FRONT PAGE / POSTS
The grandiose semiotics of TED
Many semioticians turn to the ideas forum TED for examples of emergent thinking. So maybe it’s time we looked at the semiotics of the TED phenomenon itself.
TED prides itself on ‘radical openness’: it talks a lot about community, accessibility, networks and dissemination. But its linguistic and visual codes are instead steeped in anti-democratic ideas of the individual genius and virtuoso performer.
The shadowed stage, the dramatically-illuminated speakers a-flow with (the signs of) passion and inspiration, the rapt audience sitting in the dark….it all seems so Romantic and narcissistic for a forum that’s trying to claim the contemporary terrain of ‘community’ and ‘accessibility’.
The language of TED too brims with the grandiose: everything is ‘remarkable’, ‘inspirational’, ‘extraordinary’ , ‘world-changing’. And individuals as well as ideas qualify for these epithets. In an age of communities, networks and crowd-sourcing, why is TED still able to sell the idea of the impassioned, inspired genius?
23 November 2012 at 1:03 pm
Greg says:
Deb: In the friendliest of ways i quote Robert Crumb when I say “your zest for life appals me”.
2 April 2012 at 10:07 am
Chris Horner says:
Yes -I’ve been thinking along these lines too. Well put. Notice also how boosterism pretty regularly trumps any real critical engagment with a social problem. No dialogue, no dissensus.