论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】Stuart Hall’s Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse is perhaps an outstanding publication in search of popular culture in the cultural studies. This thesis tries to analyse the hot Korean show Love Letter in China with Hall’s model of televisual communication， whose discussion is still of vital importance in the process of cultural globalization.
【Key words】encoding； code； decoding； love letter
I. Introduction
Popular culture is undoubtedly characteristic of consumption， amusement and popularity. Since the rapid development of economy has led to tension in their life， work and study， people begin to pursue funny TV program as entertainment tool without brain devotions. The popular Korean show Love Letter perhaps is it， which is a hot TV program in China about love and marriage， choosing Korean Pop stars as the cast and focusing on producing a sense of fun and facetiously. It’s well-known that Stuart Hall’s Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse is an outstanding publication in search of popular culture in the cultural studies. TV program has been considered as a mass of visual codes， as a result，‘watch’is no longer in the physical meaning， but decoding as a way of information communication， so what is the‘meaning’of the code？ Who and how put this meaning into program？ How do people decode the‘meaning’？
II. Hall’s Theory of Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse
In Hall’s model of televisual communication， the circulation of ‘meaning’in televisual discourse passes through three distinctive moments：‘each has its specific modality and conditions of existence’. First， media professionals put into meaningful televisual discourse their particular account of a‘raw’social event. At this moment in the circuit， a range of ways of looking at the world are‘in dominance’.
The moment of media production is framed throughout by meanings and ideas； knowledge-in-use concerning the routines of production， historically defined technical skills， professional ideologies， institutional knowledge， definitions and assumptions， assumptions about the audience and so on frame the constitution of the programme through this production structure. Further， though the production structures of television originate the television discourse， they do not constitute a closed system. They draw topics， treatments， agendas， events， personnel， images of the audience， definitions of the situation from other sources and other discursive formations within the wider socio-cultural and political structure of which they are a differentiated part. Thus the media professionals involved determine how the‘raw’social event will be encoded in discourse. However， in the second moment， once the‘raw’social event is in meaningful discourse， that is， once it has taken the form of televisual discourse， the formal rules， of language and discourse are‘in dominance’； the message is now open， for example， to the play of polysemy.
Since the visual discourse translates a three-dimensional world into two-dimensional planes， it cannot， of course， be the reference or concept it signifies… Reality exists outside language， but it is constantly mediated by and through language： and what we can know and say has to be produced in and through discourse. Discursive‘knowledge’is the product not of the transparent representation of the‘real’in language but of the articulation of language on real relations and conditions. Thus there is no intelligible discourse without the operation of a code.
Finally， in the third moment， the moment of audience decoding， another range of ways of looking at the world are‘in dominance’. An audience is confronted not by a‘raw’social event， but by a discursive translation of the event. If the event is to become‘meaningful’to the audience， it must decode and make sense of the discourse. If no meaning is taken， there can be no‘consumption’. If the meaning is not articulated in practice， it has no effect. If an audience acts upon its decoding， this then encoded in another discourse. Thus， through the circulation of discourse，‘production’becomes‘consumption’to become‘production’again. The circuit stars in the‘social’and ends， to begin again， in the‘social’.
III. Analysis of Korean Show Love Letter with the Theory of Hall
At first moment， media professionals put into meaningful televisual discourse their particular account of a‘raw’social event. At this moment in the circuit， a range of ways of looking at the world are‘in dominance’. Thus the media professionals involved determine how the‘raw’social event will be encoded in discourse. Meaning can be transmitted largely depending on code system which is composed of technical skills， professional ideologies， institutional knowledge， definition and assumption about the viewer. Different cultural groups have their code systems， so media professionals of Love Letter produce their code system as follows：
1. It is key for a program to determine who will be its potential viewers. Love Letter wins a large part of viewer because of its exaggerative and humorous atmosphere. Thus it fixes the younger generation as its core viewers who are open-minded， easily gaining access to something new and voluntarily devoting themselves to the program. 2. The famous host Jiang Hudong， a fat plain-looking middle-aged man， pushes the sense of facetiosity in the program to the extreme with his exaggerative style， even regardless of his own image.
3. Love Letter is an entertaining show about love and marriage， focusing on how to make fun for viewers. The competition for couple is no more than a funny game， so the host and Pop stars always play games for fun， which can make the show scene full of pleasure and burst out laughing.
In a word， for the sake of viewers， media professionals produces program in their own code system and construct messages so as to be understood by the viewer.
In the second moment， once the program has taken the form of televisual discourse， the message is now open to the play of polysemy. At this moment， Love Letter’s meaning has been totally out of control by media professionals， and individual viewers can‘read’the code in different meaning by their own understandings.
In the third moment， three hypothetical positions from which decodings of a televisual discourse may be constructed. Positions viewers of Love Letter take are quite in harmony with these three positions in Hall’s theory.
