Abstract
This article investigates the origin of editorial images, with a focus on the mental processes that enable cartoonists and illustrators across cultures to come up with novel ideas. It provides the most compelling evidence to date that recycling, where artists regularly recycle pictorial and compositional ideas they have developed earlier, is the origin of ideas. Recycling theory is thus compatible with a variety of ongoing research programs. Among these are Turner’s work on blending (2014), Musolff’s research on scenarios (2016), Langacker’s ideas on constructional schemas (1991), Johnson’s work on image schemas (1987), and van Dijk’s proposals concerning discourse complexes and intertextuality (2014). More specifically, the present study gives cognitively plausible answers to the perennial questions: To what extent does recycling shape and constrain the human way of thinking? Is it bound to certain cultural traditions? Does it characterize the style of certain artists or artistic movements? How does it contribute to discourse? Are the products of recycling always imaginative and creative? Is it a mode of efficiency? The theoretical insights are applied to 440 editorial images of Egyptian and British origin. This investigation will aid both semiotics scholarship and cognition studies based on multimodal stimuli.
Funding source: University of Bremen
Award Identifier / Grant number: CRDF-Positions No. 23 and 24
References
Abdel-Raheem, Ahmed. 2019. Pictorial framing in moral politics. A corpus-based experimental study. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780429435089Search in Google Scholar
Asquith, Christina. 2006, September 5. Who really blew up the twin towers? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/education/2006/sep/05/internationaleducationnews.highereducation.Search in Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland. 1986 [1964]. Rhetoric of the image. Trans. by R. Howard. In The responsibility of forms, 21–40. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Bateman, John. 2014. Text and image: A critical introduction to the visual-verbal divide. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315773971Search in Google Scholar
Bateman, John & Janina Wildfeuer. 2014a. Defining units of analysis for the systematic analysis of comics: A discourse-based approach. Studies in Comics 5(2). 373–403. https://doi.org/10.1386/stic.5.2.373_1.Search in Google Scholar
Bateman, John & Janina Wildfeuer. 2014b. A multimodal discourse theory of visual narrative. Journal of Pragmatics 74. 180–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.10.001.Search in Google Scholar
Blackmore, Susan. 1999. The meme machine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bordwell, David & Kristin Thompson. 2008. Film art: An introduction. New York: McGraw-Hili.Search in Google Scholar
Bransford, John D. & Marcia K. Johnson. 1972. Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11(6). 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(72)80006-9.Search in Google Scholar
Brown, Derek. (2001, September 11). Timeline: Terror and its aftermath (part 1). The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/sep/11/september11.usa24 (accessed 21 September 2020).Search in Google Scholar
Carrier, David. 2000. The aesthetics of comics. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cook, Roy T. 2011. Do comics require pictures? Or why Batman #663 is a comic. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 69. 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6245.2011.01472.x.Search in Google Scholar
Coulson, Seana. 2001. Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511551352Search in Google Scholar
Coulson, Seana. 2003. Reasoning and rhetoric: Conceptual blending in political and religious rhetoric. In Elżbieta H Oleksy & Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds.), Research and scholarship in integration processes, 59–88. Lodz, Poland: Lodz University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Coulson, Seana. 2008. Framing and blending in persuasive discourse. In Rema Rossini Favretti (ed.), Frames, corpora, and knowledge representation, 33–42. Bologna: Bononia University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Edwards, Janis L. 1993. Pictorial images as narratives: Rhetorical activation in Campaign 88 political cartoons. University of Massachusetts Amherst Doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Edwards, Janis L. 1997. Political cartoons in the 1988 presidential campaign: Image, metaphor, and narrative. New York & London: Garland.Search in Google Scholar
El Refaie, Elisabeth. 2009a. Metaphor in political cartoons: Exploring audience responses. In Charles Forceville & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal metaphor, 173–196. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
El Refaie, Elisabeth. 2009b. Multiliteracies: How readers interpret political cartoons. Visual Communication, 8(2). 181–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357209102113.Search in Google Scholar
El Refaie, Elisabeth & Kathrin Hörschelmann. 2010. Young people’s readings of a political cartoon and the concept of multimodal literacy. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(2). 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596301003679719.Search in Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner. 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic.Search in Google Scholar
