People use systems of representation to experience, interpret, and makesense of the condit ions of their l ives both as image-makers and as viewers. Inessence, we construct ideological selves through a network of represen_tations-many of them visual-that includes television, film, photography,popular magazines, art , and fashion. Media images and popular cul ture inter-pellate us as viewers, def ning within their mode of address, style of preserl-tation, and subject matter the ideological subjects to whom they speak, yetwe also negotiate that process ourselves.

I t is important, when thinking about ideologies and how they funct ion, tokeep in mind the complicated interactions of powerful systems of belief andthe things that very different kinds of viewers bring to their experiences. lf wegive too much weight to the idea of a dominant ideology, we risk portrayingviewers as cul tural dupes who can be "force fed" ideas and values. At the sametime, if we overemphasize the potential array of interpretations viewers canmake of any given image, we can make it seem as if all viewers have the powerto interpret images any way they want, and that these interpretations will bemeaningful in their social world. In this perspective, we would lose anv senseof dominant power and its attempt to organize our ways of looking. Mean-ings of images are created in a complex relationship among producer, viewer,image or text, and social context. Because meanings are produced out of thisrelationship, there are limits to the interpretive agency of any one member ofthis group.

Encoding and decoding

lmages present to viewers clues about their dom-inant meaning. A dominant meaning can be the interpretat ion that an image'sproducers intended viewers to make. More often, though, it can be themeaning that most viewers within a given cultural setting will arrive at, regard-less of the producers' intentions. All images are both encoded and decoded.An image or object is encoded with meaning in i ts creat ion or product ion; i tis further encoded when it is placed in a given setting or context. lt is thendecoded by viewers when it is consumed by them. These processes work intandem. 5o, for instance, a television show is encoded with meaning by thewriters, producers, and the production apparatus that allows it to be made,and i t is then decoded by television viewers aicording to their part icular setof cul tural assumptions and their v iewing context.

56 Viewers Make Meanins

(1)

Stuart Hall has written that

as decoders of cultural images

Dominont-hegemontc rea

posit ion and receive the c

a television show) in an ur

Negotioted reo dtng' IheY

and i ts dominant meaning

Oppositional reoding' Fi

ei ther bY comPletelY disal

in an image or rejecting it

Viewers who take the domini

images in a relat ivelY Passive

actual ly consume images in th

can satisfy all viewers' cultura

The second and third Posit ior

to us and deserve further exP

The term "negotiation" invc

kind of bargaining over mean

context. We use the term "ne[

often "haggle" with the domir

The process of deciPhering ar

and unconscious levels. l t br i r

cultural frameworks as well e

that cling to it. Interpretation i

t ion of the meanings and ass

the force of dominant ideolog

dominant meanings, al lowinS

trans{orm and even override t

social forces. The term "nego

t ion is a struggle in which c

merelY Passive reciPients in t

Let us take, for examPle, th

which has versions in manY 'ordinarY Person can win larg

tr iv ial knowledge and luck' 1

(2\

(3)

>--

.e, interpret, and maKe

akers and as viewers ln

l network of rePresen-

;ion, film, PhotograPhY,nd poPular cul ture inter-

address, stYle of Presen-

.o whom theY sPeak, Yet

nd how theY function, to

rful sYstems of belief and

' to their exPeriences' l f we

eologY, we risk PortraYing

las and values. At the same

lterpretations viewers can

ial lv iewers have the Power

hese interPretations will be

e, we would lose anY sense

our ways o{ looking' Mean

1ip among Producer, viewer,

rngs ?re Produced out of this

gencY of any one member of

/iewers clues about their dom-

r interPretation that an image's

often, though, it can be the

ral setting will arrive at, regard-

re both encoded and decoded'

in its creation or Production; tt

3n setting or context lt is then

them. These Processes work In

s encoded with meaning bY the

rratus that allows it to be made'

according to their Particular set

Intext.

stuart Hail has written that there are three positions that viewers can takeas decoders of cultural images and artifacts.

(1) Dominont-hegemonic reoding. They can identify with the hegemonrcposit ion and receive the dominant message of an image or text (such asa television show) in an unquest ioning manner.

(2r Negotioted reoding. They can negotiate an interpretation from the imageand i ts dominant meanings.