The first hypothetical position is that of the dominant-hegemonic position. When the viewer takes the connoted meaning from the program full and straight， and decodes the message in terms of the reference code in which it has been encoded， the viewer is operating inside the dominant code. This is the position which the professionals assume when encoding a message which has already been signified in a hegemonic manner. Obviously， the most appealing part in the Love Letter is that Pop stars reveal their true feelings and embarrassing gaffe which are widely divergent from their images established on stage. Therefore， viewers obtain a sense of happiness and seem to appreciate a play casting by idols as common as us.
The second position we could identify is that of the negotiated code or position. Majority viewers probably understand quite adequately what has been dominantly defined and professionally signified. Viewers of this position think Love Letter is a funny starring show to relieve them of pressure and tension in the humorous atmosphere， but they still hold a critical attitude to it， that is partly inside the code. So they positively oppose something in Love Letter as follows：
1. The stars as adults meddling with love and marriage jokingly by words like“I love you”，“marry me” at random would misguide the younger generation about their outlook， especially that they often produce tanglesome love affairs involving several people by design. 2. Love Letter pays too much attention to one’s appearance. A handsome man and a beautiful woman can be couple at the end of game in the program， in turn， plain-looking or ill-looking ones often be ridiculed and no one would like to be couple with him or her. In fact， it seeks after sensuous attraction blindly and publicizes wrong value-orientation， a definitely spiritual pollution， having negative effect on young people.
Finally， it is possible for a viewer perfectly to understand both the literal and the connotative inflection given by discourse but to decode the message in a globally contrary way. He detotalises the message in the preferred code in order to retotalise the message within some alternative framework of reference. Viewers of this position would never appreciate Love Letter but believe this program pack the beautiful love into commodity in order to gain high audience rating and profit， disregarding moral ethics and social responsibility media professionals should take on； they explore market by giving full play to idols’ commercial potential， misleading viewer’s value orientation.
IV. Conclusion
It is certain that dominant ideology gain the advantage over others. However， in the different code system of TV program， dominant ideology， which is in the state of change and conflict， cannot establish“one voice”. Confronted with this diversity， we should understand objectively the dominant ideology， analysing different ideas and contradictions through the televisual discourse. Therefore， we can take our time to different values and ideas in the TV， constructing a healthy cultural order and keep the balance of different cultural systems.
References：
[1]陸扬，王毅.大众文化与传媒[M].上海：上海三联书店，2000.
[2]约翰·斯托里.文化研究和大众文化研究[M].北京：北京大学出版社，2007.
【Key words】encoding； code； decoding； love letter
I. Introduction
Popular culture is undoubtedly characteristic of consumption， amusement and popularity. Since the rapid development of economy has led to tension in their life， work and study， people begin to pursue funny TV program as entertainment tool without brain devotions. The popular Korean show Love Letter perhaps is it， which is a hot TV program in China about love and marriage， choosing Korean Pop stars as the cast and focusing on producing a sense of fun and facetiously. It’s well-known that Stuart Hall’s Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse is an outstanding publication in search of popular culture in the cultural studies. TV program has been considered as a mass of visual codes， as a result，‘watch’is no longer in the physical meaning， but decoding as a way of information communication， so what is the‘meaning’of the code？ Who and how put this meaning into program？ How do people decode the‘meaning’？
II. Hall’s Theory of Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse
In Hall’s model of televisual communication， the circulation of ‘meaning’in televisual discourse passes through three distinctive moments：‘each has its specific modality and conditions of existence’. First， media professionals put into meaningful televisual discourse their particular account of a‘raw’social event. At this moment in the circuit， a range of ways of looking at the world are‘in dominance’.
The moment of media production is framed throughout by meanings and ideas； knowledge-in-use concerning the routines of production， historically defined technical skills， professional ideologies， institutional knowledge， definitions and assumptions， assumptions about the audience and so on frame the constitution of the programme through this production structure. Further， though the production structures of television originate the television discourse， they do not constitute a closed system. They draw topics， treatments， agendas， events， personnel， images of the audience， definitions of the situation from other sources and other discursive formations within the wider socio-cultural and political structure of which they are a differentiated part. Thus the media professionals involved determine how the‘raw’social event will be encoded in discourse. However， in the second moment， once the‘raw’social event is in meaningful discourse， that is， once it has taken the form of televisual discourse， the formal rules， of language and discourse are‘in dominance’； the message is now open， for example， to the play of polysemy.
Since the visual discourse translates a three-dimensional world into two-dimensional planes， it cannot， of course， be the reference or concept it signifies… Reality exists outside language， but it is constantly mediated by and through language： and what we can know and say has to be produced in and through discourse. Discursive‘knowledge’is the product not of the transparent representation of the‘real’in language but of the articulation of language on real relations and conditions. Thus there is no intelligible discourse without the operation of a code.