Feyaerts, Kurt. 2013. A cognitive grammar of creativity. In Tony Veale, Kurt Feyaerts & Charles Forceville (eds.), Creativity and the agile mind, 205–228. Berlin: W. de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110295290.205Search in Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1982. Frame semantics. In Linguistics Society of Korea (eds.), Linguistics in the morning calm, 111–138. Seoul: Hanshin.10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00424-7Search in Google Scholar
Forceville, Charles. 2014. Relevance theory as a model for multimodal communication. In David Machin (ed.), Visual communication, 51–70. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110255492.51Search in Google Scholar
Forceville, Charles. 2016. Conceptual metaphor theory, blending theory, and other cognitivist perspectives on comics. In Neil Cohn (ed.), The visual narrative reader, 89–114. London: Bloomsbury.10.5040/9781474283670.ch-004Search in Google Scholar
Forceville, Charles. 2017. From image schema to metaphor in discourse: The FORCE schemas in animation films. In Beate Hampe (ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse, 239–256. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108182324.014Search in Google Scholar
Forceville, Charles. 2020. Analyzing visual and multimodal mass-communication: A pragmatic model. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780190845230.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Forceville, Charles, Rlisabeth El Refaie & Gert Meesters. 2014. Stylistics and comics. In Micahel Burke (ed.), The Routledge handbook of stylistics, 485–499. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315795331.ch30Search in Google Scholar
Forceville, Charles, Tony Veale & Kurt Feyaerts. 2010. Balloonics: The visuals of balloons in comics. In Joyce Goggin & Dand Hassler-Forest (eds.), The rise and reason of comics and graphic literature: Critical essays on the form, 56–73. Jefferson: McFarland.Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond & Herbert L. Colston. 1995. The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformations. Cognitive Linguistics 6. 347–378. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1995.6.4.347.Search in Google Scholar
Groensteen, Thierry. 2007 [1999]). The System of Comics, Studies in Popular Culture. Jackson, Miss: University Press of Mississippi. Translated by Bart Beaty and Nick Nguyen, from the original French Systéme de la bande dessinée (1999).Search in Google Scholar
Harvey, Robert C. 2009. How comics came to be through the juncture of word and image from magazine gag cartoons to newspaper strips: Tools for critical appreciation plus rare seldom witnessed historical facts. In Jeet Heer & Kent Worcester (eds.), A comics studies reader, 25–45. Jackson, MS: The University Press of Mississippi.Search in Google Scholar
Hayman, Greg & Henry John Pratt. 2005. What are comics? In David Goldblatt & Lee B. Brown (eds.), Aesthetics: A reader in philosophy of arts, 2nd edn, 419–424. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Kintch, Walter & Edith Greene. 1978. The role of culture-specific schemata in the comprehension and recall of stories. Discourse Processes l. 1–13.10.1080/01638537809544425Search in Google Scholar
Kintsch, Walter & Teun van Dijk. 1975. Recalling and summarizing stories. Boulder, CA: University of Colorado.Search in Google Scholar
Kintsch, Walter, Theodore S. Mandel & Ely Kozminsky. 1977. Summarizing scrambled stories. Memory & Cognition 5(5). 547–552. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03197399.Search in Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther & Theo van Leeuwen. 2006. Reading images, 2nd edn. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203619728Search in Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2013. The language of life and death: The transformation of experience in oral narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139519632Search in Google Scholar
Labov, William & Joshua Waletzky. 1967. Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. In June Helm (ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual arts, 12–44. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories tell us about the nature of thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 2004. Don’t think of an elephant: Know your values and frame the debate. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 2008. The political mind: Why you can’t understand 21st century politics with an 18th century brain. New York, NY: Viking.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 2014. Mapping the brain’s metaphor circuitry: Metaphorical thought in everyday reason. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00958. Retrieved 14/09/2018 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4267278/.Search in Google Scholar
Langacker, Roland. 1991. Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Langacker, Roland. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey N. & Mick Short. 1981. Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. London & New York: Longman.10.2307/1772012Search in Google Scholar
McCloud, Scott. 1994. Understanding comics: The invisible art. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.Search in Google Scholar
McVeigh, Karjen. 2011, September 8. Newly released 9/11 audio recordings reveal chaos and confusion, The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/08/september-11-audio-recordings-public (accessed 21 September 2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/1985793.1985990.Search in Google Scholar
