To the Finnish front page
Erkki Karvonen:
IMAGOLOGIA. Imagon teorioiden esittelyä, analyysia, kritiikkiä
(Imagology. Some Theories of the Public Image Presented,
Analysed and Criticized.)
Doctoral thesis, S. sc. 315 pages. (Written in Finnish.) University of Tampere, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication May 1997
My study is concerned with "imagology" (imago=image + logos=word, account, study; the term is suggested by Taylor and Saarinen: Imagologies. Media Philosophy.). This study deals with various theories of public image: several approaches to public image and "image making" are presented, analysed, interpreted, discussed and criticized. Inspired by rhetorical studies I have been specially interested in the root metaphors and the unspoken premisses that constitute the starting point for the understanding of image in these theories. I also study distinctions or binary oppositions applied in the discourses. After reviewing the main imagological literature I develop my own "relational" approach to public image with certain elements taken from relational ontology and rhetorical epistemology by Cherwitz and Hikins.
Something happened in the United States by the mid of fifties: people started to talk and write about "image". Some say that capitalism turned to late capitalism and that the postmodern era began in those days (Jameson). To put it more moderately: television had its breakthrougt and marketing strategies altered. The political and commercial marketing in television effected American culture and gave rise to lively debates on public image. Such classics as Kenneth Boulding’s The Image. The Knowledge in Society (1956) and Daniel J. Boorstin’s The Image. Or What Happened to the American Dream (1962) are the harvest of this discussion. Both thinkers are studied closely here, as well as Orrin E. Klapp's theory of symbolic leadership, "impression management theory" based on Erving Goffman's studies and McLuhan's, Ong's and Postman's views on the impact of media technology. Walter Lippmann’s Public Opinion with the notion of "pictures in our heads" is the chronologically oldest text analysed in the study. Some rhetorical approaches to public relations and Moffitt's cultural studies approach to corporate image are the newest efforts to make sense of public image problematics.
On the grounds of the reviewed literature it seems that the concept of public image is janus-faced. On the one hand "image" is understood as communication, especially visual communication or presentation; on the other hand the image is considered as "mental picture" or idea. James E. Grunig calls these different conceptions "artistic image" and "psychological image". The concept of artistic image refers to the sender, who performs or presents something; the psychological image refers to the receiver, who interprets and comprehends the presentation somehow.
"Image" in a presentational sense is semiotically wise to understand as a choice of certain meaningful elements to exist in a presentation and as a choice of leaving other available elements absent. The elements present in a presentation could be understood as "public" and the absent elements as "secret". Every existing being is in a sense inevitably presenting or performing something, because the very existence as a certain kind of creature is a choice. We are are doomed to meaning and communication, as Merleau- Ponty puts it. "Image" in a psychological sense is useful to be understood as a cognitive "knowledge structure" or schema. The schema is like an informal theory concerning some object: it anticipates what kind of thing the object typically is. It is in some sense a projection to the future of former encounters and experiences.
The other finding is that there seem to be critical discourses in which image is regarded as a deceitful man- made reality, some kind of pseudo-reality (Boorstin, Lippmann). Such discourses are quite general in journalism. Plato’s metaphysical rhetorics is the paragon of this type of reasoning. The "philosophical pair" Appearance vs. Reality (Perelman) is a characteristic distinction here. This discourse is epistemologically oriented and it is often applied by the persons who are in the position of "buying" something; for instance a journalist trying to find out what the truth behind the scenes is (theater- metaphor is often used in this context). I call this discourse "deceitfulness discourse of image".
On the other hand there seems to exist an uncritical discourse, which I call "the marketing discourse of image". This discourse is related to "the seller’s position". The image in this rhetoric is indeed regarded as "the image of the customer’s needs and desires" and not "the image of reality" as in the deceitfulness discourse. The discourses are not talking about the same thing, and that is why the discourses do not really encounter each other. Treating needs and desires epistemologically (i.e. talking about true and false needs) leads to a problematic type of argumentation.
I am not very happy with either discourse of deceit or with marketing discourse. The former is often articulated in a metaphysical manner, and the latter is all too uncrititical. Therefore I deconstruct and then reconstruct the discourses from a relational starting point.
My own contribution is to develop a theoretical approach based on relational ontology or contextualism. From this point of view, image management is in an epistemological sense management of perspectives. Undertanding tends to be perspectivistic and one-sided. The art of rhetoric is essentially art of getting people to look at the thing from a certain perspective. Deceitful, illusory or propagandistic presentation is possible because of the people’s restricted ability to relate themselves to the object or event. To study, research or investigate how things really are, means that you have to relate yourself differently. The other means of getting more a versatile image is social discussion. From the ontological point of view image management is the production of optimal social and cultural circumstances. An image is understood here not as pseudoreality, but as social reality. The image has its reality-effects, for instance economic effects.
Keywords: public image, news management, image management, rhetorical studies.