Symbols (Arnheim)

Everyone knows, the first picture is the emblem of the Olympics. These five rings represent five inhabited continents. Actually, these rings don't look the continents, according to Arnheim, the description of the symbol is “the extent to which it portrays things which are at a high level of abstractness than is the symbol itself." (VD 139) If someone who doesn’t know the Olympic sees this symbol, probably he/she won't be able to interpret the representation. As we can see, the level of abstraction is very high. After the users interpret the rings as the continents, they still have to refer the continents to the Olympics. Actually, there’s no connection between the continents and the Olympic games. But, this symbol still works as the Olympic logo. We interpret this symbol not because of referring the image to the Olympic, but sharing culture of the term and the logo. Understanding backgrounds of symbols is something essential to interpret the correct meaning. As he mentioned, "any specimen … can serve as a symbol, if somebody chooses to use it that way. But in such cases, the image leaves the effort of abstracting entirely to the user." (VD139) Although the five rings don’t remind the users of the continents or the Olympics, it still works; it still works as the official the Olympic symbol as long as somebody chose. This symbol is one of good examples of extension of referring. Other pictures contain the city of name where the Olympics will be held and the years. “the verbal name or slogan presented in commercial design, is identified by consumers more readily than the blandmark.” (VR 144) This theory is applicable for the Olympics symbol too. The combination of the city name, the year, and the five rings make us easily perceive that that it’s the Olympic symbol.

Arnheim, Rudolph. "Pictures, Symbols, and Signs." Visual Rhetoric in a Digital World (2004): 137-151

International Olympic Organization. 1 Jul 2008 .