Finally， in the third moment， the moment of audience decoding， another range of ways of looking at the world are‘in dominance’. An audience is confronted not by a‘raw’social event， but by a discursive translation of the event. If the event is to become‘meaningful’to the audience， it must decode and make sense of the discourse. If no meaning is taken， there can be no‘consumption’. If the meaning is not articulated in practice， it has no effect. If an audience acts upon its decoding， this then encoded in another discourse. Thus， through the circulation of discourse，‘production’becomes‘consumption’to become‘production’again. The circuit stars in the‘social’and ends， to begin again， in the‘social’.
III. Analysis of Korean Show Love Letter with the Theory of Hall
At first moment， media professionals put into meaningful televisual discourse their particular account of a‘raw’social event. At this moment in the circuit， a range of ways of looking at the world are‘in dominance’. Thus the media professionals involved determine how the‘raw’social event will be encoded in discourse. Meaning can be transmitted largely depending on code system which is composed of technical skills， professional ideologies， institutional knowledge， definition and assumption about the viewer. Different cultural groups have their code systems， so media professionals of Love Letter produce their code system as follows：
1. It is key for a program to determine who will be its potential viewers. Love Letter wins a large part of viewer because of its exaggerative and humorous atmosphere. Thus it fixes the younger generation as its core viewers who are open-minded， easily gaining access to something new and voluntarily devoting themselves to the program. 2. The famous host Jiang Hudong， a fat plain-looking middle-aged man， pushes the sense of facetiosity in the program to the extreme with his exaggerative style， even regardless of his own image.
3. Love Letter is an entertaining show about love and marriage， focusing on how to make fun for viewers. The competition for couple is no more than a funny game， so the host and Pop stars always play games for fun， which can make the show scene full of pleasure and burst out laughing.
In a word， for the sake of viewers， media professionals produces program in their own code system and construct messages so as to be understood by the viewer.
In the second moment， once the program has taken the form of televisual discourse， the message is now open to the play of polysemy. At this moment， Love Letter’s meaning has been totally out of control by media professionals， and individual viewers can‘read’the code in different meaning by their own understandings.
In the third moment， three hypothetical positions from which decodings of a televisual discourse may be constructed. Positions viewers of Love Letter take are quite in harmony with these three positions in Hall’s theory.
The first hypothetical position is that of the dominant-hegemonic position. When the viewer takes the connoted meaning from the program full and straight， and decodes the message in terms of the reference code in which it has been encoded， the viewer is operating inside the dominant code. This is the position which the professionals assume when encoding a message which has already been signified in a hegemonic manner. Obviously， the most appealing part in the Love Letter is that Pop stars reveal their true feelings and embarrassing gaffe which are widely divergent from their images established on stage. Therefore， viewers obtain a sense of happiness and seem to appreciate a play casting by idols as common as us.
The second position we could identify is that of the negotiated code or position. Majority viewers probably understand quite adequately what has been dominantly defined and professionally signified. Viewers of this position think Love Letter is a funny starring show to relieve them of pressure and tension in the humorous atmosphere， but they still hold a critical attitude to it， that is partly inside the code. So they positively oppose something in Love Letter as follows：
1. The stars as adults meddling with love and marriage jokingly by words like“I love you”，“marry me” at random would misguide the younger generation about their outlook， especially that they often produce tanglesome love affairs involving several people by design. 2. Love Letter pays too much attention to one’s appearance. A handsome man and a beautiful woman can be couple at the end of game in the program， in turn， plain-looking or ill-looking ones often be ridiculed and no one would like to be couple with him or her. In fact， it seeks after sensuous attraction blindly and publicizes wrong value-orientation， a definitely spiritual pollution， having negative effect on young people.
Finally， it is possible for a viewer perfectly to understand both the literal and the connotative inflection given by discourse but to decode the message in a globally contrary way. He detotalises the message in the preferred code in order to retotalise the message within some alternative framework of reference. Viewers of this position would never appreciate Love Letter but believe this program pack the beautiful love into commodity in order to gain high audience rating and profit， disregarding moral ethics and social responsibility media professionals should take on； they explore market by giving full play to idols’ commercial potential， misleading viewer’s value orientation.
IV. Conclusion
It is certain that dominant ideology gain the advantage over others. However， in the different code system of TV program， dominant ideology， which is in the state of change and conflict， cannot establish“one voice”. Confronted with this diversity， we should understand objectively the dominant ideology， analysing different ideas and contradictions through the televisual discourse. Therefore， we can take our time to different values and ideas in the TV， constructing a healthy cultural order and keep the balance of different cultural systems.
References：
[1]陸扬，王毅.大众文化与传媒[M].上海：上海三联书店，2000.
[2]约翰·斯托里.文化研究和大众文化研究[M].北京：北京大学出版社，2007.