign that bears a relation of proximity or causality to what it represents. For instance, a tombstone is a sign of death both because it is erected in memory of the deceased and because it bears an actual, physical proximity to the body of dead person. The third kind of sign, the symbol, is by far is the most dominant in most languages, since it is not restricted by considerations of physical resemblance or proximity and is simply used as a matter of convention to stand in for any idea or object to which it bears no obvious connection. For example, the word ‘apple’, both in its spoken and written form, has no natural relation to the fruit it represents except the one that the linguistic tradition establishes. There are some signs that may have iconic, indexical as well as symbolic value. For instance, the Holy Cross serves as an index because it represents the very object on which Christ was crucified; it is also an icon because of its potential to serve as visual reminder of Christ’s suffering and sacrifice; finally, it functions as a symbol because it represents abstract values like kindness, charity and forgiveness that Christ is held to embody. It is obvious that the meaning(s) a particular sign represents, though assigned arbitrarily, emerge from very specific cultural contexts and become codified through sustained use over time.

Notions of culture are also inextricably related to representation, as it is the myriad forms in which all human knowledge is expressed and transmitted from one generation to the next that constitutes human civilization. Ancient philosophers like Plato and Aristotle grappled with the concept of representation, with the former critiquing art as being twice removed from reality and the latter defending it on the grounds that it represents things as they should be rather than as they are. Among the pre-historic forms of art that have survived into the modern age are the cave paintings found in Asia and Europe, which represent various animals that human beings encountered in the early stages of civilization. In ancient Greece and Rome, more complex forms of representation emerged, which dealt with human experience of loss and suffering as well as wonder and joy. Thus, classical Greek and Roman drama, involving the use of costumes and music combined with poetry and dialogue, sought to represent the social and political realities and belief systems of its times. In the modern world, the emergence of mass media has had a deep impact on the methods and means of representation, both of actual human experience and of the possibilities of human imagination. Thus, for instance, while on the one hand digital technology makes it possible for a doctor to look inside the human body for medical research or surgical intervention, on the other hand the possibilities of such technological innovations are reflected in science fiction that often represents hybrid bodies and their role in society. Thus, it is evident that representation is culturally and historically specific insofar as it reflects the conditions of human existence and is determined by the means through which humans ‘re- present’ their experiences and ideas. In fact, the various branches of study that are now part of the institutional structures of the academia all deal with representations in some form or the other. Thus, biomedicine treats the human body as a system of organs that is susceptible to invasion, anthropology investigates differences between peoples and cultures based on ethnicity, political science examines the constitution of states based on notions of citizenship and nationality. Each of these disciplines selects its own methods of enquiry into what are essentially different aspects of common human experience, and evolves its own specific ‘language’ for representing that experience. Thus, for example, a biology textbook may describe the experience of cancer in terms of the uncontrolled growth of malignant tissue in the human body, a sociological survey may indicate correspondences between certain kinds of lifestyles with the incidence of the disease, while a novel may focus on the individual patient’s contemplation of and confrontation with issues of beauty, loss and mortality. The process of representation is thus essentially one that involves the specialized use of language within a cultural context.

Section 2: Representation – Theories, Practice and Significance

Representation is always culturally rooted because language itself is never a transparent, objective medium for the communication of meaning. The meaning(s) of a particular sign are delimited by what its users consider to be its valid utterance within a specific social and cultural context. In fact, the ‘reality’ that language represents is always contingent, provisional and mediated and never quite simply ‘neutral’. For example, the use of the images of two birds pecking or two flowers dangling together in the air in popular Hindi cinema of the 1960s and 70s signified sexual activity between the hero and heroine. This symbolic linguistic code came to be shared and understood by filmmakers and cine-goers within a certain cultural context where explicit public representation of sex was considered taboo. Thus, the language of cinema, in this case, not only denotes romantic love as it is experienced by the fictional characters on screen but also suggests the audience’s attitudes towards sex. The repeated use of such imagery turns these signs into codes bearing conventionalized meanings and thereby reinforces common beliefs and values till the point that they seem ‘natural’ and ‘real’. The construction and reinforcement of ‘reality’ through such reiterative application of language is known as discourse. Academic attention to the study of discourse in the 20th century has been sharply focused on how different individuals and communities are represented within regimes of power that construct their distinct social and cultural identities. Thus, scholars of gender studies have looked into the politics of representation of women in the domains of literature and art, science, politics and law, and have related it to the subservient position they occupy in patriarchal society; similarly, scholars of postcolonial studies have investigated how the construction of an inferior non-European racial identity for the colonized subject through sustained representation by the colonizer assisted the Western imperialist project. The integral connection between social ‘reality’ and power and forms of representation has thus been the chief object of academic enquiry across disciplines, especially in the humanities and social sciences. In fact, in the latter half of the 20th century, poststructuralist theorists like Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida have pointed out that all ‘reality’ is available to us only as representation; that is to say, we do not have a direct, unmediated access to the true nature of objects and experiences – what we have are various representations of those objects and experiences in language. This is not to suggest that the world of objects that we experience and respond to every day has no material existence; rather, any knowledge about that world is made available to us through the medium of language. Also, any act of communication about that world must necessarily happen in and through language. For example, even an experience as common as a headache can be described by one individual to another only in linguistic terms such as “throbbing pain” or “dull pressure”. Complex dimensions of pain, such as the emotional trauma resulting from grief and loss, also become communicable when such experience is represented in culturally recognizable ways. Thus, survivors of the Holocaust or the Partition are able to narrate their ‘stories’ to those who have not witnessed or undergone such trauma by representing their experiences in the common language of human suffering. In a sense, the discursive representation of individual and collective experiences ‘constructs’ these as objects of knowledge that can be interpreted, assimilated and communicated in various social and cultural contexts.

Representation is therefore not merely a matter of the linguistic construction of the ‘reality’ of human experience – it also pertains to the actual application of the knowledge thus created to the ordering of various social relations between individuals and groups. For example, the representation of members of certain castes and tribes in India as victims of social exploitation and oppression not only creates their group identity as one that merits sympathetic consideration but also translates into the implementation of actual social and political policies of reservation in public educational institutions and offices. Quite naturally, representation has become one of the most important subjects of enquiry in the domain of cultural studies, since it reflects the very structure of the organization of human thought and action within specific social contexts. The experience of everyday life, on which scholars of cultural studies base their observations and theories, is fundamentally determined by the ways in which individuals represent themselves to one another as agents in particular social relations. Such representation, in turn, also reinforces those social relations and is therefore crucial to the establishment and maintenance of structures of power. Thus, for instance, the relation between a teacher and her students is based on the institutionalized representation of the former as the repository of very specialized forms of knowledge and the latter as learners who ought to inculcate qualities like obedience, patience and perseverance in order to acquire that knowledge. The students’ acquisition of such knowledge then facilitates the reproduction of similar relations of power when they themselves teach others within a familial or an academic structure. Cultural studies engages with the performance of individual identities and roles within various structures of power and investigates how representation itself functions both as the cause and the effect of the web of social relations within which we make sense of our experiences as human beings.

Section 3: Representation, Stereotypes and Identity

The sustained representation of particular communities, based on a few distinct characteristics that they are commonly believed to possess, often leads to the emergence of stereotypes. The discriminating factor in such cases of stereotyping may be race, gender, sexuality, age, class, region, religion, language or nationality. Members of a certain group, identified in terms of any of these factors, are represented as embodying the peculiar physical, intellectual, linguistic or behavioral traits that mark them out from others. The effect of such representation, in myriad domains (politics, trade and commerce, arts) and across various media (TV, film, newspapers, internet), is that the repeated associations of these traits with individuals and communities become part of the ‘common’ knowledge about them and turn into popular beliefs. Thus, what is essentially a matter of popular perception becomes over time an easy, but often reductive, way of identifying and responding to a particular individual or group. Jokes based on ethnic or racial differences are one of the most common examples of cultural stereotyping through representation. For instance, the Santa-Banta jokes that are immensely popular in India are based on the common perception of the Punjabis as a people who are not very bright. The representation of Punjabi characters as good natured dimwits in popular fiction (such as the novels of Chetan Bhagat), in cinema (like Karan Johar’s films), on TV (shows like Comedy Nights with Kapil), and increasingly on the web (cartoons shared by members of social networking sites) together constitute the cultural context in which the humour of such jokes is generated and commonly understood. While such ‘funny’ acts of representation may seem innocent and harmless, they can give rise to prejudices that result in serious discriminatory behaviour against individuals based on their group identity. Thus, the Nazi representation of the Jews as a devious, parasitic, mercenary race through the 1930s formed the political, social and cultural background against which the horrors of the European Holocaust unfolded during the Second World War.

