Abstract
Charles S. Peirce’s second trichotomy, which introduces the concepts of iconicity, indexicality, and symbolicity, is probably the only piece of his semiotic that is familiar to visual artists and designers. Although the concepts have found their way into the academy, their utility in the field has been reduced for a couple of reasons. First, as with all of Peirce’s philosophy, his second trichotomy is a concept that is subtle, fluid, and difficult to fully grasp in a sound bite. Second, there has simply been no bridge concept that would form a working connection between that philosophy in its logical guise and the studio practice in the visual arts. The purpose of this article is to remedy that situation by investigating the subtle ways the second trichotomy functions within the visual sphere, and to then suggest a model that can serve to bridge the divide between pure theory and practice. The article makes four main points: first, using examples from visual identity and the graphic arts, it demonstrates how the modes of icon, index, and symbol tend to be blended; second, examples from fine art are used to illustrate how the concept of abstraction, as used in the art world, can only be partially accounted for within the second trichotomy, but can be modeled by supplying a syntactical supplement; third, it expands on and elaborates a previously sketched model, the visual gamut, which makes it possible to classify visual entities according to their position within a map of semantic and syntactic space; finally, it concludes by suggesting ways this enhanced version of the visual gamut model might be used in the analysis of, or creation of, art and design, presenting suggestions for further study.
References
Beebe, Barton. 2004. The semiotic analysis of trademark law. UCLA Law Review 51(3). 621–704.Search in Google Scholar
Eco, Umberto. 1976. A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.10.1007/978-1-349-15849-2Search in Google Scholar
Floch, Jean-Marie. 2000 [1995]. Visual identities. Pierre Van Osselaer & Alec McHoul (trans.). London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Haworth, Karen & Prewitt Terry. 2020. The evolution of human consciousness and linguistic behavior: A synthetic approach to the anthropology and archaeology of language origins. Washington, DC: Rowman and Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1960. Linguistics and poetics. In Thomas Sebeok (ed.), Style in language, 350–377. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.1515/9783110802122.18Search in Google Scholar
Johannessen, Christian Mosbaek. 2017. The challenge of simple graphics for multimodal studies: Articulation and time scales in fuel retail logos. Visual Communication 17(2). 163–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357217746811.Search in Google Scholar
McLuhan, Marshall. 1994 [1964]. Understanding media: The extensions of man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.4324/9780203992968-15Search in Google Scholar
Morris, Charles W. 1971. Writings on the general theory of signs. The Hague: Mouton.10.1515/9783110810592Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1931–1966. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, 8 vols., C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss & A. W. Burks (eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Reference to Peirce’s papers will be designated CP followed by volume and paragraph number.]Search in Google Scholar
Skaggs, Steven. 1994. Logos: The development of visual symbols. Menlo Park, CA: Crisp.Search in Google Scholar
Skaggs, Steven. 2017. FireSigns: A semiotic theory for graphic design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston