Reading note on Hall, S. (2003) Representation, meaning and language---Yiwen He

    One might think that representation is a simple straightforward process, however, it’s much more complicated than it appears. It involves the use of language, signs, images and most importantly intention to represent things. In the chapter, Hall mainly focused on the practices of representation and claimed that the aim of this chapter is to introduce readers to this topic and to explain what it is about and why they give it such importance in cultural studies.

     Hall started by giving definition of the concept of representation. Representation connects meaning and language to culture. It means "using language to say something meaningful about, or to represent, the world meaningfully, to other people”.

      According to Hall, there are three theories of representation: the reflective, the intentional and the constructionist approaches. The constructionist approach, which has had the most significant impact on cultural studies, includes the semiotic approach and the discursive approach. 

      With reflective approach to representation, it proposes that language works by simply reflecting or imitating a fixed “truth” that is already present in the real world. The intentional approach argues the opposite, suggesting that the speaker or author of a particular work imposes meaning onto the world through the use of language. The constructionist approach implies that meaning is not inherent within an object itself, rather we construct meaning using systems of representation (concepts and signs).

        Saussure defined semiotics to be “a science that studies the life of signs within society” and “it is a general approach to the study of signs in culture, and of culture as a sort of language” (Hall, 2013). He shaped the semiotic approach to representation. He argued that meaning depends on language. Signs are made up of form and idea- signifier and signified. There is no universal meaning. It depends on each particular culture's history and context. A language, then, according to Saussure can be best understood as a system of signs that organizes the world and renders it comprehensible to us. Anything that is served to express or communicate certain message is considered language, like music, paintings, and so on.

     In my point of view, I totally agree with this part, since there is no word that signifies a certain meaning that everyone in every culture would agree upon understanding. Even in the same culture, the signifier may change over time, and still represent the same signified.

      What follows is the semiotic approach. In the semiotic approach, not only words and images but objects themselves can function as signifiers in the production of meaning. A new system of representation was the produced by Foucault, that he called it the “discourse”. Ideas can belong to the same discursive formation when they refer to the same object or event. Outside of discourse, nothing has meaning. Without discourse, objects are meaningless. The constructionist theory says that things take on meaning and knowledge only within a discourse. Thus discourse produces knowledge, not the things.

      According to Hall, in Foucault’s later work, he became more concerned about power than meaning, he was seeking the knowledge that is formed through meaning and not the meaning itself, because he believed that knowledge is a form of power. However, this part makes sense to some extent, it is widely debatable. “The major critique levelled against his work is that he tends to absorb too much into ‘discourse’ and this has the effect of encouraging his followers to neglect the influence of the material, economic and structural factors in the operation of power/language.” (Hall, 2003)