Another consequence of stereotyping is that the unique characteristics of an individual often get subsumed under his/her group identity. Since stereotypes function by focusing on and exaggerating a limited number of qualities that a person or a community is deemed to possess and expected to exhibit, they do not allow for the representation of other qualities that do not conform to the received image of that person or community. In this sense, stereotypes are a form of cultural representation that is restrictive and reductive rather than reflective and realistic. For example, the American stereotype about Indians being naïve and somewhat effeminate (derived from the colonial tradition of such representation of the Oriental subject) is evident in the portrayal of Raj Koothrappali in the immensely popular sitcom The Big Bang Theory. The character’s considerable professional achievements as a scientist – he has a doctorate in astrophysics and holds a faculty position at an American university – are rendered secondary by the narrative focus on his exceptionally privileged upbringing (parents who are “very rich in a very poor country”), his repressed sexuality (he struggles to communicate with women, presumably because of the segregation of the sexes in India), and his occasional lapse of command over the English language and lack of knowledge about American culture. All of these character traits represent Raj as a ‘funny’ character based on a degree of racial stereotyping that would be considered politically incorrect in a government document but is quite commonly accepted and enjoyed on public television. Though the show does establish an affinity between Raj and his other colleagues, his racial difference from them forms the basis of the construction of his ‘identity’ within this peer group. Raj’s responses to many of the comic situations in the show are influenced by his ‘Indianness’; conversely, the other characters’ responses to his behaviour are also frequently governed by their perception of his native cultural background. The construction and interpretation of stereotypes through popular representation(s) is thus not only about identity but also about identification – the former being the ways in which the individual perceives himself in a social group and the latter being the ways in which the group understands the individual’s role and position within its structures.

Section 4: Representation, Discourse and Ideology

The patterns of representation of individuals and groups in various domains of private and public existence not only construct their distinct identities but also result in the formation of discursive frameworks within which all their thoughts, ideas and actions find meaning. The sustained use of language in particular ways across various media (that is, discourse) constitutes the individual as a ‘subject’. Here, the term ‘subject’ denotes not just the theme or the matter of representation (such as the racially specific characteristics of an individual) but also the individual himself in terms of how s/he thinks and behaves in culturally predetermined ways. For example, the popular representation of women as nurturers and care-givers and men as providers and defenders is enacted from the very early stages in the lives of children through the kinds of games they are encouraged to play. Dolls are most commonly given to girls who then mimic the ‘feminine’ domestic labour of cooking, feeding, cleaning and keeping house in the games they play with those dolls. On the other hand, the toys given to boys (such as models of automobiles and weapons) promote them to imitate the aggressive ‘masculine’ roles of fighters and racers. Thus, the discursive representation of the division of social labour on the lines of gender has an obvious material aspect in terms of how it guides the behaviour of human subjects. Insofar as individuals accept and willingly participate in the performance of these culturally constructed roles as ‘natural’, they can also be said to ‘subject’ themselves to such discursive regimes. The translation of such acts of representation into social codes of thought and action constitutes what is known in cultural theory as ‘ideology’. Ideologies often pervade many social institutions and domains and govern not just the speech and conduct of individuals but the collective consciousness and belief systems of entire communities. For example, the modern capitalist ideology, based on economic ideas of individual ownership of property, competition and maximization of profits in a free market, manifests itself in the discourses of academic excellence and discipline in schools and colleges, of obedience, responsibility, loyalty and inheritance in the family, and of consumption and pleasure in the public domains of trade, commerce and entertainment. Thus, a child grows up learning that rigorous improvement of one’s natural talents and acquisition of new skills, at school, in the playground, in quiz contests and music and dance reality shows, is essential to prepare oneself to participate in adult society as a productive member. At the same time, through constant exposure to the mass-marketed products of consumer culture (food, clothes, accessories, electronic gadgets, and so on), an individual learns from a very early stage in her life to recognize these are desirable and even essential to individual happiness and social status. Being a ‘successful’ citizen of such a global consumer society involves inculcating the economic values of productivity and possession on which it is based and actively participating in the institutions and processes through which such values are naturalized. Thus, ideology is not extraneous to the identity of an individual; rather, it is constitutive of the meanings that an individual makes of his or her own roles and position in society.

It must also be pointed out here that the relation between the representation, discourse and ideology is circular, that is to say, each influences the other as components of a reciprocal relationship. Forms of representation do not merely lead to the emergence of particular discourses and ideologies; the ideological bases for social institutions, practices and beliefs also legitimize certain kinds of cultural knowledge as valid and dismiss others as invalid through representation in language. For instance, the institution of marriage, based on patriarchal ideology, prescribes, in most cultures, heteronormative monogamy as the model for sexual relations and defines any other form of expression of sexuality as immoral and/or illegal. Those who do not adhere to such norms of socially acceptable behaviour are often described as deviant (derogatory terms like ‘faggot’, ‘fruit’, ‘nympho’), criminal (“threat to the fundamental structure of family and society”) or insane (genetically ‘abnormal’ or psychologically ‘disturbed’). We must also remember that allied discourses and ideologies do not function in isolation but often in tandem with one another. Thus, the ideology of nationalism is realized through myriad discourses across various media and public domains – in cinema through the representation of ‘heroic’ police officers and soldiers defending the country against smugglers and terrorists, in sports through the display of skill, teamwork and competitive zeal, in trade and commerce through the export of various ‘ethnic’ goods and cultural artefacts, and in politics through the assertion of principles like sovereignty, territorial integrity, and economic progress and self- sufficiency. These discourses have a direct impact on the way we perceive and project ourselves as belonging to one nation in spite of our internal linguistic and cultural differences and reinforce the idea of India in various representational forms. It must also be pointed out here that the representation of a particular object, concept, individual or group is dynamic in nature, that is, it changes across time periods and cultures. For instance, if India as a nation sought to establish its political independence from the British during the colonial period by resisting Western economic activity within its territory, the post-liberalization avatar of the nation is one that represents itself as an attractive ground for foreign investment and collaboration. Ideology itself may thus evolve to include new ideas and discourses, which manifest themselves as new forms of representation.

Section 5: Representation and Power

Since representation always involves the generation, establishment and reiteration of certain kinds of knowledge (about objects, individuals, belief systems and practices) and certain modes of thinking and belonging in society, it is inherently political in nature; that it to say, it is about the generation and maintenance of social power. Those who have control over and access to the language in which representation occurs enjoy the authority and power to decide which forms of knowledge are culturally legitimate and valuable. For instance, biomedicine as a discipline requires its practitioners to acquire rigorous scientific training in identifying pathological conditions, their causes and possible cures. The highly specialized and technical language of medicine used commonly by doctors results from, as well as signifies, their authority over the knowledge of the functioning of the human body. Thus, though the patient is the one who goes through the actual bodily sensations that mark a physical ailment, it is the doctor who has access to the language that codifies that physical experience as a disease and therefore also the power to suggest remedies for the same. Sometimes, patients of chronic ailments such as asthma acquire a certain degree of technical know-how about their own condition from their prolonged experience of being treated. In such cases, the patient may sometimes override the doctor’s diagnosis and engage in self-administration of medicines, thereby enacting an appropriation of the cultural knowledge that gives the doctor his or her authority and power. Thus, the question of power and representation is one that must take into account both the institution or person who represents and the one who gets represented.