Meskin, Aaron. 2007. Defining comics? The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 65(4). 369–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-594x.2007.00270.x.Search in Google Scholar
Meskin, Aaron. 2017. Defining comics. In Frank Bramlett, Roy T. Cook, & Aaron Meskin (eds.), The Routledge companion to comics, 221–229. London & New York: Routledge.10.1111/j.1540-594X.2007.00270.xSearch in Google Scholar
Mikkonen, Kai. 2017. The narratology of comic art. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315410135Search in Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas. 2016. Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Search in Google Scholar
Oakley, Todd. 1998. Conceptual blending, narrative discourse, and rhetoric. Cognitive Linguistics 9(4). 320–360.10.1515/cogl.1998.9.4.321Search in Google Scholar
Oakley, Todd. 2013. Toward a general theory of film spectatorship. Case Western Reserve University.https://case.edu/artsci/engl/Library/Oakley-TheoryFilmSpectator.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Peña, M Sandra. 2008. Dependency systems for image-schematic patterns in a usage-based approach to language. Journal of Pragmatics 40(6). 1014–1066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.03.001.Search in Google Scholar
Poulsen, Dorothy, Eileen Kintsch, Walter Kintsch & David Premack. 1979. Children’s comprehension and memory for stories. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 28. 379–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(79)90070-5.Search in Google Scholar
Pramaggiore, Maria & Tom Wallis. 2008. Film: A critical introduction. London: Laurence King.Search in Google Scholar
Pratt, Henry John. 2017. Comics and adaptation. In Frank Bramlett, Roy T. Cook & Aaron Meskin (eds.), The Routledge companion to comics, 230–228. London & New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Royce, Terry D. (2006). Analysing multimodal intertextuality: An illustrative analysis. In Masachiyo Amano (ed.), Multimodality: Towards the most efficient communication by humans, 101–114. Nagoya: Graduate School of Letters, Nagoya University.Search in Google Scholar
Saraceni, Mario. 2003. The language of comics (Intertext 15). London & New York, NY: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Saraceni, Mario. 2016. Relatedness: Aspects of textual connectivity in comics. In Neil Cohn (ed.), The visual narrative reader, 115–129. London: Bloomsbury.10.5040/9781474283670.ch-005Search in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance theory: Communication and cognition, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 2007. Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511618987Search in Google Scholar
Tseng, Chiao-I. & John A. Bateman. 2018. Cohesion in comics and graphic novels: An empirical comparative approach to transmedia adaptation in City of Glass. Adaptation. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/adaptation/apx027.Search in Google Scholar
Turner, Mark. 2014. The origin of ideas: Blending, creativity, and the human spark. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Uidhir, Christy Mag. 2017. Comics and seriality. In Frank Bramlett, Roy T. Cook & Aaron Meskin (eds.), The Routledge companion to comics, 248–256. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 1976. Narrative macrostructures: Local and cognitive foundations. PT 1. 547–568.Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 1977. Semantic macro-structures and knowledge frames in discourse comprehension. In Marcel A. Just & Patricia A. Carpenter (ed.), Cognitive processes in comprehension, 3–32. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 1980. Macrostructures: An interdisciplinary study of global structures in discourse, interaction, and cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 2003. The discourse-knowledge interface. In Gilbert Weiss & Ruth Wodak (eds.), Critical discourse analysis: Theory and interdisciplinarity, 85–109. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230514560_5Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 2004. Discourse, knowledge and ideology: Reformulating old questions and proposing some new solutions. In Martin Pütz, JoAnne Neff van Aertselaer & Teun A. van Dijk (eds.), Communicating ideologies: Multidisciplinary perspectives on language, discourse, and social practice, 5–38. New York: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 2008. Discourse and context: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511481499Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 2014. Discourse and knowledge: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107775404Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 2018. Discourse and migration. In Ricard Zapata-Barrero & Evren Yalaz (eds.), Qualitative research in European migration studies, 227–246. Cham: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-76861-8_13Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun & Walter Kintsch. 1983. Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Waugh, Coulton. 1991 [1947]. The Comics. Reprint. London and Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi/New York, NY: Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth. 2014. Political discourse analysis – distinguishing frontstage and backstage contexts: A discourse-historical approach. In John Flowerdew (ed.), Discourse in context, 321–346. London: Bloomsbury.Search in Google Scholar
Worth, Sol. 1981. Studying visual communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.10.9783/9781512809282Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
