Iconology and Iconography

Iconology, which is also known as “the theory of images,” is “the study of the “logos” (the words, ideas, discourse or “science”) of “icons” (images, pictures, or likenesses)” (Mitchell, 1986:1). In his interview at the Central European University in Budapest, Mitchell (2013) defined iconology as the study of images across the media (television, painting, photography, sculpture, and computer), how to interpret the meaning of such images, and how they affect us emotionally, intellectually, and cognitively. In short, iconology is the study of the multidimensional aspects of images which includes their movement, description, appearance and effects. Therefore, iconology dovetails with this study since it focused on the respondents’

interpretation of iconic images related to Zimbabwe’s political and economic crisis.

Iconology, which nowadays includes the study of non-artistic images including biological images, is very ancient. Mitchell (2015:7) traces it back to at least the Renaissance Cesare Ripa’s Iconologia, and to Philostratus’ Imagines. Equally important to mention is iconology’s acknowledgment that apart from the visual image, there are also verbal and acoustic images and that iconology is also concerned about tropes, figures, and metaphors as with visual and graphic motifs, as much as with formal gestures in auditory time, sculptural-architectural space as with pictures on a wall or screen (Mitchell, 2015:7). In many respects, visual culture and iconology dovetail considering the fact that they both focus on various kinds of images including verbal and other forms of intangible images like mental images.

Although W.T.J Mitchell is an iconologist of note, Erwin Panofsky is regarded as one of the leading scholars in iconology, hence Mitchell’s (1986:8) admission that: “If linguistic has its Saussure and Chomsky, iconology has its Panofsky...” For the analysis and interpretation of artwork (images), Panofsky (1939) developed a three-layered model which consists of the three stages of studying images: (1) primary or natural subject matter (pre-iconographic analysis);

(2) secondary or conventional subject matter (iconographic analysis); and (3) intrinsic meaning or content (iconological interpretation). One of the striking features of Panofsky’s model is the fusion of iconology and iconography, hence, Mitchell (2015:7-8) observes that in Erwin Panofsky’s classical formulation (restricted to the visual image) iconology includes the study of iconography, the historical study of the meanings of specific images, and goes beyond it to explore the ontology of images as such, and the conditions under which images attain historical significance. Therefore, Panofsky’s also focused on the meaning of images vis-à-vis their historical and cultural contexts. As shall be shown in the fifth chapter, Marotzki and Stoetzer’s (2006) model of analysing pictures, borrows heavily from Panofsky (1939).

In the post Panofsky era, iconology has undergone a fundamental evolution. According to Mitchell (2015:8), Post Panofsky era iconology, also known as “critical iconology,” includes

“metapictures” or reflexive, self-critical forms of imagery, the relation of images to language, mental imagery, fantasy and memory; the theological and political status of images in the phenomena of iconoclasm and iconophobia; and the distinction between images and pictures.

In the same breath, Mitchell (2015:8) adds that:

Iconology is now linked to the realm of sciences, investigating the role of images in scientific research in the phenomenon of the “natural” image...advancement of life science has revolutionised the ancient conception of the image as an “imitation of life.” Biotechnology has made it possible to make a living image of life-form in the process known as cloning...invention

of computers have led to “biocybernetic reproduction” characterised by the appearance of the

“biodigital picture.”

From the above submission, it could be deduced that iconology in the post-Panofsky era (critical iconology) has become broad in scope and character, hence, its association with

“natural” images and processes like “cloning,” “biocybernetic reproduction” and “biodigital pictures.” However, “natural images” are outside the scope of this study. Since image science is an important theoretical discourse of this study, it is worth mentioning that it is also categorised under critical iconology.

The post-Panofsky or critical iconology theoretical paradigm draws a demarcating line between iconology and iconography. Guilini (n.d) notes that, for centuries, the terms iconography and iconology were used interchangeably to mean one and the same thing. In the same vein, Giulini (n.d) observes that, the terms iconology and iconography were studied from a historical, etymological, and artistic point of view which assumed that the two were equivalents (Giulini, n.d). However, it is Erwin Panofsky who later made a clear distinction between the two, hence, Giulini (n.d) notes that Panofsky’s definition which treats iconography as the study and identification of subject matter in an art and iconology as the study of their intrinsic meaning, is widely accepted. By the same token, iconography is the description, classification, and interpretation of the subject matter of a work of art or image (Encyclopedia.com, 2005:1). On the other hand, iconology is "the description, classification, or analysis of meaning or symbolism in the visual arts that takes into account the tradition of pictorial motifs and their historical, cultural, and social meaning" (Baca, 2002:89).

Additionally, Mitchell (2015) observes that iconology is the theory of images whereas iconography is the lexical sorting of different kinds of images. In short, iconography leans towards content and subject matter of work of art (or images) whereas iconology is concerned with meaning and symbolism of a work of art (or images), from a historical and cultural point of view. Iconology and iconography could also be described as two sides of the same coin, hence, Mitchell (2015:7) mentions that iconology includes the study of iconography. This study focused on the meaning of the pictures under study from the point of view of the respondents, hence, the relevance of iconology as it deals with the meaning and symbolism of the works of art or images.