(3) Oppositionor reoding. Finary, they can take an oppositionar position,ei ther by compretery disagreeing with the ideorogicar posi t ion embodiedin an image or rejecting it altogether (for exampte, by ignoring it).2

Viewers who take the dominant-hegemonic position can be said to decodeimages in a relatively passive manner. But it can be argued that few vrewersactuaily consume images in this manner, because there is no mass curture thatcan satisfy ail viewers' curturaily specific experiences, memories, and desires.The second and third positions, negotiation ano opposition, are more usefulto us and deserve further explanation.

The term "negotiation" invokes the process of trade. we can think of it as akind of bargaining over meaning that takes place among viewer, image, anocontext' we use the term "negotiation" in a metaphoricar sense to say that weoften "haggre" with the dominant meanings of an image when we interpret rt.The process of deciphering an image always takes place at both the conscrousand unconscious revers. rt brings into pray our own memories, knowredge, anoculturar frameworks as we, as the image itserf and the dominant meaningsthat cling to it. Interpretation is thus a mentar process of acceptance and rejec_tion of the meanings and associations that adhere to a given image throughthe force of dominant ideorogies. In this process, viewers activery struggre withdominant meanings, arowing curturary and personary specific meanings totransform and even override the meanings imposed by producers and broadersocial forces. The term "negotiation" ailows us to see how curturar interpreta-tton is a struggre in which consumers are active meaning-makers and notmerely passive recipients in the process of decoding images.

ret us take, for exampre, the terevision show who wonts to Be o Mirtionorre,which has versions in many countries and is based on the premise thar anyordinary person can win rarge amounts of money with the proper amount oftrivial knowledge and luck. The show stages a spectacle of both desire and

Viewers Make Meaning 57

greed, and is encoded by i ts producers with the meaning that we al llarge amounts of money. The show aims to create the fantasy for viewersthey too could win. A dominant hegemonic reading of the show wouldwith its encoded values that money increases one's happiness and socialstatus and that any viewer could potentially be on the show and win. However,the show has come under fire, even while it is immensely popular, for repre-sent ing crass commercial ism and the further debasement of mainstreampopular culture. Many viewers have thus engaged in a negotiated reading ofthe show, so that even while they may enjoy watching it, they see it as an indi-cator of what's wrong with contemporary culture. Furthermore, the show hasbeen criticized for equating knowledge with trivia. An oppositional readingmight read the show critically as an example of how capitalism creates theimpression that everyone has equal potential to succeed when in fact it is fun-damental to the structure of capitalism that only some can accede to power

and wealth. An oppositional reading might note, for instance, how theAmerican version of the show has been criticized for having mostly white malecontestants, thereby reflecting the structures of privilege in society.

To varying degrees, all cultures are in flux and constantly in the process

of being reinvented through cultural representations. This is in part an

effect of the economics and ideologies of the free market, which demandthat participants negotiate not only to trade in goods, services, and capital,but to produce meaning and value in the objects and representations of

cul tural products. Hence conf l ict ing ideologies coexist in tension. There is a

constant reworking of hegemonic structures, which allows both for con-tradictory ideological messages and new, potentially subversive messagesproduced through culture products. At the same t ime, semiot ics shows us thatviewers create meaning from images, objects, and texts, and that meaningsare not f ixed within them. Most images we see are caught up in dominantideologies, however, the value of negotiation as an analytic concept is thati t al lows space for the di f ferent subject iv i t ies, ident i t ies, and pleasures ofaudiences.

Appropriat ion and opposit ional readings

Of the three different modesof engagement with popular cul ture def ined by Stuart Hal l (dominant-

hegemonic, negot iated, and opposit ional) , the category of opposit ional

58 Viewers Make Meanine

raises Perhaps

to read a televisio

ffoes it make any differe

ffiaaning of an imager t

mean notiring comParec

consideration ralses tne

Who ultimatelY controls t

, . ways that oppositional r

cated dance o{ Power t

hegemonic and counter-

comes in Part from the c

oPPOsitional Practlces

While the advent of a '

and home video camerat

the technical equiPment

remains that the vast am

done through the enterta

engagement of the avera

shiP, not Production' Hol

passive reciPients of the ir

ucts such as films and tt

engage with images and

PoPular culture is referrec

that while viewers maY r

observe, theY can "make

cultural texts theY see As

the form of dismissal or rej

or turning the Page' But i t

ing a new use for, the obje

oPProPriation. APProPrtat

and reading, although it i

ditionallY defined as takinl

Pr iate is, in essence, to

"borrowing" and changin5

or elements of fashion'

Cultural aPPropriation I

make a statement that oP