The representation of one group of individuals by another often involves the exertion of control and power which may lead to oppression and exploitation in various forms. Thus, for instance, patriarchal ideology, based on the representation of women as being inferior to men, accords them a subservient social position in the domain of home and family (codified through the institution of marriage) as well as work (where female workers, ranging from the glamorous world of celluloid to the field of agriculture, are regularly paid lesser wages than their male counterparts). Similarly, the caste system in India has traditionally excluded members of Dalit communities from performing certain religious rituals and practices, accessing common sources of food and water, and participating in various academic and professional careers. It is the common acceptance and defence of such representations as the norm, not only by the ones who exert power but also by those who are thus subjugated, that enables certain oppressive modes of thought and behaviour to dominate social relations. Thus, when women or Dalits themselves internalize the inferior status accorded to them in society and adhere to the subordinate gender or caste roles prescribed for them by those in power, they perpetuate their own exploitation under such regimes of power. Quite naturally, the struggle for social power is essentially a struggle for control over representation. Thus, in the 20th century, feminists and Dalit activists have challenged the discriminatory assumptions on which traditional representations of gender or caste are based. Instead, they seek to uncover hitherto marginalized representations of gender and caste and thereby create an alternative history of culture and civilization. In the postcolonial context, subaltern narratives of liminal historical figures perform a similar revisionary function. Counter-representational narratives are also an effective means of interrogating prevalent discourses and ideologies. The innovative use of popular themes and motifs for the purposes of satire or parody is one of the ways in which representation serves to question traditional structures of power. For instance, a film like Queenemployswell-established generic conventions of romantic comedy and coming-of-age narratives to present a ‘love story’ that ends not in the protagonist’s marriage but with her realization of personal happiness and ambition outside the domain of matrimony. Thus, the film subtly challenges the patriarchal structures of power that define a woman’s identity and role in society only in terms of familial relationships. Conversely, in some cases, identification and acknowledgement of an individual’s or a community’s social disempowerment may also serve as a strategy for reclamation of power. Thus, the recent demands by certain groups of people to be recognized as Dalits in India may be seen as their attempt at accessing social power through the official channels of affirmative action.

The relation between representation and power has assumed new degrees of complexity in the era of globalization, as there is now a widespread collaboration between governments, industries and media houses, all of which exert a tremendous influence on the representation of individual, groups, cultures and nations. For example, Narendra Modi’s recent ascension to political power in India has been represented as the beginning of a new phase in the country’s march towards ‘progress’ and ‘development’ not only by national and international media channels but also by industrialists and business conglomerates, both at home and abroad, eager to reap the benefits of the increasing privatization of an enormous economy. At the same time, modes of representation have now become more easily accessible to common men and women with the coming of digital technology, which creates a more democratic, polyphonic space of interaction between myriad discourses and ideologies. Thus, social networking sites have been playing a major role in mobilizing public opinion on various social and political issues across the world. For example, the recent ‘Kiss of Love’ campaign in a few Indian cities evoked responses from across the country on the issue of moral policing through debates on social media. While the actual, physical participation in the campaign was restricted mainly to urban youth, the discussion it has generated in the virtual world brings up significant questions of individual freedom and expression, law and public morality, and cultural ethos. The struggle for social power, in this case, is one that is effected as well as analysed through the prism of popular representations of ideas and identities in the public domain. Representation has thus become one of the most contested terrains of theory and praxis within the field of cultural studies.

Audio-Visual Quadrant

The Representation Project<http://therepresentationproject.org/> Representation and the Media, by Stuart Hall <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sbYyw1mPdQ>

Media Coverage and Female Athletes <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVqHsMP-GTM> Killing Us Softly: Advertising’s Image of Women, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxfmdfj_KhQ>

Gendering of Toys

Racial Stereotypes in Popular Media

REFERENCE:

• Banaji, Shakuntala, ed. South Asian Media Cultures: Audiences, Representations, Contexts.
• London: Anthem Press, 2011.
• Gentz, Natascha, and Stephan Kramer, eds. Globalization, Cultural Identities, and Media Representations. New York: State University of New York Press, 2006.
• Hall, Peter A. et al, eds. The Politics of Representation in the Global Age: Identification,
• Mobilization, and Adjudication. New York: Cambridge UP, 2014.
• Hall, Stuart, ed. Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. London: Sage, 1997.
• Hooks, Bell. Outlaw Culture. New York: Routledge, 1994.
• Owens, Craig. Beyond Recognition: Representation, Power, and Culture. Berkeley: U of California P, 1992.
• Pickering, Michael. Stereotyping: The Politics of Representation. London: Palgrave, 2001.